Subject:
|
Re: Conflict in the Middle East
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 16 Apr 2002 17:22:56 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
890 times
|
| |
|
|
This is from my memory, so don’t recite too loudly! Dan Jassim probably
could give your question more justice.
I have never visited but… I think the short answer is "both". On the edge of
the town of Jenin exists a refugee camp which has probably housed refugees
since the War of Independence in 1948/49 when the Palestinians now in the
camp were forced from Israel into what was then Jordan. After the war, the
Israelis refused to let them return as they claim:
a) They left under their own free will (a dubious claim).
b) Their return would mean that Israel would not have had the desired
cultural mix (an interesting argument).
Israel then invaded the area of Jordan we know as the West Bank in the 6-day
war (‘67).
I imagine Jenin town is the kind of town one would expect to see in that
region of the world. Jenin camp is basically what I would call a shantytown
- poorly constructed breeze-block dwellings with poor services. Around
13,000 people lived in the "camp".
When the refugees were forced from their homes in the War of Independence
they left behind their whole lives to live in some of the most densely
populated places on the planet. The predicament of these people and the land
occupied in ‘67 is at the root of Palestinian “resistance”.
Scott A
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1932000/1932535.stm
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/middle_east/newsid_1932000/1932943.stm
> >
> > ...or read Suzanne Goldenberg's report. She describes the camp as "a vast
> > expanse of rubble":
> > http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,685133,00.html
>
> Forgive my ignorance, but I want to be clear on something. Is Jenin a
> camp, a town, a camp-within-a-town, a town-within-a-camp, or something else?
> I ask because I've heard it referred to alternatively as any of the above,
> so I'm unclear of what sort of area is at stake. That doesn't in any way
> reduce the loss suffered by those whose houses were bulldozed, but it would
> give me a better sense of the scene.
> In addition, in these articles and elsewhere, is a distinction drawn
> between "a town reduced to smoking rubble" and "parts of a town reduced to
> smoking rubble"? I don't see it clearly stated in the article, but if the
> destruction is obviously total, then I suppose there wouldn't be much use in
> belaboring the point. Again I ask because it would be helpful in
> illustrating the scope for me, since "the town" and "part of the town" can
> imply very different things.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Conflict in the Middle East
|
| "Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:Guo8A8.3J7@lugnet.com... (...) probably (...) edge of (...) refugees (...) the (...) the (...) 6-day (...) that (...) shantytown (...) Independence (...) the land (...) Quite a bit of video (...) (23 years ago, 16-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Conflict in the Middle East
|
| (...) camp, a town, a camp-within-a-town, a town-within-a-camp, or something else? I ask because I've heard it referred to alternatively as any of the above, so I'm unclear of what sort of area is at stake. That doesn't in any way reduce the loss (...) (23 years ago, 16-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
93 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
