Israel-Palestine+Conflict

**Essential Questions**:
People can't live in peace together when deeply held beliefs and views are in conflict, because different people with different beliefs and views just can't see eyes to eye. Like how the American didn't like the Soviets because of their different beliefs and views during the Cold War.
 * ** Can people live in peace together when deeply held beliefs and views are in conflict? **

Since no one want to admit their wrong with their beliefs and view, people will continue to argue that their views and beliefs are the only right views and beliefs.
I do not believe that the international community should play a role in helping a countries establish self determination, because then it wouldn't be called self determination, it will just be "Your country can't be any other government except this ..". It is called self-determination for a reason.
 * ** Should the international community play a role in helping countries establish self-determination? **

Should not place a role in helping a countries self determination because countries should have the freedom to choose what government they want their country to be
I do believe it is OK for victims to become the persecutors as, because a victim becoming a persecutor is just the victim getting on the offensive side on the discussed matter. Though victim becoming persecutors is not OK, because in the end there would be more victims created. Violence doesn't justified for anything, instead of using violence when access to resources is cut off, one just just talk about it, instead of using force. It would only just escalate the problem even more. I do believe the holocaust is a excuse for Israel overreach partition boundaries with Palestine, as after the Holocaust the Jews had nothing as the Nazis took everything from them. So, the Jew does deserve some sort of preparation for the pain that they had to go through.
 * ** Is it ever OK for victims to become the persecutors? **
 * ** Is violence justified when access to resources is cut off? **
 * ** Does the Holocaust excuse Israel from overreaching partition boundaries with Palestine? **



__**Reflection: Identify and explain the Bias of this Video Clip**__

The Bias of the video clip is to make the Palestinian seems like they're the victim from the conflict they had with the Israelis. In the video, the narrator says many Palestinian villages and buildings were destroyed. The narrator also mentioned that the Israeli used violence on the Palestinian to kick them out of "their" land. Also the narrator mentions that many Palestinian became refugees after getting kicked out of their homeland. From the video the narrator is using these sad evidences to make us feel sympathetic towards the Palestinian, and to persuade the audience to believe Israelis are the antagonists of the conflict.



**Opener: Picture Detective**:
 * Copy into your wiki


 * Ask a question
 * What clues do you see do you see?
 * What is the message of the cartoon
 * Question:** Why are there more white pieces than black pieces?


 * I see a single black piece is defending itself.
 * It means:** the many white pieces are trying to attack the black piece.
 * I see many white pieces surrounding the single black piece.
 * It means:** The many white pieces are ganging up on the single black piece.
 * Palestine is a white pieces.
 * It means:** If Palestine is a white piece, than the rest of the pieces are their allies, which all these pieces have in common is that they're all Arab states.
 * Palestine is the smallest piece compared to the other white pieces
 * It means:** Palestine is so small, that it can't fight back the black piece, thus it has other pieces behind it to back it up.
 * Israel is in the basic rook's place.
 * It means:** Many of the Arab states made their move, but Israel just remained there, doing nothing.


 * Message:** The message of the cartoon is that, many Arab states are ganging up on the Israel, and is pushing Israel into a corner.

__**Palestinian-Israeli video cartoon**__ Message: The message of the video is to show justification of the need of weapon to the world, that with constant attacks from the Palestinian, Israel require weapons to protect themselves from the constant attacks. Israel will strike back if continuation of poking and picking is coming from Arab states.

Bias: The Bias of the video is to say that Israel should have the privilege to have weapon, as the Israeli require protection against the constant attacks of Palestinian.

I n the late 1880's a group of Zionists traveled to Palestine to see what it offered as a Jewish homeland. One Zionist said, when he returned to Europe;
 * "The Bride is beautiful but she is married to another man" **
 * What was meant by this quote: This quote means that Zionist want the "bride", but at the same time, the "bride" does not belong to him, but instead it belongs to someone else (Palestine).
 * This quote means that the land would become a great homeland for the Jews, but the land is overpopulated with Arabs.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1n2b7pzT0SRZarGr2xVfM2cq1vhe3EPY5tYGxSQDEDWk/edit?usp=sharing
 * __Section guide question__**


 * Reflection: Part 1 Guide questions: **

The information I find most interesting about the conflict from this portion of the reader is that both want Israel because of religious significance. Jews want the land because it was proclaimed to be where the Jewish faith and Jews once originated from. The Muslims want the land because they've claimed to live in the area for centuries and that their prophet rose to heaven from that area. The Balfour Declaration, and the Hussein-McMahon Correspondence contributed to the conflict, because in both cases, Britain was basically waving bones in front of the two religious groups. Which the two religious groups were happy to take, but what the two group didn't know was that Britain's promise was completely different than what Britain promised originally.
 * 1. What information did you find most interesting about the conflict from this portion of the reader? **
 * 2. Explain and give examples of how other nations and international organizations impacted the conflict. **



__Observations __

 * 1) ====In 1917 there is only Palestinian living in the area. ====
 * 2) ====In 1946 Jews are slowly settling in parts of Palestine, which is the beginning of the Zionist movement. ====
 * 3) ====By 1947 Palestinians lost majority of their land to the Jews due to the UN partition Plan of 1947. ====
 * 4) ====By 1948-1949 Palestinians lost even more lands to the Jews. Also Palestine is referred to as Israel as majority of the land belongs to the Israelis. ====
 * 5) ====In present day there is only a small remnant of Palestinian left in Israel, as majority of the land belongs to the Israelis. ====
 * 6) ====Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Ramallah use to reside on Palestinian land, but now those city are in Israeli territory. ====

**Reflection on Guide questions 2**: (copy and paste and answer directly in your wiki)
UN tried to keep peace in the region by partitioning the land into halves in 1947, to stratify the needs and the demand of both Arabs and Jews. The war didn't make as much impact on the region, as soon after the war the UN forced Israeli to give back some of the land that they've conquered back to the Palestinians. Even though Israel gave some of the land they've conquered back to the Palestinians, the Israeli still manage to grow even larger in the Israel area. Palestinian refugees are treated poorly by Arab states, as many Arab states saw that they've brought it upon themselves for fighting in the first place. Some other Arab states also see the remaining Arabs living in the Israel area to be traitors to the Islamic faith. Palestinians were also treated like second class citizens in Israel.
 * ** How did the UN try to keep peace in the region? **
 * ** How did war impact the region? **
 * ** Reflect on the treatment of Palestinian refugees **


 * ** reflection questions on Guide questions 3 directly into your wiki: **

The role that the international community played in the 1967 war was that, after the war the UN passed Resolution 242 which entitled Israel to give up all the land they've claimed after the 1967 war, back to the respective country that Israeli took from. Language can be used to one's advantage in UN resolution 242, because in the French version the resolution, it state that the Israel should withdraw from "the territories" that Israel claimed, while in English version it state Israel should withdraw from "territories". Thus it allowed Israel to keep some of the land they've claimed after the 1967 war. ====Treatment of Palestinian refugees by Israelis after the war, was that the Israeli treated Palestinians as second class citizens, many of their basic rights were taken away. The possible reason for this treatment, is to really show who is the more dominant group, in this case Israel. Also it could be that the Israelis want the Palestinians to know the pain that the Jewish people went through, during the Holocaust. Some Palestinians were viewed as terrorists, thus by treating Palestinians poorly, it prevent Palestinian from forming oppositions against Israel. ====
 * 1. What role did the international community play in the 1967 War? **
 * 2. How can "language be used to one's advantage? (UN resolution 242) **
 * 3. Evaluate the treatment of Palestinian refugees by Israelis after the war? what are some possible reasons for this treatment? **

__**Comment on Six Day War video **__

 * The Israeli's victory demoralized the military power of the Arab nations that were involved in the war.
 * The premier of Israel said Israel will decided their own course of action, which means Israel will not listen to commands from the international community.
 * After the war, Israel took over Jerusalem and Bethlehem
 * After the war, it was first time that Jews were able to enter the holy city.
 * Israeli took over Jerusalem and Bethlehem because of religious significance.
 * After the war, the many Arab leaders / military official resigned after the defeat of the war.
 * Russia created sanctions against Israel, to stop Israel's progression on Palestinian land.

=__Reflection Questions on Section 4 Guide Questions.__= Israel's responded to the first Intifada with violence by killing Palestinian civilian. Israeli could of handled the situation differently, by forming a compromise with the Palestinians, instead of using violence to stop the Palestinian protest. The Use role in the peace attempts in the region were both positive and negative. When Jimmy carter was in office, he was able to get the president of Egypt and Israel to form a peace treaty between the two nations. While at the same time during President George H Bush was in office, he attempted to make Israeli Prime Minister Shamir to have a open negotiation with Palestinians and the other Arab nations. Though Shamir agreed on the negotiation, in the end it failed, because neither Israel nor Arabs could see eye to eye. The role of Israel and the PLO in attempts to peace because both group is afraid what might radical groups like Hamas will do.
 * ** Evaluate Israel's response to the 1st Intifada. How could it have been handled differently? **
 * ** Evaluate the US role in the peace attempts in the region. What were the causes of successes and failures? **
 * ** Assess the role of Israel and the PLO in attempts at peace. **

__Political Cartoon on Israel-Palestinian conflcit__


__**Reflection**__ **__questions on Guide Questions 5:__ (Copy and paste into your wiki)** **1. Discuss the viewpoint of the Israelis and the Palestinians on the barrier between Israel and the West Bank.** Israelis approves of the barrier as it protected them from terrorist attacks, while Palestinians are upset with the barrier, as the walls reconfigure the roads and communities in West Bank. The wall also blocked Palestinians from access to natural resources. **2. What do you see as the major stumbling blocks in the attempted peace talks discussed in this section?** The major stumbling blocks in the attempted peace talk discussed in this section is; the annexation of West Bank by Israel. Land right and civil right of Palestinians are the major stumbling blocks to section's negotiation. **__Reflection Questions on Guide Questions 6:__ (Copy and paste into your wiki)** **1. Do you think Palestine should be a full member of the UN? Why or why not?** I don't think Palestine should be a full member of the UN because to really be considered as a member of the UN, you must have your own independent state, at which Palestinians do not have. I do think Palestine should be a full member as UN as it once were a independent state, until the UN decided to partition parts of Palestine to the Israelis. **2. Evaluate how a lasting peace could be achieved in this conflict. Give specific evidence from your work** I believe lasting peace could be achieved in this conflict, just not anytime soon, considering the fact that in the past Palestinians/Arab had many negotiations in the past with Israelis, and each time they get closer to an agreement, but in the end things, doesn't work out between the two group. Lasting peace could be achieve this conflict by simply acknowledging Palestinians deserve a independent state.

__ Barrier Wall video Notes __ https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PdblF7k84PAtFZhUMoun9uapB-OpbuLrYl4lAeAnqgk/edit?usp=sharing

__Palestine Statehood Mean Markup__ https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QtYt7ykaaHIN0-zDfhSVeYfppLcBmVoycoccG9AugIU/edit?usp=sharing