 |
| |
|
|
Az
|
 |
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:37
|
|
quote:
They didn't sell them out to "somebody," they just sold them out for themselves.
British promised them freedom, self-determination, not puppetry.
Ask the Arabs what they think about it.
|
Who are "them"? most of the arabs didn't fight for the british. It was a number of seminomadic clans of Beduins, while most of the arabs were agricultural, Falahs, and hated the Beduin for raiding their field with their herds, and being bandits. The only lie the british told the leaders of those clans were that they'd get Syria, which they let the French have, and the guy who was supposed to get Syria, got half of Palestine. ( that was promised to the jews by the british)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Urban Ranger
|
|
Apolyton Duke of Off-Topic
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Az
yes, of course, of course. Now factor in the efficiency of fossil power plants.Fossil power plant Energy efficiency is something like 10,000 BTU/KWh ( both are energy units, so it's a unitless coefficient) |
The nice thing about fuel cell is, you can use solar, tidal, wind, geothermal, biomass, etc. energy to get hydrogen in the first place.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ted Striker
|
 |
United States of America
Jan 1970
time: 21:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Az
quote:
They didn't sell them out to "somebody," they just sold them out for themselves.
British promised them freedom, self-determination, not puppetry.
Ask the Arabs what they think about it.
|
Who are "them"? most of the arabs didn't fight for the british. It was a number of seminomadic clans of Beduins, while most of the arabs were agricultural, Falahs, and hated the Beduin for raiding their field with their herds, and being bandits. The only lie the british told the leaders of those clans were that they'd get Syria, which they let the French have, and the guy who was supposed to get Syria, got half of Palestine. ( that was promised to the jews by the british) |
Not. Dude this is just common knowledge. But I guess uncommon inside of Israeli history books.
quote:
The Arab Revolt (1916–1918) was initiated by Sherif Hussein ibn Ali with the aim of securing independence from the ruling Ottoman Turks and creating a single unified Arab state spanning from Aleppo in Syria to Aden in Yemen.
After the Turkish nationalist reform party Young Turks coup in 1908, Ottoman politics changed and the Ottoman Empire increased discriminating against its non-Turkish inhabitants. The Ottomans joined the Central Powers in World War I in 1914. Many Arab nationalist figures in Damascus and Beirut were arrested by the Ottomans. The Arabs were also threatened by the construction of the Hejaz railway, which helped move Turkish troops deep into Arab areas.
Because of this, Sherif Hussein, as the head of the Arab nationalists, entered into an alliance with Britain and France against the Ottomans in June 1916. The Arab forces were led by his sons Abdullah and Faisal. Faisal seized Damascus from the Ottomans in 1918. At the end of the war, their forces had seized what is today Jordan, large parts of the Arabian peninsula and parts of southern Syria.
Britain promised, in the Hussein-McMahon Correspondence, that it would support Arab independence if they revolted against the Ottomans. Both sides had different interpretations of this agreement. Britain, France and Russia divided the area in ways unfavourable to the Arabs under the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement. Further confusing the issue was the Balfour Declaration of 1917, which promised support for a Jewish "national home" in Palestine. |
duh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Revolt
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
|
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:37
|
|
Not reading your own sources 
Now, let me remind you who was Sherif Hussein ibn Ali - A Hashemite, who was at odds with some other arab factions, like the Saudi family ( who took Arabia away from him ) and who certainly wasn't representing the will of most of the people who call themselves arab today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherif_Hussein_ibn_Ali
As you'll see bellow, prior to WWI, the Hashemites were rulers of desert cities, and weren't descendants of Falah upper classes, but rather the appointed rulers of desert cities, like Mecca.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemite
Also, you might discover that these fellows were much at odds with the leaders of the arabs in mandatory palestine, for example, and historicall were in much better relations that the falah arabs, that were the majority in population.
For example,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal_Weizmann_Agreement . Of course, this was shortlived, since the british played both sides, but this again wasn't betrayal of "The Arabs", since the Hashemites can hardly be called the arabs representatives.
For example, the relationship between the Hashemite king Abdullah, Faisal's brother, and the proto-palestinian leadership ( like the El-Husseini family, the ruling family of falah arabs in palestine, basically ) were notoriously "great" - for example, they've had a part in Abdullah's assassination, after suspicions that he wanted to sign a peace accord with TEH ZIONAZIS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_I_of_Jordan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni
So, basically, calling them "arab nationalists", and the representatives of arabs, is laughable.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ted Striker
|
|
United States of America
Jan 1970
time: 21:37
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Az
Not reading your own sources
Now, let me remind you who was Sherif Hussein ibn Ali - A Hashemite, who was at odds with some other arab factions, like the Saudi family ( who took Arabia away from him ) and who certainly wasn't representing the will of most of the people who call themselves arab today.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherif_Hussein_ibn_Ali
As you'll see bellow, prior to WWI, the Hashemites were rulers of desert cities, and weren't descendants of Falah upper classes, but rather the appointed rulers of desert cities, like Mecca.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemite
Also, you might discover that these fellows were much at odds with the leaders of the arabs in mandatory palestine, for example, and historicall were in much better relations that the falah arabs, that were the majority in population.
For example,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faisal_Weizmann_Agreement . Of course, this was shortlived, since the british played both sides, but this again wasn't betrayal of "The Arabs", since the Hashemites can hardly be called the arabs representatives.
For example, the relationship between the Hashemite king Abdullah, Faisal's brother, and the proto-palestinian leadership ( like the El-Husseini family, the ruling family of falah arabs in palestine, basically ) were notoriously "great" - for example, they've had a part in Abdullah's assassination, after suspicions that he wanted to sign a peace accord with TEH ZIONAZIS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdullah_I_of_Jordan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni
So, basically, calling them "arab nationalists", and the representatives of arabs, is laughable. |
Out of respect for Horse I won't continue this discussion any longer.
But it's pretty obvious where your bias is coming from, especially considering Palestine just "happens" to be connected to the events in question. But I guess when the word, "Arab" is used a gazillion times in reference to an event, it really has nothing to do with Arabs.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:37.
Apolyton Time is 00:37. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-08-2005 15:33
|