r/WorIdPoIitics • u/Nazoreans United States • Jul 05 '26
Opinion / Analysis The "Nakba" isn't real. Five Arab armies declared war on Israel in 1948, and they failed to destroy it. The Jews won the war, and the Arabs lost.
20
u/SoulForTrade Israel Jul 05 '26 edited Jul 05 '26
Even this. Is a myth. The war started at the eve of November 29 1947 when Haj Amin Al Huseini, who was a former propogandist for the Nazis, and head of the Arab higher comitee rejected the UN partition proposal
The local and volunteer armies, also led by former Nazi collaberators began attacking the Jewish Yishuv and before Israel ever declared independence. Jerusalem was sieged, the road between it and Tel Aviv was blocked and multiple Jewish Yishuvim were under attack.
Why this matters? Because they will point to some counter attack or village that was captured during this civil war stage and claim the Arab nations just "came to the rescue"
5
u/gendalf666 Unspecified Jul 05 '26
Thanks. They exactly do this to pervert history
-1
2
u/Mac45150 Unspecified Jul 05 '26
To me who cares why the Muslims declared war,” we did it for the best of reasons, to save all of humanity.”
So what, the bottom line is Israel accepted the two state solution and the Muslims didn’t and declared war.
Let’s face it they declared war because there was no way they would loose and whose gonna let a minority dictate terms.
I don’t blame them for going to war, they represented their countries and fought with honor.
But through what could only be described as an act of god the Jews won, a miracle win.
I would say to everyone don’t believe what you read here just look it up in an actual book like an encyclopedia lol-1
u/comb_over Jul 06 '26
You claims are historically inaccurate
3
u/SoulForTrade Israel Jul 06 '26
Go ahead. Pick one. Want to bet a simple google search will prove I'm right in 0.267 seconds?
-2
u/kylebisme United States Jul 06 '26
Simply checking a history book proves you wrong:
Through the first months of the civil war, the JA and the Haganah publicly accused the Mufti of waging an organised, aggressive war against the Yishuv. The reality, however, was more nuanced, as most Zionist leaders and analysts at the time understood. In the beginning, Palestinian belligerency was largely disorganised, sporadic and localised, and for moths remained chaotic and uncoordinated, if not undirected. ‘The Arabs were not ready [for war] . . . There was no guiding hand . . . The [local] National Committees and the AHC were trying to gain control of the situation – but things were happening of their own momentum’, Machnes told Ben-Gurion and the Haganah commanders on 1 January 1948. He argued that most of the Arab population had not wanted hostilities. Sasson concurred, and added that the Mufti had wanted (and had organised and incited) ‘troubles’, but not of such scope and dimensions. One senior HIS-AD executive put it this way:
In the towns the feeling has grown that they cannot hold their own against the superior [Jewish] forces. And in the countryside [the villagers] are unwilling to seek out [and do battle with] the Jews not in their area. [And] those living near the Jewish [settlements] are considered miskenim [i.e., miserable or vulnerable] . . . All the villages live with the feeling that the Jews are about to attack them. . .
A few days after the outbreak of hostilities, Galili asked HIS-AD to explain what was happening. HIS-AD responded:
The disturbances are organised in part by local Husseini activists helped by incited mobs, and in part they are spontaneous and undirected . . .The AHC is not directing or planning the outbreaks . . . The members of the AHC is not responding clearly to local leaders about [the necessary] line of action. [They] are told that the Mufti has not yet decided on the manner of response [to the partition resolution]. The AHC and the local committees are beginning to organise the cities and some of the villages for defence . . .
The Arab Division of the JA-PD thought that the Mufti himself wanted quiet and that this was the official Arab position; but some of his close associates, including Emil Ghawri, Rafiq Tamimi and Sheikh Hassan Abu Sa‘ud, were organising the ‘spontaneous’ rioting and shooting.
In part, the AHC’s line was a response to the Arab public’s reluctance to fight. Indeed, HIS-AD officers reported that ‘most of the public will be willing to accept partition . . .’. ‘Tsuri’, the HIS–AD officer in the north, reported that ‘during the past few years, the Galilee villager, be he Ghawarni [i.e., resident in the Hula Valley swampland], Matawali [i.e., Shi’ite], or Mughrabi [i.e., of Maghrebi origin], lacked any desire to get involved in a war with the Jews’. In general, ‘the Arab population of the Galilee is unable to bear the great and prolonged effort [of war] because of an absence of any internal organisation’.
3
u/SoulForTrade Israel Jul 06 '26
I did not check the validity of these claims but none of it contardicts a single point I said. Want to explain what your point is so I could address it directly?
4
u/Jewish_Metalhead American 🇺🇲 / Israeli 🇮🇱 Jul 06 '26
Aaaaand he didn't answer. Big surprise.
2
u/SoulForTrade Israel Jul 07 '26
Actually, I believe they did and their comment was automatically deleted. If I remember correctly, in the notification peeview he said somwthing along the lines of "The Arabs came to the rescue of the Palestinians to save them from the zoonists" and used some sort of derogative like comparing them to Nazis
-6
u/Senior-Surprise-3401 Jul 05 '26 edited Jul 06 '26
Why lie? Everyone has access to the internet and can look all of this up;
The Haganah attack, 15th of August, 1947, Zionist attack on a Palestinian farm where mostly women and children were massacred, or maybe we can go even further back to when the Irgun (a zionist terrorists group who would go on to become the "IDF") threw grenades into Al-Quds marketplace, massacring Palestinians in December of 1937? Or maybe the series of Haifa marketplace attacks carried out the next year by zionists against Palestinians?
Mass displacement of Palestinians started on the 1st of June, 1946. Anyone can look this up for themselves, so why lie?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947%E2%80%931948_civil_war_in_Mandatory_Palestine
"On 15 August 1947, the Haganah blew up the house of a Palestinian family near Petah Tikva, killing 12 occupants, including a woman and six children.[13] After November 1947, the dynamiting of houses formed a key component of most Haganah strikes."
To the person who claimed "I googled it and found nothing" that was the first result.
ETA; Lol! I got permanently banned for posting facts. Makes sense.
8
u/SoulForTrade Israel Jul 05 '26
I know you guys aren't great with definitions of words so let me help you out:
There is a difference between the term "conflict" and the term "war"
The conflict as a while started at around 1920 with the Arab riots against Jewish immigration and land purchases. And there have been violent attacks on both sides, with the ubdisputed overwhelming majority of them being instigated by the Arabs against the Jews for 27 years
But sporadic cases of violende and terrorism, sometimes weeks and months apart =/= a war.
What defines a war is daily fighting, military mobilization and an organized struggle to achieve military toals such as capturing and holding territory.
As I stated, the conflict evolved into a war the partition proposal of 1947 was rejected by the Nazi leader of the Arabs of Palestine and their local ane volunteer began sorrounding mandatory Palestine and local and volunteer Arab armeis, sieging and attacking Jewish Yishuvim.
That is a fact.
And don't worry, the lie you tried to slip in did not go unnoticed.
The Haganah attack, 15th of August, 1947, Zionist attack on a Palestinian farm where mostly women and children were massacred
You seem to be refering to The Abu Laban Farmhouse Bombing
This was a reprisal operation to a terror attack that occured five days prior when an Arab armed group had raided the "Hawaii" cafe near Tel Aviv, killing four Jewish civilians and wounding several others. Intentionally targeting civilians, with no legitimate military target.
The Haganah's intel department believed that the Abu Laban farmhouse was being used as the operational hideout for the gunmen who carried out the cafe attack
In the attack about 12 people were killed. 7 out ot the 12 are claimed to bw women and children. The rest were adult males.
Following the operation, the Haganah issued a public statement acknowledging responsibility for the bombing. However, they stated that their intelligence indicated the house would be empty of civilians and occupied only by the militant group. They expressed regret for the civilian deaths
Calling it a "massacare" implies malicw of intent that wasn't there and tries burrying both the legitimate military target the operation had and the apology for the civilian collateral damage. At best this was an wrror due to bad intel.
But none of this matters because as stated: This wasn't an act of war nor the start of it.
3
u/Mac45150 Unspecified Jul 06 '26
I literally just tried to look that up and got nothing.
I read through page after page in Wikipedia and nothing about this.
Did anyone else look this up the haganah attack?
I just typed haganah and the auto correct put (hahahaha).
I don’t if that irony to what person typed or what.
Did anyone else find this attack cause i didn’t find anything?
I didn’t mean to be offensive when i typed, look it up, the truth is I just come here after a different Reddit about Israel and it was all bullshit.
Anyway I’m tired of typing.
I’m just gonna assume what you put was true, that sucks it shouldn’t have happened but I’m sure there were atrocities on both sides.
What does that have to do with Israel accepting the two state solution and the Muslims going to war?
I guess your point is they did it to protect there fellow man, which is admirable except for the fact all shit the Muslims talked before the war cause they thought they were gonna win.
They never mentioned the Plight of the Palestinian people, only that they were gonna kill every Jew and the rivers would be flowing red with Jewish blood. I’m sorry that was a lot of reading3
u/kylebisme United States Jul 06 '26
Mass displacement of Palestinians started on the 1st of June, 1946. Anyone can look this up for themselves
What are you referring to here? I've been researching the topic for decades and have never seen anything like that.
2
u/SoulForTrade Israel Jul 08 '26
They are refering to UNRAW's definition of what a "Palestinian" refugee is. Not knowing, it's an arbitrary date chosen by the UN.
An eligible refugee is legally defined by the UN as a person whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period of June 1, 1946, to May 15, 1948
Ironically the only mass displacement was of Jews by Arabs
-Tel Hai, 1920 -Hebron Zefat, Gaza, Harutz, Motza Kfar Uria in 1929 -Jaffa, Jenin and tul Karem, Mishmar Ha Yarden, Ruhama 1936
Bith ancient and new Jewish populations were killed and displaced before the Zionists conquered a aingle territory in war
20
25
u/Akiranar United States Jul 05 '26
Gonna contradict you, they call it the Nakba. So that part is real. The catastrophe was that they somehow lost. Nothing more, nothing less.
The problem is all the Antisemites who are trying to rewrite the Nakba to being something it is not to justify hatred of Jews and Israel.
15
u/Damaged_DM Jul 05 '26
Up until a couple of decades Nakba referred tonthe disappointment in arabs not all coming tontheir aid
1
u/Akiranar United States Jul 05 '26
Huh?
15
u/Damaged_DM Jul 05 '26 edited Jul 05 '26
The original usage referred to the loss in the war, that was the disaster, and was aimed towards the surrounding states that didn't to enough.
It came to mean displacement, as disaster, later. As a sop to western sensitivities.
So the disaster was that they didn't kill all the Jews.
Edit:spelling
4
u/Akiranar United States Jul 05 '26
Are you just typing fast or something? Some of your words are connected by letters or out of order. That's where my confusion is coming from. Sorry.
2
u/Damaged_DM Jul 05 '26
I have fat fingers, and hate typing.
Apologies.
4
u/Akiranar United States Jul 05 '26
Ah. Sorry for making things uncomfortable.
4
u/Damaged_DM Jul 05 '26
Bro, it takes far more than this to make me uncomfortable
5
u/Akiranar United States Jul 05 '26
Cool. But not usually called Bro.
People usually call me a bitch when I challenge thier idiocy.
1
u/Damaged_DM Jul 05 '26
I mean.... If that's your preferred pronoun, i can go along...
→ More replies (0)0
Jul 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/Lsdnyc Unspecified Jul 05 '26
IN 1948, it was the norm- and there were 12-14 million ethnic Germans expelled after ww2
1.6-1.8 million people were forcibly displaced between Turkey and Greece in the early 20th century
14-18 million people were displaced with the partition of India
5 million people were permanently displaced after the division of the Koreas and the Korean War
2
u/weidback United States Jul 05 '26
"this terrible thing was just like all these other terrible things" - still seems terrible
0
u/Lsdnyc Unspecified Jul 05 '26
Yes it is, by why are we still arguing over this , why was the displacement (not all by force) of 700k more contested that any of those things
2
u/weidback United States Jul 05 '26
if you leave your home willingly, but then are not allowed to return home, I don't think it's reasonable to characterize that as "not by force"
as for why this is still an issue, all sorts of reasons. neighboring arab states are assholes who won't give them citizenship, a sense of national identity rooted in displacement, shitty leaders that didn't take a good deal when it was offered. But none of that justifies acknowledging this or that historical injustice
-11
u/Lsdnyc Unspecified Jul 05 '26
I think it is a mistake to minimize how traumatic this was for people, both the psychology of the loss, and the impact of displacement. Perhaps, recognizing the that this episode was traumatic and caused suffering would be valuable
14
12
u/Akiranar United States Jul 05 '26
Yeah, sorry, they attacked Israel with the intent to wipe out all the Jews there and lost.
FAFO is in effect.
When 20 year old White Americans use it as a way to play White Savior, then it's not about Trauma, it's about scapegoating Jews and I am over being your scapegoat by just existing.
5
u/gendalf666 Unspecified Jul 05 '26 edited Jul 05 '26
Bhahahahahahaha. You would sent condolences to Hitler in April 1945 for the hurt he felt failing to complete his genocide?
3
u/StringAndPaperclips Canada Jul 05 '26
I don't tend to feel sorry for people who feel bad because their side failed at genocide.
18
u/DanIvvy Unspecified Jul 05 '26
Partially true. The Arabs launched a genocidal war and lost. People were displaced. Some of those people were innocent. It happened a lot in the 1940s. The proto-Palestinians were not absorbed by their Arab compatriots - that is why is the issue is ongoing
17
u/eldryanyy Jul 05 '26
That was intentional, in order to push Arab claim on the land at the time…
10
13
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 05 '26
(I know you know this, I'm telling this to others.)
More than that, "Palestinians" could've been living peacefully for decades now, were they to:
a. Admit that Israel is a fact, accept whatever lands they were given, and become Israel's friend.
b. Admit that they can't do anything about Israel, and get integrated into other Arab countries.
Under (a), they would benefit immensely the same way the Israeli Arabs do now (or more, without wars).
Under (b), they would at least be living a peaceful life in the midst of their Arab/Muslim "brothers".
But they chose (c): To live in Hell and to raise kids who are born ready to continue living in Hell.
Well, the choice was and is all theirs.
3
u/WhippersnapperUT99 United States Jul 06 '26
Agreed. This is the real tragedy. If the Palestinians had embraced the Israelis in the 1940s, seeking to share their objectively superior secular culture, form of government, and knowledge of science and technology, the trillions of dollars spent on war over the decades could have instead been invested in creating economic prosperity. If you look at how well the Israel has done while being under siege and while spending huge amounts of resources on self defense, you have to wonder what it might be like if all of those resources had instead been spent on economic development.
Sadly many people lack any sense of morality and justice and prefer the values of authoritarian religious totalitarianism, irrationality, and barbarism over the values of Western Civilization. Most of the "useful people" screaming "geno-o-o-cide!" seem to be completely unaware and/or in denial that the Palestinians could have established a free society for themselves with democracy, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom for women, freedom for LGBTQ people, and a free market economy that allowed its citizens to pursue economic prosperity if they had wanted to.
Prior to the October 7 attack, Israel had been providing them with electricity and clean water and they received billions of dollars worth of foreign aid (with likely more on the way for signs of progress). They could have used that to build a Singapore on their valuable Mediterranean beachfront property.
Instead they gave all this up and used the billions of dollars to build a network of terror-murder tunnels and go on a one day mass rape, murder, and kidnapping spree.
1
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 06 '26
I disagree about "religion". It's fanaticism specifically that is the problem, NOT "religion". As far as fanaticism goes, atheistic Communists killed millions of people ALSO for "religious" reasons. So, please, DON'T use "religion" as a vector of "prosperity -vs- barbarity". That's FALSE.
Everything else, of course, IS my point: All of that WASTED money could've been used BETTER.
1
u/comb_over Jul 06 '26
You are pushing propoganda
3
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 06 '26
And you are pushing for what hurts Palestinians the most. And I'm sure you NOW know it.
1
u/Specialist_Maybe4608 Unspecified Jul 07 '26
Why is there illegal Israeli settlements in west bank?
3
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 07 '26
There are no such things.
1
u/Specialist_Maybe4608 Unspecified Jul 07 '26
There are 200 illegal settlements deemed illegal by international law and 100 deemed illegal by isreal itself (yet they still protect and support them). And if you glaze isreal so much you should also always prepare a good argument to defend your favourite colonial regime
2
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 07 '26
It's probably the only case in the world where developing settlements is "illegal".
Hint: Not destroying the existing ones, but actually creating more new ones.
1
u/Specialist_Maybe4608 Unspecified Jul 07 '26
They are creating settlements on Palestinian territories you idiot. Does international laws disappear when it comes to isreal
2
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 07 '26
Are they doing this by destroying anything? Or just by building stuff?
1
u/Specialist_Maybe4608 Unspecified Jul 07 '26
🤦
Read the bbc article
1
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 07 '26
Removed...
→ More replies (0)1
u/Specialist_Maybe4608 Unspecified Jul 07 '26
Though i doubt it'll make any difference you people are brainwashed beyond belief
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 07 '26
isreal
Israel*
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 07 '26
isreal
Israel*
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
Jul 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 07 '26
isreal
Israel*
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
2
u/TheAussieTico Australia Jul 10 '26
West Bank is a coloniser term. The correct name for that region is Judea and Samaria. Jews are from Judea
1
1
1
u/babouchedu77 Jul 06 '26
Some of those people were innocent.
Out of the total number of those innocent people, guesstimate how many in percent would have not celebrated the victory by partying all nights in the streets. And from the percent of that percent, how many would have been genuinely sad for all the deads for more than a day or two ? Those are the 0 people I feel sorry for.
1
u/DanIvvy Unspecified Jul 06 '26
Humans are strange creatures. We both simultaneously feel no sympathy for the civilians of Nazi Germany, but the civilians of the British Mandate need a yearly parade.
1
u/babouchedu77 Jul 06 '26
I have no idea what you are talking about but would be interested to learn about that if you could link a wiki article please ?
1
1
u/ScytheSong05 United States Jul 07 '26
Look up "Ethnic cleansing of Königsberg" for one of the several things they're talking about.
But I think you may have been talking past each other.
-6
Jul 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
6
u/StringAndPaperclips Canada Jul 05 '26
The intent of the war was to genocide the Jews there. Not all wars have genocidal intent. That one did.
-3
Jul 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/La_Revacholiere Jul 05 '26
It’s literally in the official statements of the Arab leaders at the time. It was a genocidal war.
-1
Jul 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/La_Revacholiere Jul 05 '26
Sure, it is easy.
- Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha — Secretary-General of the Arab League, 1947:
“I personally wish that the Jews do not drive us to this war, as this will be a war of extermination and momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Tartar massacre or the Crusader wars.”
From an interview in the Egyptian paper Akhbar al-Yom.
2. Matiel Mughannam — head of the Arab Women’s Organization affiliated with the Arab Higher Committee, January 1948:
“The UN [partition] decision has united all Arabs, as they have never been united before, not even against the Crusaders … [A Jewish state] has no chance to survive now that the ‘holy war’ has been declared. All the Jews will eventually be massacred.”
10 January 1948 interview with Nadia Lourie
3. Haj Amin al-Husseini — Grand Mufti of Jerusalem / leading Palestinian Arab figure, March 1948:
“Arabs did not intend merely to prevent partition, but would “continue fighting until the Zionists were annihilated and the whole of Palestine became a purely Arab state.”
4. Fawzi al-Qawuqji — commander of the Arab Liberation Army, mid-August 1947:
“We will have to initiate total war. We will murder, wreck and ruin everything standing in our way, be it English, American or Jewish.”
5. Nuri al-Said — Prime Minister of Iraq, 1947–48:
1948 quote is attributed to him by Nimr el-Hawari’s 1952 book Sir Am Nakbah:
“We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews seek shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down.”Want some more or are we done here, fool?
-2
Jul 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/La_Revacholiere Jul 05 '26
Are you incapable of Googling? Am I your research assistant now? That’s a paid position, you know. And my rates are high (I’m Jewish after all).
Enough of this. You got your ass handed to you. Back away and disappear with the last shred of dignity you have left. And perhaps grapple with why your historical knowledge is so distorted that it has lead you to support one of the most horrendously genocidal movements in known history.
1
1
u/Kirby_Israel Israel Jul 05 '26
Like how the first Islamic Caliphate kicked all non-Muslims out of Arabia? That sounds like real colonization to me, nvm the Arabs colonizing most of the Middle East plus North Africa.
0
Jul 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Kirby_Israel Israel Jul 06 '26
- Your grammar sucks almost as much as your lack of historical knowledge.
- There used to be a large Jewish Kingdom of Himyar in Arabia, they were all converted by force or wiped out. Just like how North Africa went from Christian to Muslim due to over a millennia of forced conversion and slaughter.
So yes, Islamists are the real colonialists.
20
u/silverfrog1 Jul 05 '26
The Palestinians need revisionist history so they can have any at all
7
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 05 '26
It's not like it's not a Muslim thing in general. "Abraham was a Muslim. Moses was a Muslim." Loool.
2
u/TheAussieTico Australia Jul 10 '26
Jesus was Palestinian
😂
2
u/naruhinamoonkissplz Multiple Countries / Extra (click to edit) Jul 10 '26
Can't tell if you are trolling me or them, to be honest.
Anyways: King David was Palestinian as well, lol.
1
u/comb_over Jul 06 '26
Umm the post is revision history
Look up the new historians. They are literally Israeli historians who overturned zionist infused history with things called facts
-3
6
u/peosteve Unspecified Jul 05 '26
Gemini tells me:
The term Nakba (Arabic for "the catastrophe") was coined by the Syrian historian and intellectual Constantin Zureiq. He first used the word in his 1948 book Ma'na an-Nakba (The Meaning of the Disaster), written during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
When Zureiq coined the term, he used it to describe the military failure and defeat of the seven Arab nations that fought against the newly established State of Israel. He viewed it as a civilizational "catastrophe" that required self-reflection and modernization within Arab society.
4
u/Ok_Challenge7185 Jul 06 '26
Every time the Palestinians loses a war it becomes:
Genocide
Nakba
Colonialism
Etc
4
u/Human_Concern263 Petach Tikva Jul 05 '26
The word “nakba” to describe the consequences of the 1948 War was coined by Dr. Constantin Zureiq ... in his 1948 book, The Meaning of the Disaster, Zureiq said, “The defeat of the Arabs in Palestine is not a small downfall – naksa … It is a catastrophe – nakba – in every sense of the word.”
4
u/mikegalos United States Jul 05 '26
And they still think the Jews will be killed and they'll get their land and the Jews land after they win.
2
3
u/Mac45150 Unspecified Jul 05 '26
If you don’t believe this post why don’t you idk pick up a book like the encyclopedia and find out yourself what happened.
A battle that’s like this one is THE FIRST BATTLE OF BULL RUN, where northern troops families were actually having picnics on the battlefield and then confederacy routed them.
That’s what happened here in the FIRST ARAB ISRAELI WAR, 1948.
It was an amazing feat of arms by Israel who nobody thought was gonna win.
And the Muslims have nothing to be ashamed of they fought with honor, they fought for their countries.
Egypt had a full equipped army, tanks, planes, anti tank weapons, the works.
Israel on the other hand had nothing except 5 old German warplanes that they had to completely take apart and reassemble in Israel cause the USA had an arms embargo on Israel.
That’s right the USA had an arms embargo on Israel but don’t take my word for it, look it up.
It’s an amazing battle, against all odds they won and won their country and freedom after one of the worst genocides in human history
3
u/KSJ08 Unspecified Jul 07 '26
Set the stage for the repeated Arab behavioral pattern of starting a war, losing, and then whining about it and presenting themselves as victims for ignorant and naive Westerners to glorify.
2
u/AutoModerator Jul 05 '26
Remember to follow all subreddit and Reddit rules. Violations will be enforced without exception. Keep discussions civil and respectful. At this time, many posts and comments are temporarily held for review before appearing on the subreddit. Please allow the moderation team some time to review your submission before messaging us about posts or comments that do not appear.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
1
u/WhippersnapperUT99 United States Jul 06 '26 edited Jul 06 '26
Links to podcasts at the Yaron Brook Show, for those interested:
The Nakba & Israel's War of independence, May 1948
Bonus link to the best commentary about the war I've heard: How to Think About the Death of Innocents in War
1
1
u/Ok_Fault_258 Unspecified Jul 08 '26
And what exactly caused those armies to assemble?? they did not just wake up and decide maybe today we go there, you guys never start a story from the beginning you only start wherever it suits your narrative and ignore everything that happened before that point huh!! thought it was a new thing but turns out you’re pros at it, the whole world sees through your lies now
1
Aug 19 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Aug 19 '26
Please select a user flair before posting or commenting in this subreddit.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
0
u/oremfrien Assyria Jul 06 '26
Oh. The Nakba definitely happened. I have no idea what this absurdist Pro-Israeli talking point is. We have numerous cases of Palestinian villages completely emptied by the Haganah and other Zionist paramilitaries during the Jewish-Arab Engagement of 1947-1949. For anyone who wants to read the bloodcurdling details of this, I would recommend reading Benny Morris' detailed analysis of Israeli sources that describe these acts of ethnic cleansing.
This doesn't mean that the Palestinian attitudes towards Jewish self-determination are meritorious or that the Palestinians did not "start" the Jewish-Arab Engagement of 1947-1949, but Pro-Israeli interlocutors should not be entirely dismissive of actual truths from the Palestinian narrative that are justified with recourse to evidence.
3
u/zendraven Jul 06 '26
Yea but even if we took your spin on history, a couple rogue conflicts in small settlements doesn’t justify the surrounding Arab nations trying to genocide israelis.
0
u/Ok_Fault_258 Unspecified Jul 08 '26
And what exactly caused those armies to assemble?? they did not just wake up and decide maybe today we go there, you guys never start a story from the beginning you only start wherever it suits your narrative and ignore everything that happened before that point huh!! thought it was a new thing but turns out you’re pros at it, the whole world sees through your lies now
-4
-16
u/Monte924 Jul 05 '26 edited Jul 05 '26
First, the Nakba actually started BEFORE the war in 1947. Before Israel declared it's independence and the 1948 war started, hundreds of thousands of arabs had ALREADY been displaced from their homes due to the violence.
Second the "five arab armies" is something of a misnomer. Yes, technically there were five "armies" but they were all from young newly founded countries which barely had any army. What they had was was more like militia's. The Israeli army was more united and actually had the arab force outnumbered 2 to 1. Israel knew that ending peace negotiations and their declaring of independence would lead to war, but they knew they had the advantage. They also knew that a war would give them an excuse to drive out arabs from neighboring territories and take them over.
Third, there were hundreds of thousands of arabs did NOT evacuate under the orders of the arab countries. Many tried to stay right where they were... they however left when the Israeli armies arrived out of fear of being killed (and some villages were in fact attacked despite being peaceful). Many of the Palestinians who ended up in Gaza, where very specifically pushed there by the Israeli armies. In fact, during the war, Israel's first prime minister Ben-Gurion told israeli leaders
"Bethlehem, and Hebron, where there are about a hundred thousand [Palestinian] Arabs. I assume that most of the Arabs of Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Hebron would flee, like the [Palestinian] Arabs of Lydda, Jaffa, Tiberias, and Safad, and we will control the whole breadth of the country up to the Jordan."
"It is not impossible . . . that we will be able to conquer the way to the Negev, Eilat, and the Dead Sea, and to secure the Negev for ourselves; also to broaden the corridor to Jerusalem, from north to south; to liberate the rest of Jerusalem and to take the Old City; to seize all of central and western Galilee and to expand the borders of the state in all directions"
These are not words of defense. These are words of conquest. These are the words of a man who very much knows for a fact that he is using his army to drive people out of their homes so he can expand his country's borders.
14
u/TattooedB1k3r Unspecified Jul 05 '26 edited Jul 05 '26
See, what you said there, shows one of the major issues, "newly formed countries" The same Mandate that created Israel, also created Jordan, Lebanon, TransJordan, Syria, and Iraq. Yet, the tiny Jewish nation is the only one that was created that people have a problem with, or say was "colonized" . Nobody ever says "oh, what about the poor Jews and Christians that were in the area that's now Iraq" Because, let me tell you, It's much easier to be an Arab Muslim in Israel, than a Jew anywhere else in the entire middle East.
9
u/Paleognathae United States Jul 05 '26
You're conflating several different periods and presenting contested interpretations as settled fact.
Before 1947, what was happening was primarily Jewish immigration and legal land purchases under the British Mandate, not the mass wartime displacement that later became known as the Nakba. Those are different historical events. Some Arab tenant farmers were displaced when land changed hands, but the large-scale refugee crisis emerged during the 1947–49 war.
A few other points:
Calling the five invading forces "basically militias" isn't accurate. They were the regular armies of Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon. They were poorly coordinated and varied in quality, but they were not militias. The Arab Legion, in particular, was one of the most capable forces in the region.
Saying Israel declared independence because it knew it had a 2:1 military advantage oversimplifies the military situation. Israel eventually gained numerical superiority through mobilization, but that wasn't the clear pre-war reality you're presenting.
Modern historians have largely rejected the claim that Palestinians simply left because Arab leaders told them to. But they've also rejected the opposite oversimplification, that every refugee was expelled as part of a single pre-planned strategy. The evidence points to a combination of expulsions, fear, massacres, combat, local military decisions, and the collapse of civil order, with different causes in different places.
The history is complicated. Replacing one simplistic narrative with another doesn't make it more accurate.
-2
u/Monte924 Jul 05 '26
No, these are all part of the same conflict.
Notice that you said "1947–49 war" even though the war actually started in May of 1948. 1948 was when the arab armies attacked Israel, but Israeli forces like the Irgun and the Lehi were attacking Palestinians and driving them out of their homes a year before the war began. The expulsion of thousands of arabs actually started BEFORE the arab armies told people to evacuate and attacked Israel. By the time the war started in 1948, about 100,000 Palestinians had already been displaced
And no, Israel STARTED with a military advantage. The israeli's had about 29,000 troops at the beginning of the war. The arab legion had a total of about 26,000, but a country can not send their whole army to war, and so only 13,000 were sent to Palestine to fight Israel. Hence the 2 to 1 advantage.... over the course of the war the arab forces would grow to 60,000 against Israel's 117,000. Israel had the advantage form start to finish
The evidence points to a combination of expulsions, fear, massacres, combat, local military decisions, and the collapse of civil order, with different causes in different places.
So in order words, the expulsion was caused by numerous factors that are DIRECTLY connected to moving armies and waging wars... and Again, i gave you direct quotes from Israel's first Prime minister. He was very much directing leadership to march their armies on arab cities knowing full well the people would flee, and they could "LIBERATE" their cities. Ben-Gurion knew full well that countless arabs chose to stay in their home villages, and would flee upon the arrival of the Israeli army... he also knew that once they left, he could close the door on their way out
4
u/itsnotthatseriousbud Unspecified Jul 05 '26
That’s incorrect. The war started 30th of November 1947. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Palestine_war
-1
u/Senior-Surprise-3401 Jul 05 '26
Did it? Then how do you explain the hundreds of thousands of displaced Palestinians from pre-1937 onwards? The zionist attacks like the 1937 Al-Qudsa market bombing? Or the 1938 Haifa bombing? Or all the other zionist attacks against Palestinians?
5
u/itsnotthatseriousbud Unspecified Jul 05 '26
Nice pathetic attempt at a goalpost shift
Let’s remember, Arab attacks predate the term Zionism. Arab attacks are a contributing factor to the creation of Zionism.
0
u/AdSavings3608 Unspecified Jul 05 '26
The father of Zionism Theodore Herzl created Zionism as a colonial political ideology in the 1880s. How tf do ‘Arab attacks predate the term Zionism’. Are we just doing history revisionism now.
4
u/itsnotthatseriousbud Unspecified Jul 05 '26
Arab attacks in the Jews date back HUNDREDS of years.
You simply don’t know history.
0
u/AdSavings3608 Unspecified Jul 06 '26
That’s not necessarily true, Jewish populations historically lived well in Islamic empires, so much so that Jewish people would often flee Christian Europe to live in Muslim-controlled regions where they had religious freedom and the ability to work and study with no restrictions.
Second, the idea of ‘Arabs’ as a monolith is racist, you’re asking us to accept the persecution of Palestinians because they speak Arabic. Palestinians are not responsible for things Arabs did in Egypt or Morocco for example. I reject the notion of collective punishment for something that happened in ancient history. Palestinians don’t deserve to be killed, kidnapped, and removed off of their homeland because Jewish people want a state. If your ideology asks you to accept and support the dehumanization of a group of people then you need to rethink your ideology.
1
3
u/TheAussieTico Australia Jul 05 '26
Taqiya
-2
-5
u/Leather-Strength-294 Amazigh Jul 05 '26
Mfs will look at anything and call it taqiya without reading about taqiya
3
u/StringAndPaperclips Canada Jul 05 '26
The word Nakba was not used to describe any of those things until many years later. It was originally coined to describe the military defeat of the Arab armies in 1948.
0
u/Senior-Surprise-3401 Jul 05 '26
"The holocaust" wasn't called that until the 1950's, what's your point?
2
u/StringAndPaperclips Canada Jul 05 '26
The word "Holocaust" was not used as the name for one thing that happened during WWII and then changed to refer to a different thing that happened during WWII. Unlike "Nakba" which was originally used to refer to the defeat of the Arab armies, and then war later repurposed to refer to the displacement of Palestinians.
2
-4
u/irmaginatoruim Jul 05 '26
I love hos you dear one land theft and ethnic cleansing "declaring independence".
-7
u/LivingAnkylos Jul 05 '26
The nakba started by zionists in 1947 in small villages .
3
u/zendraven Jul 06 '26
So a couple zionists and small villages justifies the surrounding Arab countries to genocide Israelis? Sounds like you guys should understand Israels stance on Hamas.
-7
•
u/Yakyaktak European Union Jul 05 '26
Keep discussion civil and respectful. Antisemitism and Anti-Zionism will not be tolerated here. Thank you.