Talk:History of Israel

repeated sentence

at the end of the fifth paragraph of the section "netanyahu I; Barak," the sentence "since 2013 it has been a permanent member of the group" is repeated twice. Chairibum (talk) 20:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Hyphenation Expert (talk) 23:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

History Of Israel, Its Not Palestine

The opening line: "The history of Israel covers an area of the Southern Levant also known as Canaan, Palestine or the Holy Land, which is the geographical location of the modern states of Israel and Palestine." - The early sentence reference to "Palestine" here is incorrect. It was NOT called Palestine when it was known as Canaan or The Holy Land. Also, Palestine is not recognized as a country, or a state.

"The word Palestine derives from Philistia, the name given by Greek writers to the land of the Philistines, who in the 12th century BCE occupied a small pocket of land on the southern coast, between modern Tel Aviv–Yafo and Gaza."

"This country received the name of Palestine, from the Philistines, who dwelt on the sea coast: it was called Judea, from Judah: and is termed the Holy Land, being the country where Jesus Christ was born, preached his holy doctrines, confirmed them by miracles, and laid down his life for mankind."

"While the State of Israel was established on 15 May 1948 and admitted to the United Nations, a Palestinian State was not established. The remaining territories of pre-1948 Palestine, the West Bank - including East Jerusalem- and Gaza Strip, were administered from 1948 till 1967 by Jordan and Egypt, respectively."

Sources:

https://hc.edu/museums/dunham-bible-museum/tour-of-the-museum/bible-in-america/bibles-for-a-young-republic/judea-palestine-or-the-holy-land/#:~:text=This%20country%20received%20the%20name,down%20his%20life%20for%20mankind.

https://www.britannica.com/place/Palestine#:~:text=The%20word%20Palestine%20derives%20from,Tel%20Aviv%E2%80%93Yafo%20and%20Gaza.

https://unctad.org/topic/palestinian-people/The-question-of-Palestine#:~:text=While%20the%20State%20of%20Israel,by%20Jordan%20and%20Egypt%2C%20respectively.

Please fix this issue, in any way you see fit, and don't be pressured by political biases on a supposedly FACTUAL website.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 June 2024

change "The result of the 29 August 1967 Arab League summit was the Khartoum Resolution, which according to Abd al Azim Ramadan, left only one option -a war with Israel." to "The result of the 29 August 1967 Arab League summit was the Khartoum Resolution, which according to Abd al Azim Ramadan, left only one option – a war with Israel." Imginarypart (talk) 09:18, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 12 June 2024 (2)

change "Increased Soviet antisemitism and enthusiasm generated by the 1967 victory led to a wave of Soviet Jews applying to emigrate to Israel. ." to "Increased Soviet antisemitism and enthusiasm generated by the 1967 victory led to a wave of Soviet Jews applying to emigrate to Israel." Imginarypart (talk) 09:21, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 09:28, 12 June 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request

Near the end of second lead paragraph it says "...., until Saladin’s Ayyubids finally expelled Christian rule late in the 12th century." Although Saladin conquered Jerusalem and most of the Christian kingdom, the Crusaders retreated to Acre and mantained their rule near the coast. It was only a century later that the remaining Crusader kingdom fell completely at the hands of the Mamluks. I think it would be more accurate if the sentence read "From the 11th century to the 13th century, the Land of Israel became the centre for intermittent religious wars between European Christian and Muslim armies as part of the Crusades, with the Kingdom of Jerusalem being almost entirely overrun by Saladin's Ayyubids late in the 12th century, although the remaining Crusader outposts would last for another century."

Further modifications are welcome. Thanks in advance.--2800:2503:121:F0F:1:0:3E80:E756 (talk) 01:32, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Prehistory: 1st paragraph must be rewritten

- The A. Ronen article ("The oldest human groups in the Levant") is out of date, publ. in 2006. It's the base of most of the paragraph.

- Terms are used chaotically, w/o understanding their meaning.

- Human remains have meanwhile been identified among Ubeidiye material. Arminden (talk) 10:35, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Lead: C19, 20

Pls don't remove historical facts. Qualifications can always be made after discussing them here, but the facts are clear. Thank you. Arminden (talk) 14:06, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

@Arminden: I guess you are referring to the removal and edits of:

1- "the Jews accepted the plan, while de Arabs rejected it."

This is an oversimplification that does not summarize the body and ignores Ben Gurion's publicly stated intention to take over all of Palestine.

2- "civil war ensued, won by the Jews"

this sounds like a football match that does not align with how RS have portrayed the events, also too detailed for lede.

3- "the Israeli Declaration of Independence sparked the 1948 War in which Israel repelled the invading armies of the neighbouring states. It resulted in the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight"

the declaration was the immediate step before the war, but obviously the war would have ensued anyway due to the raging conflict. Also which historical fact says that the 15 May 1948 war resulted in the Palestinian expulsion, when it is a historical fact that this expulsion had started in late 1947? And how did Israel "repel" the invading forces if it had not been able to control the West Bank and Gaza? Makeandtoss (talk) 15:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Every recent BBC World Service programme summarised it exactly this way. BBC, not Israeli TV or Deutsche Welle. We're talking about the intro (lead); in the body one can add as many qualifying remarks and justifications as one wants - and the fellow editors go along with :) Arminden (talk) 15:28, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

@Arminden: I don't think citing what BBC World Service programme said or wrote is a good counterargument to any of the questions or arguments I made above. Still waiting for your responses to each point. Makeandtoss (talk) 16:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

@Makeandtoss:

1- "the Jews accepted the plan, while de Arabs rejected it."

Fact. That Ben Gurion... etc. is your claim, in no way the historians' mainstream opinion. Taking over all of Palestine is BS, pls excuse my French. What X or Y hoped for during their wet dreams, or Ben Gurion wrote at some point in his journal - he wrote everything and its opposite at some point or another - is irrelevant. There was no way in 48 to realistically hope for more than they achieved, and they truly didn't. So you see, allegations here & there, not good for brief intros.

2- "civil war ensued, won by the Jews ("Jewish forces" is better)."

Fact. The British crushed the 1936-39 Arab Revolt with such violence that the Arabs entered the civil war 8 years later still severely weakened - and lost in every respect. Wars can be won and lost, much like football matches. All the various details deserve mention, but not in the lead - but the result? An absolute must for the lead. You can't complain it's too brief, AND too detailed (one short sentence, too detailed?) all at the same time.

3- "the Israeli Declaration of Independence sparked the 1948 War in which Israel repelled the invading armies of the neighbouring states. It resulted in the 1948 Palestinian expulsion and flight"

Fact. The USA tried to persuade Ben Gurion to wait, being convinced that this way the war could be preempted. The US opinion, not mine or yours.

The neighbours DID invade the very next day. I'm happy if you add "the civil war and.... 48 led to the refugees etc.". Benny Morris has the numbers, it may well be that most refugees were the result of the 48 war, but I don't know it by heart and it doesn't matter much, I believe.

Israel DID repel the invading armies from all territories granted to it by the UN and for sure stopped the Egyptian advance toward Tel Aviv and the Trans-Jordanian, Syrian and Iraqi push westwards of the Jordan Valley into Galilee. Not sure which side Latrun was placed in the UN partition plan, and similarly some sections along the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee and the Hula Valley taken by Syria, but all else went the Israeli way. If you wish, we can rephrase to "managed to defend all the territories granted to the Jewish state by the UN partition plan."

Opposite to what you wrote here-above, the West Bank and Gaza were NOT on any Israeli target list in 48, with the exception of Gush Etzion and possibly a couple of other kibbutzim elsewhere.

I can bring piles of RS for each point, but please, let's drop this unnecessary effort. Life is much too short for such futile exercises.

Arminden (talk) 16:25, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

To save time: this is what Encyclopaedia Britannica writes about the topic. Arminden (talk) 17:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

@Arminden: I have all the time to go over each point thoroughly. Oversimplified facts are half truths.

1- Wanting to take over all of Palestine is documented by RS: "Zionists accepted this scheme [the UN partition plan] since they hoped to use their state as a base to conquer the whole country" [1]. This is also heavily sourced at the UN partition plan WP article.

2- "which Jews won" is an oversimplified statement that adds nothing of value.

3- The Israeli declaration of independence did not specify Israel's borders, thus claims of repelling the Arab armies is misleading as the territories are not specified. Not to mention that it was the Jordanian army that repelled the Israelis at Latrun near Jerusalem an international area according to the plan. Again, misleading oversimplification.

4- Still no counterargument provided to the factually inaccurate claim currently in the article that says the war led to the expulsions when in fact they had started in late 1947. Makeandtoss (talk) 11:22, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

I completely disagree. I have already answered to most of it. You will always find counterarguments to everything, even the most logically obvious things, let alone to historiographical topics. Therefore please excuse me, I'll stop here. Cheers, Arminden (talk) 15:00, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

@Arminden: Points 1 and 2 were only recently inserted, and the onus is on you as the restorer to demonstrate consensus per WP:ONUS, so stopping this discussion from your side will mean that there is no consensus and that this content should be removed. I have added a POV tag until then. Makeandtoss (talk) 12:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)