Population of Palestine 1900 600,000, of which 94% Arab.

Therefore about 560,000 arab, 40,000 non-arab.

UNSCOP report 1948.

Population 1.9 million, approx 600,000 Jews, 1.3 million arabs.

FWIW…

Can you fill the gaps?

And yes, you’re right. There were approximately 300,000 in Mandate Palestine and about 6-700,000 Arabs so whether this was a heavily populated area is in fact a subjective question.

Palestine being named originally by the Romans, regardless of their motivation is pretty much irrellevant.

I believe that the time of the partition, there were about 300,000 Jews in Israel/Palestine, so as a whole the entire region was predominately Arab. Whether or not 500-700k counts as ‘heavily populated’ or not is probably somewhat subjective, but certainly not wrong enough to call such a claim historical revisionism.

I am not terribly concerned with what was and endless debate over who was right when and what historical wrongs happened. Every nation on earth was founded in the blood of other peoples. Its ugly, but its the truth. I am concerned with what we should do now, with things as they are.

As it is, there are millions of people in the occupied territories. It is wrong to displace them with forced movement or ethnic cleansing and they certainly deserve a voice in their own governance. Given those options, either Israel has to make them full citizens, or Israel has to give them their own land.

Since Israel wants to maintain its Jewish nature, and certainly won’t countance Jews being a minority in their nation a Palestinian state is the only remaining option. The exact borders of that state can be negotiated on, but in essence it should be the occuppied territories. A bit here and a bit there that Israel needs for defensive purposes can be justified, trying to take the entire thing and forcibly remove the Palestinians cannot.

And Dave, I didn’t say any nation that didn’t exist before Roman times doesn’t have the right to exist. What I meant when I said: “‘Palestine’ was only created by the Romans who wanted to add insult to injury having routed Bar-Kochba’s rebellion and sent the Jews to exhile’ is that the area of the world presently known as Israel became “Palestine” only when the Romans renamed it for a tribe the Israelites had fought throughout their history beginning with the conquest of Canaan by Joshua. That has nothing to do with the “Palestinians” “not having the right to exist” as you seem to think I was claiming. In fact I believe the Israeli Arabs have all the rights in the world to exist; I just don’t give any credit to the name they’ve chosen for themselves as it is historically invalid.

HonestPartisan: you’re NOT an “honest partisan.” You’re revising history when you write that the area previously known as “Palestine” was “heavily and predominantly Arab pretty much up until 1948.” In fact only 500,000-700,000 lived in present day Israel on the dawn of the War for Independence(1947-’48). You also say there are now 2 million Palestinians refugees. For a counterpoint, read my next post on HearOIsrael.blogpost.com.

1. I don’t understand what you’re getting at when you quarrel with the designation “Palestine.” The area that’s today Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip was heavily and predominantly Arab pretty much up until 1948. The term “Palestine” is a useful placeholder to frame the question of the fate of the 2 million or so Arabs who currently live in the West Bank. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that you de-legitimize the term “Palestine.” What have you achieved? What are you really getting at?

2. You state that Israel is legitimate because it sustained military victories, especially in 1948; indeed, you say that Israel should have been much bigger than it is because of its miltiary capability. You’re essentially making a “might makes right” argument here. Two problems with that: (1) you take away a lot of the better arguments for the legitimacy of Zionism; and (2) you make it legitimate for Palestinians to use violent means to achieve their ends.

I am also quite sure that without international support, there would be no State of Israel today.

The Palestinians have forged an identity seperate from other Arabs. Just as other groups forge their own idenity. I cen think of no way that you can justify the existence of Israel that, if one was fair, would not justify the existence of Palestine save divine right. Divine right is an arguement that I reject completely.

As for Palestine, you’re right. Were I in a position of power I would deny Israeli Arabs a homeland b/s this “homeland” isn’t justified politically(nearly 15 years of the intifada) nor historically(Arabs living in Israel have always been known as Arabs and “Palestine” was only created by the Romans who wanted to add insult to injury having routed Bar-Kochba’s rebellion and sent the Jews to exhile).

Of course you know that I don’t deny the existence of Israel or wish to replace it with Palestine. You however do deny the existence of Palestine and even Palestinians and wish to replace Palestine with Israel.

I want two states, hopefully living in peace with each other, but at a minimum seperated enough so that they can largely ignore one another.