Talk:Palestine (region)

Palestinians in exile

• I think jordanians living abroud should also be considered palestinians in exile since that land was part of the region of palestine until 1929

Is there a catagory for this ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marinesuper (talk • contribs) 11:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Since Palestine is a geographical region, there are some Jews who were and are still in exile, since they choose to live outside the land from which the Romans exiled their ancestors. John Hyams (talk) 03:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

John, your comments are completely irrelevant, the user is asking about Palestinians in exile, not Jews in exile. Furthermore, I challenge you to provide evidence that Jews were ever exiled from Palestine.

The fact is that there are over 3 million Palestinians who have been forced out of their homes and effectively forced to live in exile outside of Palestine because of Israeli persecution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.115.198.24 (talk) 03:44, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

read historical books,such as Joshepius Plavious' books.

read the bible for god sake! most of it might be not true,but at least it's clear that there were some jewish state, in your "palestine". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.70.160.81 (talk) 00:18, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Jews have lived in Palestine thousands of years ago, they also lived in other parts of the Middle East, Europe and Africa. They were a scattered group of people who believe in Judaism. A "Jewish State" never existed in the area called Palestine, but Jews did.

I encourage you to read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestine#Hasmonean_dynasty_.28140_BC.29 and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Judah . If you want to go into details of what state did or did not exist in that area - you should say that a "Palestinian State" never existed in that area, mainly because the notion of a "Palestinian People" or "Nation" had only risen in the 20th century, when the area was under Ottomman, British and Israeli/Jewish rule (and the West Bank was also under Jordanian rule). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.176.44.102 (talk) 20:49, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Attacking the origins stories of other groups whether Jewish or Muslim is classic racism and pointless. The important point is to describe accurately the history and current state of the Palestine area. Who was there first or longest or who was in charge is important to describe but not to wet one's pants over --Tumadoireacht (talk) 22:09, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

currently there isn't such thing as the 'state of palestine' and nobody used the term palestinians before 1967 and it should be mentioned in the article. and there was a jewish state and kingdom in israel for a lot of years and for more than one time and it should also be mentioned in the article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.139.203.116 (talk) 13:28, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Your own Bible speaks of the Palestinians by stating that there was a Land of the Philistines (the extent of it can be argued, but it existed nevertheless and is also mentioned in Egyptian and other historical records, so you cannot deny it). If there was a Land of a people then there must have been a people of this name on the land, right? Also, while there was not a country in the "modern sense" called Palestine, as there is no country in the modern sense called Texas or New York, there was certainly a geographical/political entity called Palestine and had I asked anyone from that area at any time over the past 2000 years or so about where he was from he or she would indicate something that has Palestine in it one way or another, be it Palestina, Jund Filistine, Wilayat Filistin, or whatever. And contrary to your belief, nowhere in actual history is it called Israel before 1948.

One would think that all religious references should be removed from the article as evidence of anything. I frankly do not care what the Torah, Bible or the Quran say about something which is supposed to be historical and factual, and certainly outside of the religious realm. Your beliefs do not matter to me and my beliefs do not matter to you. You cannot prove to me that what is in your religion is true and I cannot and do not want to prove to you that my beliefs are true. So better for all of us, and for "scientific" honesty, to leave all religious BS out of it. And that would be actually the only neutral way of approaching the subject, not by mentioning all religions' claims. Biraqleet (talk) 04:10, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Region Palestine

There is no evidence nor valid sources for arranging the State of Israel into a Region Palestine. Israel is an own Region. Just because supporters of palestinian methods of terrorism, in form of violence and attempts to manipulate the view of historical events does not mean that they are right. Just because the logic and facts of history is unpleasent, or would have a negativ outcome for the own attitude or believing, doesnt give anyone the Right to contest the sovereignity of the state of Israel. Israel and Jews themself are ongoing attacked by rockets and other form of violence. But to argue that it is the right of palestinians to defend themself against Israel, and to support this view by categorizing Israel into a Region Palestin,e and a term of occupation, is far away from reality. The Region palestine is restricted to parts of the Gazza Strip and the West-Bank. During history the original Home of Jesus, Judaism and Jerusalem was sieged and occupied. It was originaly Jewish. The Palestinians today lived in a small place adjacent to Israel, nowadays know as the Gazza strip. Nowadays Jews have freed the region from occupation. But because the last occupants of Israel were Moslems, grants the Islam and palestinians the right to claim the Country by relying on the argumentation that Israel is part of the Region Palestine? It is the same when 5 persons are voting against the truth, one votes for it, but the 5 persons are right because they are more? The view of history is not based on democracy, but on truth. Again, do not alter my edits, i simple erase POV, conclusions without any sources and historical incorrect informations. --Santiago84 (talk) 10:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

The name "Palestine" has different meanings, such as the proclaimed state. Palestine, as a region, is commonly defined as to include Israel. This is especially true when also seen in a historical context. There is a multitude of highly reliable sources which says just that. --Frederico1234 (talk) 16:59, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Missing opening parenthesis

"in the Greek form, Παλαςτίνη), it is used by Josephus" Please correct. -- 77.187.59.4 (talk) 16:38, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

20th century

"According to American Ambassador Morgenthau, Turkey had never been an independent sovereignty"

Morgenthau was a known turcophone. Judging from this statement his knowledge on history wasn't also the best. The Ottoman Empire was established in 1299 and expanded for centuries, I wonder who limited its "independet sovereignty" for all these centuries, especially in its high time? Just because it wasn't a national state but a heterogenous Empire (multinational state) to deny that it was sovereign is plain wrong.

The capitulations of the empire were at first bilateral treaties signed from a position of strengh and just later on in the decline of the Empire "misued" / forced on by foreign powers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MaxFrisch85 (talk • contribs) 06:34, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

History section

The history section is much too long in the article. I propose to summarise it, and ensure that all extraneous detail finds its way into History of Palestine. Anyone disagree with this plan? Oncenawhile (talk) 21:08, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

I have started the process. Since as always this topic can be sensitive, I propose to carry it out slowly to allow all editors to contribute. The first step is to ensure that no good information is removed from wikipedia - i.e. any information in the History section here which is not already in the History of Palestine article needs to be added in. I have compared the two and carried this out for the period up until the start of the Byzantine era. Grateful for any comments / additions. I will then start on the next part from the Byzantine era onwards. Oncenawhile (talk) 19:31, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for undertaking this mammoth but necessary project. Could I ask that we use the headings in the history section as outlined here? These are based on scholarly naming conventions laid out in RS' quoted in this article and differ from those used in the History of Palestine article, particularly as regards the ancient history period where naming empires is a tricky business given the lack of conclusive archaeological and textual evidence regarding the identity of the inhabitants. Tiamut^talk 19:43, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tiamut, my pleasure - hopefully i can do this work to the satisfaction of all sides. On the subtitles, I understand your point but i'm not sure I fully agree as (i) the existing structure has a number of imperfections, e.g. the dating of the start of the chalcolithic period is wrong, the persian period should not be in the iron age, and the ayyubids are missing; and (ii) I propose the section will become quite a lot shorter so will have quite a few less subtitles. I'll have a think about it some more and hopefully my proposed version will work ok re your point. Oncenawhile (talk) 03:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Update on this - I have now finished a couple more eras, so about two thirds done. Comments gratefully received. Oncenawhile (talk) 15:16, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I have now completed all the way up to the British Mandate period. Oncenawhile (talk) 07:32, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Please review History of Palestine

After more than a week of effort i have finished merging the history section of this article with History of Palestine. I'll hold off before starting to summarise the section in this article to give editors a chance to review first.

In the meantime, a question for other editors - how short should the "shortened" version of the history section of this article be?

Oncenawhile (talk) 22:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if this is the correct place, but the image of "Palestine" in all green, which is cut off at the borders of modern day Israel, is both innacurate and offensive. One must read further down the article to see the actual region that the Romans names "Palestine" . It would be more accurate to show the image of Palestine, without the context of the modern state of Israel.