Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
And the modern secular state of Lebanon was created by the Western powers, just like the modern secular state of Israel, Both have the same right to exist as any other internationally recognized national state.
Thats the question I asked, what changed. I don't think anything has changed. What happened during WW! and the intervention of the League of Nations and Britain was just another episode in the many Isreal has gone through as a nation. Its no different to the past when other powers recognised them as a nation or Kingdowm or people.
Tyre, Sidon, Byblos and others were ancient cities that became a nation in Lebanon. The same as Jerusalem, Ashkelon, Hebron and other cities formed the nation of Isreal.
You still haven't figured it out. Here is a hint. The Western powers not only created Mandatory Palestine, they created Mandatory Syria, Lebanon and Jordan and gave them hard borders which were satisfactory to none of the semitic people (Jews and Arabs) who actually lived there.
But isn't that the case for just about all nations. If it wasn't Western powers it was Persian, Assyrian, Babylonian, Roman and Ottoman powers making and braking nations.
No one really its just fact and reality. Its not as if there was no nation of people there. They had developed a destinct people with culture and power who already had much of what we consider a nation of people. Whether others recognise them or not they are still a unique and independent people.
Who weren't consulted. The people who were already a nation but no given official status. This jhas happened with all nations throughout time. Did the Ottomans consult the people when they expanded their Empire. Did the Romans. Did the Egyptians consult Isreal when they recognised it as a nation or Kingdom.
The protestors have been identifying with Hamas. They are their elected government after all.The harassment of Jewish students appears to be taking place off campus and by people who do not attend Columbia University.
Demonstrations just outside Columbia’s gates, which are currently closed to the public, took an especially dark tone over the weekend, when protesters who did not appear to be connected to the university were accused of celebrating Hamas and targeting Jewish students.
Nemat Shafik, Columbia’s president, said in a statement early Monday. “These tensions have been exploited and amplified by individuals who are not affiliated with Columbia who have come to campus to pursue their own agendas. We need a reset.”
“Go back to Poland!” one masked protester who clutched a Palestinian flag shouted outside the Columbia campus gates, according to a video posted on X.
Some on-campus activists said over the weekend that outside agitators were responsible for the antisemitic episodes and distanced themselves from the agitators.
“There’s so many young Jewish people who are, like, a vital part” of the protests, said Grant Miner, a Jewish graduate student at Columbia who belongs to a student coalition calling on Columbia to divest from companies connected to Israel.
That group said in a statement, “We are frustrated by media distractions focusing on inflammatory individuals who do not represent us,” and added that the group’s members “firmly reject any form of hate or bigotry.”
What We Know About the Protests and Arrests at Columbia University (Published 2024)
After nearly two weeks of protests, demonstrators seized Hamilton Hall. By the end of the night, the police moved into to arrest them.www.nytimes.com
They were all called Palestinians because that was the area where they lived. Jew's and Arabs were both called Palestinians.
They were Arabs living in land belonging to the ottomans then the brits.
Right and that is what the Gazan Arabs are pretending they were.
Because they were not a nation. They were arabs living in OTTOMAN LAND
But Palestine is a generic name for the area and doesn't represent a specific nations just like Canaan was the name before that and how Europe is the generic name for the nations or destinct peoples within that area. The Romans actually names it so as a way to try and wipe out the Jews.
Yes but all along these Arabs and Jews were still cultivating their cultures and nations as vassel states or Kingdoms. The Ottomans and before them the Persians, Assyrians and Romans were allowing to varying degrees the people of those lands to continue to live and develop even under their rule.
I am not sure what you mean. Do you mean pretending to be Palestinians. What is a Palestinian. What is their destinct national history. What were their city States before being Gaza. Isreal has Isreal in the history books as a destinct people and Kingdom, powerful cities like Jerusalem, Jericho and Ashkelon. Jodan has the Hashemite Kingdom and before that the Kingdoms of Ammon, Moab and Edom who became on nation of people.
Yes like at one stage people of Europe or as the Greeks said the “land west of the Bosporus” before nations were formed, when there were tribes, City States and Kingdoms which gradually sprouted destinct cultures and nations. The same with Russia which is still evolving as we see with Ukrain and every other nation on the earth.
You think nothing changed, You think that after WWI Jews, Christians and Muslims could all live in Palestine together, own land, have access to their holy sites, etc. just like they had before. And of course that continued after 1948, when the Western powers created a secular state in former Ottoman Palestine. No problems at all until Palestinians--for no reason at all--began to take issue with the situation.
As a nation? By the time of WWI Israel was not a nation and had not been one for close to 2000 years.
More false facts to counter Palestinian false facts? But the general shape of your argument is becoming clear, whether you realize it or not:
Ok maybe not exactly but certainly Tyre and other ancient cities were a big part of Lebanon becoming a nation.
I disagree. Its history is not too dissimilar to other nations around it. All were conquered and went through metamorphes into the nations they are today. They all evolved from oowerful cities that grew into Kingdoms and nations.
Actually the city was captured by the Phillistines so it wasn't originally a Phillistine city. The Phillistines were only around for 600 odd years and then were gone to history.
The point was the Republic of Lebanon was the culmination of those cities It could not declare itself a republic and nation without that history and it did so because if that history. The Republic of Lebanon is just one entity that area was known by and recognised as a people. Before that what is Lebanon was the cities of Byblos, Sidon and Tyre under the Pheonesians where King Hiram I ruled from the most powerful city Tyre.
But this came later after the area had already evolved into different forms of a proto nation. It was a Kingdom under King Hiram in Tyre which was the most powerful city state in the Pheonesian Empire. Lebanon was well on the way to being a nation before small villages around Mount Lebanon came into play.
How so? If you want to make this claim in support of a parallel claim about Israel, you really need to demonstrate how Lebanon became a nation and what relevance it has.
Nations rarely come into existence by fiat, unless the European colonialists were drawing arbitrary straight lines through ethnic groups and cultures. (In the middle east and Africa).
Where is the documentation of Israel growing from powerful cities? citation needed.
So it was a Canaanite city captured by the Egyptians and then the Philistines, and then the other great empires, OK, but it was never an Israelite city.
Never seen a map of ancient Israel without the Philistine cities in them. This taking of land you speak of is modern.
The Republic of Lebanon was not formed by a group of city-states declaring them a nation independent of the rest. It was an old Ottoman province held by the French under League of Nations mandate that declared itself independent. (The southern part of the Levant under British mandate declared itself independent a few years later. *There* is your parallel.)
Arabs have been part of "Lebanon" for a very long time going back at least until the Arab conquest. All of the modern groups of Lebanon are similarly descended from the Canaanites/Phoenicians in admixture with outsiders from many places bringing the complex web of religious pluralism to modern Lebanon.
Wow! Impressive! Human occupied land was divided into territories or provinces at some point in history.
There was no "Phoenician Empire". Individual Phoenician cities had their own colonies.
That is the foundation of one of the religious traditions that form the complex web of modern Lebanon.
The Republic of Lebanon did not "declare itself." It was created by France as a safe haven for Maronite Christians and to whittle down the territory traditionally governed from Damascus. Your fabulous history of the Middle East had nothing to do with it. It was all based on partitioning former Ottoman provinces into "zones of influence" by the British and French, mostly by force against bloody local resistance.
While the Europeans pressured the Ottoman formation of Lebanon in the mid 19th c.
As mentioned from 3200 to 539 BC, what was to become Lebanon was part of Phoenicia. So its ethnicity is not Muslim or Arabs but a sea faring people on the coast in northern Canaan. As mentioned the cities of Tyre, Sidon and Byblos were city States and Kingdoms from which most Lebanese come from. Evidence shows Byblos is one of the oldest citiess in Lebanon.
Yes but its cities were always there and these make up the majority of Lebanon. They still has a ruling system before this as KIngdoms and City States even under occupation ie
It seems many nations were declared or not declared States, nations, or Kingdoms by conquering powers who either allowed them to exist with a degree of independence or as a vassal or completely subsuming them. Nations borders have often changed into what they are today.
First there is the bible, one of the best history books as well when it comes to verifying the Isrealites and other nations and rulers as well as archeological evidence for those times, places and people.
armstronginstitute.org
armstronginstitute.org
It seems to have been no ones city. I guess being in that location on the coast and at the border of a number of powers it has a checkered history compared to more central locations. But in the end it was the Isrealites who settled it being that it was on the edge of their established territory.
So with all of this insightful historical and political analysis you have gifted us with and so much factual and faultlessly documented evidence, I may have lost track of what your point was to begin with. As far as I can tell, what you are trying to prove is that of all of the modern nation states carved out of the remains of the Ottoman Empire, some of the people living there deserve their status as nations more than others.As mentioned from 3200 to 539 BC, what was to become Lebanon was part of Phoenicia. So its ethnicity is not Muslim or Arabs but a sea faring people on the coast in northern Canaan. As mentioned the cities of Tyre, Sidon and Byblos were city States and Kingdoms from which most Lebanese come from. Evidence shows Byblos is one of the oldest citiess in Lebanon.
These cities were then incorporated into the Persian Achaemenid Empire and then became part of Alexander the Greats Empire in 332 BC. The region was then split into provinces under the Roman Empire Coele Syria and Phoenice, the latter which the land of present-day Lebanon was a part of.
This is where Mount Lebanon comes in with a hermit named Maron who established the Christian Maronites who moved to the mountains to escape persecution from the Romans. Then comes the Muslims in the 7th century when they conquered Syria including parts of modern day Lebanon around the same time they conquered Jersusalem. They then took control of parts of Mount Lebanon in the 980's which resulted in the Druze religion a branch of Sharia Islam around the 11th century.
The cities of Sidon, Tyre, Acre, Tripoli, Beirut, and others were administered by the Muslim Caliph and absorbed into Arab culture. The Franks Crusades reclaim the former Byzantine Christian territories and establish the County of Tripoli as Roman Catholic Christian states along the coast for a couple of centuries and then it comes back under Muslim control with the conquest by the Mamluks.
Lebanon became part of the Ottoman Empire in 1516 and the area was organized into provinces: Northern and Southern Mount Lebanon, Tripoli, Baalbek and Beqaa Valley, and Jabal Amil. The Druze ruled southern Mount Lebanon until the civila war with the Maronites wherre around 10,000 Christians were slaughtered. Shortly afterwards, the Emirate of Mount Lebanon, which lasted about 400 years, was replaced by the Mount Lebanon Mutasarrifate, as a result of a European-Ottoman treaty called the Règlement in 1861.
After 1861 there existed an autonomous Mount Lebanon with a Christian mutasarrıf, which had been created as a homeland for the Maroni under European diplomatic pressure following the 1860 massacres. As a result Mount Lebanon was split into two parts one under the Maronite and the other the Druze. But certainly the Maronite has been there far longer.
The Maronite Catholics and the Druze founded modern Lebanon in the early eighteenth century, through the ruling and social system known as the "Maronite-Druze dualism" in Mount Lebanon Mutasarrifate.
On September 1, 1920, Greater Lebanon, or Grand Liban, was officially established under French control as a League of Nations Mandate.
Greater Lebanon united the regions of Mount Lebanon, North Lebanon, South Lebanon, and the Bekaa, with Beirut as its designated capital.
This led to Lebanese independence in 1943.
Lebanon - Wikipedia.
I think this is the political rule you are talking about from Mount Lebanon. But as you can see there is a lot of history leading up to that point. Even then at certain stages we could say Lebanon was already a nation and Kingdom of sorts along the way when its cities were autonomous and regarded as States or Kingdoms even under occupation like Isreal.
It seems like Isreal the Muslims came in later and captured territory and then made the area Muslim despite there being a strong Christian presence and even rulers. Lebanon has a shared power structure it seems where Christians, Muslims and Orthodox Christians share power.
But to say that Mount Lebanon is the be all and end all of how Lebanon became a nation is only telling part of the story. In some ways it seems the Druze who emerged out of Sharia Islam as rulers were a minority and ruling as feudal families.
Yes but its cities were always there and these make up the majority of Lebanon. They still has a ruling system before this as KIngdoms and City States even under occupation ie
By the mid-14th century BC, the Phoenician city-states were considered "favored cities" to the Egyptians. Tyre, Sidon, Beirut, and Byblos were regarded as the most important. The Phoenicians had considerable autonomy.
Under the Persians the Phoenician area was later divided into four vassal kingdoms—Sidon, Tyre, Arwad, and Byblos—which were allowed considerable autonomy. Local Phoenician kings were allowed to remain in power and given the same rights as Persian satraps (governors).
Phoenicia - Wikipedia
It seems many nations were declared or not declared States, nations, or Kingdoms by conquering powers who either allowed them to exist with a degree of independence or as a vassal or completely subsuming them. Nations borders have often changed into what they are today.
First there is the bible, one of the best history books as well when it comes to verifying the Isrealites and other nations and rulers as well as archeological evidence for those times, places and people.
But there is plenty of evidence outside the bible for showing that the Hebrews and Isrealites were a nation of sorts.
Just off the top of my head I can think of one. King David Kingly line is acknowledged by the Pharoh Sennacherib with the Tel Dan Stele. So Isreal was big enough and powerful enough to be mentioned among other nations and Kingdoms by the Egyptians. King Davids city has been found down from the Temple mount.
The Tel Dan Inscription: The First Historical Evidence of King David from the Bible
Why is the Tel Dan Inscription regarded as the first historical evidence for King David? Learn how this discovery, referencing the “House of David,” reshaped debates about David’s historicity and the early kingdom of Judah.www.biblicalarchaeology.org
There is also evidence of King Hezekiah defending Jerusalem against Sennacherib which shows Judah was a powerful Kingdom.
Jerusalem Under Siege - The BAS Library
Now that so much attention is being focused on the new excavations around the Gihon Spring and Hezekiah’s Tunnel—which was built as a defense against a siege by the Assyrian leader Sennacherib—it may be time to look at the siege itself. Specifically, was there one attack in 701 B.C., or were...library.biblicalarchaeology.org
Then theres the Amarna Letters from Canaanite cities under siege by the Isrealites to the Egyptian Pharoh asking for help. They speak of losing their cities and how Canaan as a whole was being lost to the Isrealites as part of becoming a nation. There are around 380 letters but here as some more interesting ones.
Amarna Letter EA144
Zimreddi, mayor of Sidon, informs pharaoh that all the nearby cities have been lost to the Hebrews.
Amarna Letter EA215
Bayawa begs pharaoh to send Yanhamu, an Egyptian ambassador or provincial overseer, to help within the year or the entire land of Canaan will be lost to the Hebrews.
Amarna Letter EA284
Shuwardata, mayor of Hebron, claims that all lands nearby have been captured by the Hebrews and that he alone is left.
Amarna Letter EA286
Abdi-Heba, mayor of Jerusalem, informs pharaoh that he is the last city mayor standing that hasn't been captured by the Hebrews.
https://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-maps-conquest-amarna-tablets-letters-akhenaten-habiru-abiru-hebrews-1404-1340bc.htm
The Pharohs also acknowledged the Isrealites as a nation or Kingdom.
Menepta stele
The Merneptah Stele (or Israel Stele) is an engraved stone slab which describes Pharaoh Merneptah’s military victories in 1207 b.c.e. The mention of Israel in this 3,200-year-old document suggests, at the time of its inscription, the nation of Israel was an established power and not a nomadic people who had just recently entered the land of Canaan.
Merneptah Stele: Proving Israel’s 3,200-Year Existence
What does a pharaoh’s conquest have to do with Israel?
Sennacherib’s Prism
An Assyrian artifact known as Sennacherib’s Prism, the king boasts: “As for Hezekiah, I shut him up like a caged bird in his royal city of Jerusalem.”
Uncovering the Bible's Buried Civilizations: The Assyrians
See this and more on ArmstrongInstitute.org
You can't have a Royal city if you have not got a Kindom.
There are many more like this that mention the Isrealites as a nation and/or Kingdom in passing.
It seems to have been no ones city. I guess being in that location on the coast and at the border of a number of powers it has a checkered history compared to more central locations. But in the end it was the Isrealites who settled it being that it was on the edge of their established territory.
The Egyptian King Merneptah actually mentions taking Ashkelon and Gezer while claiming to have laid Isreal to waste, their seed no more. Which is obviously not the case because Isreal was still around. But it implies that Isreal as a destinct people growing in power within Canaan around 1200 BC.
IBSS - Biblical Archaeology - Evidence of the Exodus from Egypt
The Amarna Letter EA287 also refers to Ashkelon, Lachish and Gezer being allied to the Hebrews. So it seems that around that time (3,000 odd years ago) Ashkelon and other Canaan cities were becoming part of the Isrealites.
https://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-maps-conquest-amarna-tablets-letters-akhenaten-habiru-abiru-hebrews-1404-1340bc.htm
What about an engraved inscription from the actual time and people involved that states these Philistine cities becoming part of Isreal even 3,000 years ago.
Despite not declaring themselves the city states, the places that contained the majority of people and culture were the nation regardless of what declarations were made later. Where else were the majority who make up the actual nation as a people but not in the most powerful and influentual cities.
This is what I don't understand with the logic that many protestors against Isreal claim. They call them occupiers and colonialist and yet that is exactly what the Arabs and Muslims did. Now you are making an arguement that this is ok and part of becoming a nation. Perhaps it is but at least we have to be consistent with who qualifies under this definition as its no different to Isreal.
I disagree. Canaan was a mixture of hunter gatherers and nomads. People then began to settle with farming but still many were nomads. From settling came powerful cities with destinct cultures and peoples. It is at this point I think is the basis of the culture as it comes out of the land once people settle in that particular land.
The question is why. Perhaps the Tower of Babel lol. People were once one people with a common language and never seen themselves as seperate peoples. On the other hand evolution has it that this was an inevitable consequence of survival where people became tribal and territorial.
Ok then Phoenicians spread their culture far and wide beyond their own land where they originated. Still it has the same hallmarks of an Empire in that its spreading a certain culture and way of life onto other cultures and people from a different background.
But this like the Islamic Druze should not be used to define Lebonese status as a nation. These were later additions to the Phoenician culture that was already there.
The Phoenician state was the Phoenician people and their culture and that never been broken. The core and dominant culture of Lebanon is Phoenician and always has been. The people that came later from other cultures with other beliefs were an addition but did not replace that core culture and history.
They did the same in all nations but that didn't change that the dominant culture was still the original culture which continued to develop despite having been influenced by other beliefs and cultures.
