http://www.milon.co.il/general/general.php?term=invade

"to invade" = "lipelos" (root: PLS)

http://www.milon.co.il/general/general.php?term=invader

"invader" = "poles" (same root)

The Israelites used the word to refer to Greek invaders. Now the Arabs use the word to refer to themselves for some reason.

The Romans renamed Judaea "invaderland" ("Palestina") about 2000 years ago.

 

Maybe they think of themselves as invaders?

I doubt it.

The Arab empire streteches from Iraq to Morocco and from the Mediteranean to south of the Sahara. Within that empire there live hundreds or thousands of nations and tribes, most without rights or recognition.

But whether the Arab stands on the land taken from the Berbers, the Moors, the Nubians, the Massalith (Darfurians) or Somalis (a mix between Yishmaelis and Africans), the Kurds, the Assyrians, the Spaniards, or the Jews; he will always see himself as the native and the existing population as intruders.

This wasn't a problem during the Golden Age of Islam, when nationality was less important than religion and when non-Muslim religions were (at least in theory) respected.

But it is definitely a problem now.

I think northern Africa and the middle east should be decolonised.

Most people don't even recognise many of the peoples ruled by Arabs:

http://www.aina.org/releases/caamletter.htm

(I have met Assyrians in Israel. They lived in Europe and came to visit the holy land. They speak Aramaic and have little problem understand street signs in Hebrew.)

 

Golden Age or not, it is still the same ..... ask an Indonesian, an Indian, a Pakistani, an Egyptian, a Moroccan, an Algerian, a Sudanese, or any Muslim anywhere .... In fact ask anyone in the world, what comes first.... God or country? ..... dont kid yourself Leauki .... You are the one who is making it one .... your own details provide a vivid refutation of this assertion ... unless of course you recognize those native rulers as Arabs ... and in that case your whole premise collapses ... the only period when the rulers were from the Arabian peninsula was the first few hundred years after Pr. Mohammad's death. for the last 1200 yrs or so the rulers were from Iraq, Syria, Morocco, Egypt and at the end Turkey. Assimilation and integration of several cultures and ethinic groups into one language and one religion is great achievement of any group of people which results in great nations ... india, China, Indonesia, Russia ... even the Romans and the Greeks ... are good examples. Presenting that chievement as colonization flies in the face of logic and history You looking for disintegration aren't you? the same old divide and conquer in a new cloth? that wont fly leauki ... they are onto it .... and they know it well.

Seriously, TA, either type text like a normal person or don't comment on my threads. You messed up the formatting of the page AGAIN! What are you doing? Typing in Word and pasting with control characters?

As for your point, it doesn't seem to me that you even recognise all those non-Arab peoples.

The white rulers of Rhodesia were also born in Rhodesia, but they were still English and spoke English. And the "native" population (and by that I mean simply people also born there but of different cultures) also deserved recognition.

And the same applied to non-Arab peoples of the middle-east, be the other Semitic nations, like the Jews and Assyrians, related peoples, like the Berbers, or unrelated peoples, like the Massalith and Kurds.

Arabising everything is not integration and is not seen as such by the victims.

Does Israel seem very willing to be arabised? Did the Kurds? Do you think the Massalith enjoy being slaughtered? Did the Christians in southern Sudan seem very willing to surrender? You have to understand that Arabs are not very popular among the non-Arab peoples of their empire. They don't tell Muslims or Arabs, but they talk when they feel safe enough.

Heck, the rulers recognise THEMSELVES as Arabs. I don't have to do anything of the sort. Why is Arabic the official language everywhere in the "Arab" world? Do you even recognise that Aramaic-speaking Assyrians exist? What about Tamazight-speaking Berbers?

It's the same as the British Empire, without the advantage of abolition of slavery and introduction of democracy and responsible government. Sudan still has slavery, Mauritania only just abolished it a few years ago. Saudi-Arabia is an apartheid state with different laws for different population groups.

 

A Berber group in Morocco founded a Berber-Israeli friendship association.

The Arabs are angry.

The Berbers see themselves as the native population of the region the Arabs call the "Arab Maghreb" and their history goes back 3000 years.

I will write another article soon, with links to videos and articles about non-Arab groups in the "Arab Maghreb" and "Greater Syria" who are absolutely not happy about Arab imperialism, Arab nationalism, and about being ruled by Arabs.

This has to end.

Whether it is China in Tibet (and, while we are at it, the rest of "China", not all of which consists of Chinese), or the Romans everywhere, or Arabs in northern Africa and Syria.

Some call it integration and an achievement. I say it can be. And it can be good and bad. But it is imperialism. And Arab imperialism didn't do much good for the world.

The spread of Islam arguably did.

However, many might not know this, the greatest Muslim thinkers were Iranians.

You can call subduing the Berbers, murdering the Massalith, fighting the Kurds, and allying with Hitler an "achievement". I call it evil imperialism. It has to stop. And I am seeing more people speak up in the "Arab" world. And they are not Arabs.

I'll write about Berbers (Imazighen), Assyrians, Kurds, Jews, Massalith, Somalis, the Dinka, and the Nubians.

I'll write about Maronites in Lebanon who do not want to be identified as Arabs and Assyrians in Iraq. (I realise now that I should have learned more about them when I was there!)

I am sick and tired of Arab claims that everything is Arab, from Arabia to Syria and Iraq via Israel and Egypt to the "Arab" north-Africa.

 

Like a small child - "it is mine" and that is the end of the discussion.

Real mature/ 

I am aware of the Arab Hegemony that occurred after Mohammed.  And also their mistaken belief that all conquered lands have to stay that way.  As I said, like a small child.  What I dont fathom (as I just cannot wrap my brain around the stupidity of some) is how the rest of the world tries to defend that vision.  I guess I am just not stupid enough.

That is very typical of you Leauki !!!!

blaming someone for the faults of others or of your own !!!

I do no such thing other than type in the comments' box.

pasting with control characters????!!!!

of course you dont believe that .... but then...what is new????

yes, if it is voluntarily. Whoever chose not to be Arabised wasn't !!! ever heard of Iran? (next door to Arabia !!!!).. Turkey? Pakistan? Indonesia? and many other countries in Africa and Asia.... etc.

you are fighting seventeenth century politics .... it is over Leauki ...

you cant fight history and nature .... keep trying ... it will get you no where ... and while you are at it why not try to revive the American-Indian Nations too !!! or is your fight only concerning a certain Nation?

In fact according to your logic decolonizing the United States makes more sense ... the American-Indians have a Treaty with the "invaders" and never acknowldged them or tried to integrate with them ....

In the Name of Israel you are trying to bury 1400+ years of history and natural integration .... it wont work and will never work.

The non-Arbisation of Israel proves my point not yours .... if the Israelis wanted it, they will be ... but since they never considered themselves part of a whole world around them ... they will never be part of it ... and that is their dilemma.... they want to be there but not part of it .... they complicate their own problem by trying to do that on the corpses of the natives .....

All of Israel's efforts to camouflage these facts are not fooling anyone in the world .... their temporary military might (and it is temporary no matter how it looks now) will never gurantee any permenant peace for themselves. 

 

 

so you are a divider? .... what a concept especially in these historic moments !!!!!

of course Arabisation of these areas is not good for the whole world !!! how can we siphon their resources if they were united as before? ... how can Israel exist as a political entity? (dont even try injecting Jews here.... they are not the problem .... Israel IS)

from a "divide and conquer" promoter ... of course it doesnt do much good at all ... in fact it is disasterous.

[fixed. - too many malformed span tags]

You still speak of "united" as a polite term for "under Arab rule". The "Arab" world is hardly united. Instead you have civil wars and terrorism everywhere.

And what is "their resources"? How is anything in north-Africa "Arab"? The Arabs invaded the lands, lost them to Turkey, lost them to European countries, and then got them "back". After "independence" the new Arab governments of the "Arab Maghreb" undertook massive policies of Arabisation, all in countries that were formerly under Turkish rule and inhabited by lots of non-Arab peoples.

I find it the height of arrogance to claim other people's lands as "Arab" and the resources under that land as belonging to the Arabs.

Maybe you should ask yourself how the Arabs can siphon their (non-Arabs') resources when the non-Arab peoples united against the Arabs?





Israel is Jews, TA; get that into your head. Jews fled to Israel, primarily from the Arab world, because they didn't want to live under Arab rule. It was apparently not pleasant. Israel it not the problem, Arab nationalism is. The survival of a few hundred thousand Jews in the middle east _might_ be a problem for Arab nationalism though. I sure hope it was.

You cannot have Israel without Jews and you cannot have Jews without Israel, as the last 100 years of Arab history have shown.

(And before you tell me again how Arabs and Jews lived in peace let me remind you again that Jews remember the past differently and that Arabs cannot live in peace with ANY non-Arab group, as events in Algeria, Sudan, Iraq, and "Palestine" show.)



If you will. I don't care what you call it. I want an end to Arab imperialism and acknowledgement of all the peoples living under Arab rule.

"Divider" is, I assume, the politically correct term for someone opposed to Arab imperialism?

I am a proud "divider" and, while we are at it, a proud "son of dogs and monkeys" (which, as you know, is when said about Jews some kind of legitimate criticism of Israel's policies, much like "shove them in the ovens", which was so often heard among the "anti-war" protesters).

I think this is exactly what clouds your thinking and the thinking of many Israelis as well. The memory of the "Ovens" and other terrible actions of a continent that, till this day, is full of hate and ignorance .... Europe ... if you can't tell.

The people who were cursed to be swines and apes have no sons .. they all died as such and if you read the verses you will know they were not even Jews ... they refused to belief Moses ... that is why God cursed them ... so how can they be Jews????

Now, you take some ignorant statements by an ignorant Imam or an Ignorant muslim as representing the  Muslim's or the Arab's view and sentiments? .... that is where your clouded thinking kicks in ...

From your writings ... I understand that you are of a German origin.... i can understand your bias  but not your insistence on distorting history and facts.

The Arabs are not Germans or Europeans ... and Muslims are not Christians  .....

you didnt live in and among Arabs or muslims to know what the history and the facts are ... I HAVE..... trust me .... You and Israel are fighting the wrong battle ... and the wrong people and the wrong culture ....

Ignorance are not a monopoly of any group, culture or belief ... they exist everywhere .... but that doesnt change the facts or the history of how muslims and Arabs dealt with the "people of the Book" .... till Israel's creation (or recreation) started in 1898 ..... it all went downhell from that point..... That cant be ignored and it will be there till the problem is solved rationally not on the basis of a Victor vs Defeated .... there is no victor or defeated in this fight .... as long as the two people exist and keep fighting... no one will ever win or lose .... it is a stalemate .... till both come to their senses.

 

No. It's not the memory, it's the reminders.

It's the Arab (and western) street calling for Jews to be shoved back into the ovens, calling for the death of the Jews and the destruction of Israel.

You think Europe is full of hate and ignorance? Try looking Jewish in the Arab world.

 

I do not distort history or facts. And I don't like your silly accusations. If you have a problem with something I say, feel free to correct me. But don't just accuse me od distorting history, CORRECT me instead.

You think my bias is typical for a German origin? What do you know about Germany?

 

And I never said they were. You are introducing non sequiturs into the discussion. That doesn't help.

Being Arab or being German does not define whether one is good or evil. But German Nazis were evil, and so were their Arab allies. Their Arab nationality does not make them better than the German Nazis.

And you know what? I understand the difference between Germans and Arabs. The hateful views, the anti-Semitic propaganda; you won't find much of it in Germany any more. But in the Arab world it is rampant. Just see where you can buy Hitler's book or the Protocols. Do you think those are popular in _Germany_?

 

Did you ever live in Israel or among Jews?

If Israel had not won every war, do you think the Jews would still be alive? If so, how do you explain the calls for the death of the Jews and celebrations of impending such in the Arab world in 1967 and other times?

I know what the history and the facts are. It is you who keeps claiming that Jews and Arabs lived in peace and that it was the Jews (or Israel) who started it.

Have you ever met a middle-eastern Jew and talked to him?

 

Who guarantees me that if Israel stopped fighting, the Arabs would not make good on their promise to kill all the Jews?

(And don't tell me they didn't make statements about killing all the Jews. I do not want to quote Arab leaders again and again. I want to know WHY I can believe that another Shoah won't happen in spite of the Arab street calling for the death of all Jews, NOT how one can ignore the signs.)