p> Jews in such places as Iraq were given the choice to leave for Israel.What was their alternative and why were those who left deprived of their property and savings?
p> Their alternative was to stay. If Jews chose to leave Iraq, they had to leave their possessions, but they were never expelled.
To stay as full and equal citizens? Of course not.
Why were those who left deprived of their property and savings?
How is that despite these draconian conditions, virtually all left?
p> In Iraq, the law that was passed allowing Iraqis to leave the country if they so wished never even mentioned the Jews.
So you are saying that before that law was passed - which did not apply to Jews - it was illegal for Jews to leave?
And this is the viable "alternative" you saw for them?
p> Avi Shlaim, (who was born in Baghdad in 1945, and who's family had to seek shelter in the British embassy as anti-Jewish violence sweeped the streets)
And this is the viable "alternative" you saw for Jews?
Shlaim> We left out of our own free will.
So you agree that any Arabs that left of their own free will are "not refugees"?
p> Much of the Palestinian landowning elite (not the common Arab citizens
Thanks for confirming that the common Arab citizens did not own land.
Despite the constant propaganda we hear to the contrary.The majority of Arab refugees fled due to the Arab choice for war over peaceful coexistence.
Most were able to take what they could carry, including retaining their savings.
Morris> Only an extremely small, almost insignificant number of the refugees during this early period left because of Haganah or IZL or LHI expulsion orders or forceful ‘advice’ to that effect. Many more – especially women, children and old people – left as a result of orders or advice from Arab military commanders and officials.
p> The December 1947 - June 1948 intelligence document...
The usual idiocy. Looking at one document (as if it has to be right?) while ignoring all other evidence.
Though better than earlier in your post, where you quote two half-sentences and seek to close the matter.
As I noted, history is like a foreign language to you.The British officer commanding the Arab Legion noted:
The Arab civilians panicked and fled ignominiously. Villages were frequently abandoned before they were threatened by the progress of war.
The majority of the Arab refugees never saw a Jewish/Israeli soldier.
Prof. Benny Morris confirms that the majority fled due to the fear of war threatened by the Arabs.
Some on the orders of their own leadership.
Some based on the fear-mongering caused by Arab propagandists.
(Note how pouncer and tokugawa seek to still perpetuate the same propaganda.)
Note that the Arabs, the majority of which fled, were not deprived of their possessions as a condition of leaving.
In most cases, there were no Jews/Israelis present to do so.The other big difference is, of course, what happened to each of these refugee populations.
Nearly 1 million Jewish refugees were put in transfer camps in Israel and, over a decade, absorbed into Israeli society.
(Roughly doubling Israel's population.)
The 700,000 Arab refugees were thrown into "refugee camps". Not by Israel, but by Arab governments.
They are denied the rights guaranteed to all other refugees. Not by Israel, but by Arab governments.
The right to education, work, relocation and naturalization (citizenship) in their new country.
(See the "Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees".)
p> ?In the 1940s, there were scores of millions of refugees.
None of them had a "right of return".
p> you can only give examples (many under the exceptional circumstances of WWII) from the 1940s.
Do the 400,000 Palestinian Arabs expelled from Kuwait in 1990 have a "right of return"?In a prior discussion about the so-called "right of return", for lack of a better option, you claimed its origin in UNGAR 194 (which explicitly lists alternative to repatriation!). When I pointed out that the other 90% of this Resolution was based on the Arabs making peace with Israel, you then dismissed the parts of the Resolution that didn't have a precedent... which would thus include even the "ROR" (which is nonetheless not mentioned in the Resolution, which also outlines alternatives to that).
Notice the logical circle? How can an intelligent person claim that something originates in a document which he then dismisses?
p> The "alternative" (though you have lied about it) is a matter of Arab CHOICE ie. "those choosing not to return" can be recompensed by other means.
False, any return was predicated first on peace being made, and was not legally required (the legal distinction between "should" and "shall").
But, as usual, you miss the point. You can't claim that the RoR originates from UNGAR 194 and then dismiss the parts of that resolution first requiring peace because they aren't based on prior existing international law (which in itself is also wrong).
p> if the Jews were "ethnically cleansed" (laugh) from "Judea and Samaria", then they have no right to "return" there to build their settlements do they?I have never claimed that Jews have a "right of return" to Judea & Samaria (from which, along with eastern Jerusalem and Gaza, all Jews were ethnically cleansed during the 1948 Arab invasion).
I have claimed that Jews have a right to live in Judea & Samara (and eastern Jerusalem and Gaza).
Do you disagree?
p> Of course not.
OK, then we've established that Jews living in Judea & Samaria is not "illegal".
p> they can't be allowed to live there as Israeli citizens under the authority of the Israeli government. The issue should be a matter for the Palestinian Authority
First a border needs to be determined.
Something which, for decades, Arab parties rejected.
Israel was under no obligation to wait forever at the expense of these Jews.The only hypocritical contradiction here is your own. As noted in that other topic, UNGAR 194 speaks of "refugees" - including both the Jewish and Arab refugees that resulted from the Arab war. How can you claim that the Arab refugees have a "right of return" while denying it to the Jewish refugees from Judea, Samaria, eastern Jerusalem and Gaza?