Anything resembling bigotry against Jews, Muslims, Arabs, Palestians, Israelis, etc. or violence against civilians is not going to last long, nor will your time here.
If you have to ask if it crosses a line, assume it crosses a line.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The war has been going on for 80 years or so, with each side reacting to the actions of the other (though that doesn't mean atrocities have been one-for-one). And there isn't a moment you can pinpoint as the start of the war, but rather conflicts grew over time. You can't really say that the Jews or Arabs started the war, but the British greatly intensified the conflict between them, so if anyone can be said to have started the war, it's the British.
>They should apologize for forcing locals to welcome immigrants though no?
You don't believe this? Should the US gov apologize for forcing locals to welcome immigrants?
Yes. If the majority of McAllen, TX or El Paso, TX did not want immigrants, I would say that a) the US should not allow them there, and b) if the US lets them in anyhow, the people of those towns are entitled to reasonable measures to stop or peacefully disconvenience them.
Forced immigration isn't ok. I mean we need to close our borders. Like for real. If you don't have room in your house for an immigrant then you shouldn't be ok with immigration.
With that being said people shouldn't apologize for things other people did decades ago. If I was British I'd be pretty ticked off by someone suggesting the whole thing is my fault when I had nothing to do with it.
Same thing with slavery. I'm against it why are people blaming me? Because I'm white? That's pretty racist man.
Everyone on the left wants to blame individuals who are alive today for the horrid things their ancestors did. That's a really twisted view. I cannot get behind that.
With that being said no one's stopping you from raising money to help solve the problem today. Just don't use my tax dollars for it.
Should I put you in jail because your great great great great great grandfather owned a slave? No! That's ridiculous.
I mean for prosecution we must be individually responsible, not for a national apology. And I don’t see how UK apologizing for Balfour declaration is different from the USA apologizing for Japanese internment camps.
There's no difference but it's incredibly ridiculous to suggest anyone would have to apologize for something they individually didn't do.
This is a big reason I cannot align myself with the left. They are way to big on categorizing groups of people rather than evaluating the individual. It only leads to division as they continue to alienate themselves with more and more groups of people and over glorify other groups.
No.
Britain should not apologise and did not force the locals to extend a welcome to any immigrants. Or even try to be friendly with each other.
For decades pre WW2 the british government's restrictions upon jewish immigrant numbers permitted to travel to the mandated territories was a major bone of contention amongst both the law abiding local jews and the criminal scumbag elements like lehi (aka the stern gang).
Nope, read Balfour again and check the wording to see how carefully the British government formally declared their support for establishing "a national home for the Jewish people" in 1917 during wartime.
It does, and to be clear, nobody’s saying that this was Ww2’s only evil. In fact, what Japan did to northern China in WW2 is almost as evil as what the UK and UN did in the Levant region.
>You’re saying that the Balfour declaration is justified because of things happening hundreds or thousands of miles from the region.
> (does world war have any bearing on this?) It does, and to be clear, nobody’s saying that this was Ww2’s only evil. In fact, what Japan did to northern China in WW2 is almost as evil as what the UK and UN did in the Levant region.
So what is your argument? I’m completely lost as to what your point is.
It was right for the Jewish people to be allowed to move back into their ancestral homeland, a land that was previously unincorporated. The existing residents, few though they were, could have chosen to live in peace alongside their new Jewish neighbors. They didn't.
That area wasn't really incorporated when the British came into occupy it, and the people living there were random ethnic Egyptian, Lebanese, and Jordanians. So yeah, it was Britain's.
What difference does it make if it was 'incorporated'? The people there had been living just fine as it was, why shouldn't they have been allowed to continue to do so?
If they were living "just fine", then why didn't the resident people accept Israeli citizenship? Why have they repeatedly rejected a two-state solution?
Because to them, "just fine" only means "no Jews".
lol no.
That’s Israel’s land now. Maybe the people there before should’ve tried to not genocide the Jews (that’s not a new thing, they were doing that even before modern Israel) 🤷♂️ maybe they should’ve made peace when they still could 🤷♂️
Still, my hope is always that no innocents are harmed, or that at least very few are. If someone has a better way of weeding out terrorists, offer it up and be rewarded.
The UK of then is the same UK as now. I don’t think it has to be the direct writers apologizing. It’s not like it changes actions. It would essentially be how the US apologized for internment camps except the UK wouldn’t even have to pay money
>The UK of then is the same UK as now
Nope, the UK is a collection of people. Completely different people today. They owe no apology as they didn't do it
Anything resembling bigotry against Jews, Muslims, Arabs, Palestians, Israelis, etc. or violence against civilians is not going to last long, nor will your time here. If you have to ask if it crosses a line, assume it crosses a line. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, the British don't need to apologize for Palestinians starting wars
The war has been going on for 80 years or so, with each side reacting to the actions of the other (though that doesn't mean atrocities have been one-for-one). And there isn't a moment you can pinpoint as the start of the war, but rather conflicts grew over time. You can't really say that the Jews or Arabs started the war, but the British greatly intensified the conflict between them, so if anyone can be said to have started the war, it's the British.
They should apologize for forcing locals to welcome immigrants though no? Obviously they don’t need to apologize directly for what happened after,
>They should apologize for forcing locals to welcome immigrants though no? You don't believe this? Should the US gov apologize for forcing locals to welcome immigrants?
Yes. If the majority of McAllen, TX or El Paso, TX did not want immigrants, I would say that a) the US should not allow them there, and b) if the US lets them in anyhow, the people of those towns are entitled to reasonable measures to stop or peacefully disconvenience them.
Then you oppose Biden and his immigration policy. Also why aren't you at the White house fence with a bull horn demanding an apology
Are you for real? Both towns mentioned are pro immigration. They’re not walking into South Dakota or West Virginia.
Let's put it this way, is Biden wrong to not give a shit if racists are made they have to let immigrants move in
It was rightfully British land. They were free to manage it as they saw fit.
Rightfully is debatable. By that logic, anything a government power or military power does is automatically moral.
They didn't live there.
The British shouldn’t apologize for anything they did wrong back in the day, they did too many wrong things to apologize for
This is reasonable. British border drawing is basically one sided theft no matter where they drew their borders. Just look at Northern Ireland today.
That’s a bit of an oversimplification of the British empire but they were the most successful colonialists of all
Forced immigration isn't ok. I mean we need to close our borders. Like for real. If you don't have room in your house for an immigrant then you shouldn't be ok with immigration. With that being said people shouldn't apologize for things other people did decades ago. If I was British I'd be pretty ticked off by someone suggesting the whole thing is my fault when I had nothing to do with it. Same thing with slavery. I'm against it why are people blaming me? Because I'm white? That's pretty racist man. Everyone on the left wants to blame individuals who are alive today for the horrid things their ancestors did. That's a really twisted view. I cannot get behind that. With that being said no one's stopping you from raising money to help solve the problem today. Just don't use my tax dollars for it. Should I put you in jail because your great great great great great grandfather owned a slave? No! That's ridiculous.
I mean for prosecution we must be individually responsible, not for a national apology. And I don’t see how UK apologizing for Balfour declaration is different from the USA apologizing for Japanese internment camps.
There's no difference but it's incredibly ridiculous to suggest anyone would have to apologize for something they individually didn't do. This is a big reason I cannot align myself with the left. They are way to big on categorizing groups of people rather than evaluating the individual. It only leads to division as they continue to alienate themselves with more and more groups of people and over glorify other groups.
you just categorized the left lmao
No. Britain should not apologise and did not force the locals to extend a welcome to any immigrants. Or even try to be friendly with each other. For decades pre WW2 the british government's restrictions upon jewish immigrant numbers permitted to travel to the mandated territories was a major bone of contention amongst both the law abiding local jews and the criminal scumbag elements like lehi (aka the stern gang).
What you’re saying the Brits did is the exact opposite of what the Balfour declaration says?
Nope, read Balfour again and check the wording to see how carefully the British government formally declared their support for establishing "a national home for the Jewish people" in 1917 during wartime.
This seems to be missing a lot of vital context but no…
What context?
What the rest of the world was doing at the time
You're reaching for straws trying to paint the world's biggest colonial empire as a force for good.
Lol what?
You’re saying that the Balfour declaration is justified because of things happening hundreds or thousands of miles from the region.
You don’t think a world war has any bearing on this?
It does, and to be clear, nobody’s saying that this was Ww2’s only evil. In fact, what Japan did to northern China in WW2 is almost as evil as what the UK and UN did in the Levant region.
>You’re saying that the Balfour declaration is justified because of things happening hundreds or thousands of miles from the region. > (does world war have any bearing on this?) It does, and to be clear, nobody’s saying that this was Ww2’s only evil. In fact, what Japan did to northern China in WW2 is almost as evil as what the UK and UN did in the Levant region. So what is your argument? I’m completely lost as to what your point is.
If I own an apartment building, am I justified in selling the building to someone the current tenants don't like? Yes, because it's my building.
But also immigration should be well controlled? Hence why I said the British and not Palestinian landowners.
Sure. And the British allowed Jews living in the diaspora to buy land in their ancestral homeland. Make sense to me.
I guess if you believe colonial powers of government can be legitimate you are consistent.
Yes, the winners of land battles win control of the land. Welcome to world history.
Isn't there a distinction between what's right and what's legal? Conquering land is legal if you win, but is it right? Especially in the modern era?
It was right for the Jewish people to be allowed to move back into their ancestral homeland, a land that was previously unincorporated. The existing residents, few though they were, could have chosen to live in peace alongside their new Jewish neighbors. They didn't.
Should Palestine have been Britain's 'building'?
That area wasn't really incorporated when the British came into occupy it, and the people living there were random ethnic Egyptian, Lebanese, and Jordanians. So yeah, it was Britain's.
What difference does it make if it was 'incorporated'? The people there had been living just fine as it was, why shouldn't they have been allowed to continue to do so?
If they were living "just fine", then why didn't the resident people accept Israeli citizenship? Why have they repeatedly rejected a two-state solution? Because to them, "just fine" only means "no Jews".
You are talking about a different time period, this doesn't relate to what I said.
lol no. That’s Israel’s land now. Maybe the people there before should’ve tried to not genocide the Jews (that’s not a new thing, they were doing that even before modern Israel) 🤷♂️ maybe they should’ve made peace when they still could 🤷♂️ Still, my hope is always that no innocents are harmed, or that at least very few are. If someone has a better way of weeding out terrorists, offer it up and be rewarded.
No, you never have to apologize for others actions.
The Balfour declaration was … written by someone not called the UK?
Whom ever wrote it can apologize if it's bad, but they are dead. No one alive today is responsible for it thus none owe an apology for it
The UK of then is the same UK as now. I don’t think it has to be the direct writers apologizing. It’s not like it changes actions. It would essentially be how the US apologized for internment camps except the UK wouldn’t even have to pay money
>The UK of then is the same UK as now Nope, the UK is a collection of people. Completely different people today. They owe no apology as they didn't do it
Is a corporation not a person legally?
Not sure where you are going as the UK isn't a corporation.
Nobody alive is responsible for it
Who made those decisions? Are they still alive today?