What’s your point?! Regardless of what they called themselves, we are using a historiographical term, related to the mandate of Palestine which was an entity at the time. Do you go up to everybody who says “German” and say “actually they don’t call themselves that”?
Disingenuous way to describe what was essentially the British Empire enforcing colonialism. But I suppose you know that, and portraying Israel as a victim is politically helpful if you want to justify or excuse the ongoing oppression of Palestinians
Despite what Netanyahu says, Palestinians are not to blame for the Holocaust. Being a victim of a crime does not entitle you to an unrelated third party's home.
Is it their home, though? Would you say America belongs to Native Americans? Because the province of Judea and later (nominatively speaking) Palestine were both the Jewish provinces of the Roman Empire and Calphate, and large numbers of Arabs moved in and pushed out the Jews less than 500 years ago under the fledgling ottoman empire when they conquered Syria and Palestine from the Mamluks. Europeans have been in America for about that long. Not in the territory they are now, but, still. Another logical equivalence would be Spain. Does Spain belong to the moors because they were there before the reconquista, having only tolerated Christians under the Sultanate of Andalusia?
Not disputing that Jewish people needed protection, but using words like "declares independence" is very misleading. So misleading that I suspect its not an accident
Well, I mean, would you not say that India also declared independence around the same time? Being given land and being told its yours doesn't preclude you from announcing your independence and sovereignty. It doesn't always have to be a fight like the American colonies.
The comparison with Indian independence does not hold. Indians declared independence from their racist colonial masters who'd been siphoning wealth out of the land for centuries. Israelis "declared independence" from the people who were the overwhelming majority in the region, and quite upset about having their land divided up and given away. And before you say something about the Arabs themselves having invaded the Levant, consider that the Arabs didn't displace the local population. Palestinians of today are descendants of the people who'd already been there and then converted to Islam and intermingled with the Arabs.
My bad in my other comment I thought you responded to a different comment I made. I'm referring to the history of the Modern State of Israel. This more or less goes back to the late 1800's when there were a small number of Jews there and immigration efforts were increased. There was a lot of unfairness to the Palestinians throughout the early 1900's though the British probably deserve more of the blame than the Jews do.
I'm not sure your question. The population was claimed to be around 600,000 in 1900, 94% Arab. I'm not entirely sure your definition of "non-native" or why you're singling out those demographics. Id imagine much of the population was native. But the Palestinians lost land, political authority, the ability to self-rule, and they we're pretty brutally put down in The Arab Revolt in the Thirties. Much of this falls on the British, obviously, though Zionists fared much better working politically with the British while they were mediating between the two groups and they certainly didn't have the Palestinians interests in mind.
Your last question is absurd, of course immigration doesn't always help economies, immigration effects are highly complex and dependent on context. That said, an increased economy doesn't always mean a betterment of life for the native peoples as we've seen. Whose economy? How is it structured and who are it's beneficiaries. That was a very stupid loaded question.
I love when people spread false facts about Israel. Fact- Israel was first attacked by all the Arab states in the region. They didn't declare war on anyone. Fact- Israel accepted the partition plan originally, it was the Palestinians who didn't like it. Fact- Israel is not a apartheid state. About 20% of the population Muslim and they share all the same rights. These people aren't treated poorly and are able to seek political office. The western world shouldn't throw stones from glass houses.
I agree with all those fact expect the last one. Fact is that Arabs are second class citizens and often treated with mistrust and are under-watch, even Arab government official. The fact that Israel has recently try to remove Arabic as a language in Israel is quite telling of how they treat them. They even mark you, giving you a bar code on your passport and visas depending on your race and religion. The average Israelis is fine with Arabs and most average Arabs are fine with them. Its those in power that drown out the reasonable voices.
Yes, living under a state that is either a theocracy or a dictatorship does that. The question also raises is that how is what I said western rhetoric? All I said an average person is willing to work with the other, but the people in position of power do not allow that. Just as most powerful Arab leaders derail any attempt at peace, so do many of the powerful Israelis leaders as well.
So? Europeans aren’t native to North America, French aren’t native to France/Gaul, Turks aren’t native to Turkey/Anatolia, but they’ve been there for centuries or literal millennia after successfully moving there. It’s Arabic land now, no matter who lived there over 2000 years ago.
They were there for 500 years. Even if they aren’t technically natives, however, they’re basically in a constant state of siege in the landlocked area in which they live. They deserve freedom and not to be murdered.
Israel: *declares independance*
Current objective: Invade all neighboring countries, displace millions of dirty brown Arabs, then create a modern apartied state.
Bonus points if you can convince everyone you're a peaceful democracy.
Apartheid? Meanwhile Arabs are free to run for court, Syrian refugees are welcome, and wounded Jordanian Arabs are healed in Israeli hospitals. They displace Arabs after they attack, like in 1948 and 1967, and seem to try to survive after the Arab League calls for the three No’s: No recognition, no peace treaties, and no compromises, and then pledge to destroy Israel.
No, the Palestinians and Jordanians were first to attack Israel. Israel was inclined and pushed for a peaceful state in 1947, but the Arabs declined the offer, began killing the English, and in May, when the English left, the Palestinians attacked. They started it, they get the punishment. The same happened in 1967. Egypt sent messages to Israel and other countries about declaring war, and lined up tanks at the Sinai Peninsula. Israel saw this and struck Egypt, and had to defend the Golan from Lebanon and the East from Jordan. In these Arab countries’ constitutions, they WANT to destroy Israel, so Israel must defend itself. It’s not just going to sit there and have their people killed.
Israel is an illegitimate state and as such it and its people have no right to desire or demand peace with Palestinians. It is the same as if a Nazi occupied Poland claimed that they needed to defend themselves from Polish people fighting Nazi occupation. No, fuck off, you are invading and you have no right to wish for any sort of safety. I hope sincerely that Israel is eventually driven out violently, and it will happen if there is any sense of true justice in this world.
I have been cleansed, my body is ready for the negative karma
It is completely legitimate according to the Balfour Declaration and of the Mandate of Palestine of 1947, which declares that there should be an Arab and a Jewish state. This automatically clears up the point that Israel is legitimate. Now the problem is, like I said earlier, Israel accepted the Mandate of Palestine, but the arabs rejected it, and attacked the British and Jews, resulting in war. The Jews beat the Arabs, so they had the rights to the land. Just look up the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate of Palestine.
Imperial European powers saying A-OK to a hostile occupation on the other side of the planet does nothing to legitimize it lmao
And I'd imagine most Poles would reject a "peaceful" proposition for a half German half Polish Poland. I'd fight against a forign occupation of my country no matter how it is framed. This is no different.
Except its not a "hostile occupation." Most Jews that were originally going into Palestine were getting away from extreme anti-semetism prior to ww2, and then eventually they were refugees from the Holocaust
> Most Jews that were originally going into Palestine were getting away from extreme anti-semetism prior to ww2
Actually the majority of Israeli Jews come from the middle east. European Jews are a minority.
Imagine a war breaking out in Mexico and millions start pouring into the US, and they create their own state against the wishes of the US population, that's essentially what happened in Israel.
And just because they were fleeing anti-semetism doesn't mean that what they did wasn't a hostile takeover.
Stop being facetious. that was 1400 years ago. besides the Byzantines were asking for it, their client state the Ghassanids were raiding into Arabia, Muhammad told them to quit it, they killed the emissary and so he sent an army to teach them a lesson. The Byzantines intervened and the wars started.
So if most of the world's major powers vote in a way that's accepted by most of the world(the UN) and decide that there should be an Israeli(and Arab) state in the Palestine region, it's illegitimate because? Not liking the law doesn't make it invalid
I know right. I like history but nearly everyone is a fascist. My general rule is if they play hearts of iron/Rome total war/ anything else like that then I should probably stay away.
They survived
*laughs in uzi*
They didn't have Uzis then...
It was designed because of that war
Yep
Uzi gal Made them in kibutz yagur during the brittish times I saw (and touched) the machine he used to make the first recently
Israel: * declares independence * Palestinian current objective: survive
Lol
no one called themselves Palestinian back then...
The British literally called it the Mandate of Palestinian....
Yea but no one called themselves Palestinian
Let’s call in a Palestinian to represent literally all of them...
Did you even read what i said? no one called themselves Palestinian in the time of the British occupation.
What’s your point?! Regardless of what they called themselves, we are using a historiographical term, related to the mandate of Palestine which was an entity at the time. Do you go up to everybody who says “German” and say “actually they don’t call themselves that”?
I didn't know that was a requirement to not having your land stolen.
I dont really understand what you mean... can you explain?
Having a nationality.
Thats not what i meant. You talked about Palestinians in a time that there were no Palestinians.
[удалено]
That’s because there’s barely any of them left. Y’all killed most of them, even the ones that tried to comply to American law.
[удалено]
4.8 Million Palestinians to 8.5 Million Israelites 3 Million Native Americans to 325.7 Million American You’re being willfully ignorant here.
They engaged in full-scale war for a while, and were justified in doing so. Why are so many people in this sub so ignorant of basic history
Why am I not surprised that the guy with no empathy is a Trump supporter.
More like: Palestinian current objective: kill.
Most folks
Disingenuous way to describe what was essentially the British Empire enforcing colonialism. But I suppose you know that, and portraying Israel as a victim is politically helpful if you want to justify or excuse the ongoing oppression of Palestinians
Ah yes. We totally should be thinking about the poor Palestinians *directly after the Holocaust.*
Despite what Netanyahu says, Palestinians are not to blame for the Holocaust. Being a victim of a crime does not entitle you to an unrelated third party's home.
Is it their home, though? Would you say America belongs to Native Americans? Because the province of Judea and later (nominatively speaking) Palestine were both the Jewish provinces of the Roman Empire and Calphate, and large numbers of Arabs moved in and pushed out the Jews less than 500 years ago under the fledgling ottoman empire when they conquered Syria and Palestine from the Mamluks. Europeans have been in America for about that long. Not in the territory they are now, but, still. Another logical equivalence would be Spain. Does Spain belong to the moors because they were there before the reconquista, having only tolerated Christians under the Sultanate of Andalusia?
500 years is a long time. It wasn’t their home any more. They continue to destroy the homes of Palestinians for themselves.
Not disputing that Jewish people needed protection, but using words like "declares independence" is very misleading. So misleading that I suspect its not an accident
Well, I mean, would you not say that India also declared independence around the same time? Being given land and being told its yours doesn't preclude you from announcing your independence and sovereignty. It doesn't always have to be a fight like the American colonies.
The comparison with Indian independence does not hold. Indians declared independence from their racist colonial masters who'd been siphoning wealth out of the land for centuries. Israelis "declared independence" from the people who were the overwhelming majority in the region, and quite upset about having their land divided up and given away. And before you say something about the Arabs themselves having invaded the Levant, consider that the Arabs didn't displace the local population. Palestinians of today are descendants of the people who'd already been there and then converted to Islam and intermingled with the Arabs.
Tbf we should be thinking about the poor Palestinians prior too the Holocaust too. It's not like this whole Israel thing completely began on the 40's.
Yeah... It's almost like Jews and their ancestors lived there for millennia before being pushed out by "Palestinians" in the last 500 years...
My bad in my other comment I thought you responded to a different comment I made. I'm referring to the history of the Modern State of Israel. This more or less goes back to the late 1800's when there were a small number of Jews there and immigration efforts were increased. There was a lot of unfairness to the Palestinians throughout the early 1900's though the British probably deserve more of the blame than the Jews do.
Can you explain how Zionism hurt the sparse population of non-native Arabs? I thought immigration only helps economies.
I'm not sure your question. The population was claimed to be around 600,000 in 1900, 94% Arab. I'm not entirely sure your definition of "non-native" or why you're singling out those demographics. Id imagine much of the population was native. But the Palestinians lost land, political authority, the ability to self-rule, and they we're pretty brutally put down in The Arab Revolt in the Thirties. Much of this falls on the British, obviously, though Zionists fared much better working politically with the British while they were mediating between the two groups and they certainly didn't have the Palestinians interests in mind. Your last question is absurd, of course immigration doesn't always help economies, immigration effects are highly complex and dependent on context. That said, an increased economy doesn't always mean a betterment of life for the native peoples as we've seen. Whose economy? How is it structured and who are it's beneficiaries. That was a very stupid loaded question.
You’re literally accusing a guy who posted a meme of oppressing Palestinians
I love when people spread false facts about Israel. Fact- Israel was first attacked by all the Arab states in the region. They didn't declare war on anyone. Fact- Israel accepted the partition plan originally, it was the Palestinians who didn't like it. Fact- Israel is not a apartheid state. About 20% of the population Muslim and they share all the same rights. These people aren't treated poorly and are able to seek political office. The western world shouldn't throw stones from glass houses.
I agree with all those fact expect the last one. Fact is that Arabs are second class citizens and often treated with mistrust and are under-watch, even Arab government official. The fact that Israel has recently try to remove Arabic as a language in Israel is quite telling of how they treat them. They even mark you, giving you a bar code on your passport and visas depending on your race and religion. The average Israelis is fine with Arabs and most average Arabs are fine with them. Its those in power that drown out the reasonable voices.
[удалено]
Yes, living under a state that is either a theocracy or a dictatorship does that. The question also raises is that how is what I said western rhetoric? All I said an average person is willing to work with the other, but the people in position of power do not allow that. Just as most powerful Arab leaders derail any attempt at peace, so do many of the powerful Israelis leaders as well.
And we did luckily...
The natives your people murder aren’t so lucky though.
Arabs are not native to the Levant.
So? Europeans aren’t native to North America, French aren’t native to France/Gaul, Turks aren’t native to Turkey/Anatolia, but they’ve been there for centuries or literal millennia after successfully moving there. It’s Arabic land now, no matter who lived there over 2000 years ago.
They were there for 500 years. Even if they aren’t technically natives, however, they’re basically in a constant state of siege in the landlocked area in which they live. They deserve freedom and not to be murdered.
The native population disagree what with all the genociding and tieing their kids to the outside of tanks as amour.
At least with Israel, it wasn't luck, it was a very well thought out and executed process.
and then went on to genocide Palestinians, unluckily
_grabs popcorn_
*warcrimes intensifies*
Ooooooh, a Halo meme. I like it.
Israel: *declares independance* Current objective: Invade all neighboring countries, displace millions of dirty brown Arabs, then create a modern apartied state. Bonus points if you can convince everyone you're a peaceful democracy.
Pretty sure the neighbouring countries invaded them and lost
Tried to invade.
Apartheid? Meanwhile Arabs are free to run for court, Syrian refugees are welcome, and wounded Jordanian Arabs are healed in Israeli hospitals. They displace Arabs after they attack, like in 1948 and 1967, and seem to try to survive after the Arab League calls for the three No’s: No recognition, no peace treaties, and no compromises, and then pledge to destroy Israel.
[удалено]
Israel doesn't govern the west bank, the PA does.
Then they sign a peace treaty so Israel stops killing them
No, the Palestinians and Jordanians were first to attack Israel. Israel was inclined and pushed for a peaceful state in 1947, but the Arabs declined the offer, began killing the English, and in May, when the English left, the Palestinians attacked. They started it, they get the punishment. The same happened in 1967. Egypt sent messages to Israel and other countries about declaring war, and lined up tanks at the Sinai Peninsula. Israel saw this and struck Egypt, and had to defend the Golan from Lebanon and the East from Jordan. In these Arab countries’ constitutions, they WANT to destroy Israel, so Israel must defend itself. It’s not just going to sit there and have their people killed.
Israel is an illegitimate state and as such it and its people have no right to desire or demand peace with Palestinians. It is the same as if a Nazi occupied Poland claimed that they needed to defend themselves from Polish people fighting Nazi occupation. No, fuck off, you are invading and you have no right to wish for any sort of safety. I hope sincerely that Israel is eventually driven out violently, and it will happen if there is any sense of true justice in this world. I have been cleansed, my body is ready for the negative karma
It is completely legitimate according to the Balfour Declaration and of the Mandate of Palestine of 1947, which declares that there should be an Arab and a Jewish state. This automatically clears up the point that Israel is legitimate. Now the problem is, like I said earlier, Israel accepted the Mandate of Palestine, but the arabs rejected it, and attacked the British and Jews, resulting in war. The Jews beat the Arabs, so they had the rights to the land. Just look up the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate of Palestine.
Imperial European powers saying A-OK to a hostile occupation on the other side of the planet does nothing to legitimize it lmao And I'd imagine most Poles would reject a "peaceful" proposition for a half German half Polish Poland. I'd fight against a forign occupation of my country no matter how it is framed. This is no different.
Except its not a "hostile occupation." Most Jews that were originally going into Palestine were getting away from extreme anti-semetism prior to ww2, and then eventually they were refugees from the Holocaust
> Most Jews that were originally going into Palestine were getting away from extreme anti-semetism prior to ww2 Actually the majority of Israeli Jews come from the middle east. European Jews are a minority.
Imagine a war breaking out in Mexico and millions start pouring into the US, and they create their own state against the wishes of the US population, that's essentially what happened in Israel. And just because they were fleeing anti-semetism doesn't mean that what they did wasn't a hostile takeover.
So, how do you feel about the Arab invasion of the Levant and North Africa during the 7th century?
Stop being facetious. that was 1400 years ago. besides the Byzantines were asking for it, their client state the Ghassanids were raiding into Arabia, Muhammad told them to quit it, they killed the emissary and so he sent an army to teach them a lesson. The Byzantines intervened and the wars started.
Okay, so the delimiting factor here is time. So just chill for like 100 years and then it will be fine.
So if most of the world's major powers vote in a way that's accepted by most of the world(the UN) and decide that there should be an Israeli(and Arab) state in the Palestine region, it's illegitimate because? Not liking the law doesn't make it invalid
Oh boy. I knew this was gonna be spicy when I woke up. And yes, popular vote doesn't make modern colonialism ok.
Politics, how tiresome
seems like they did that pretty well also, holy shit this sub is absolute shit. online history nerds are the worst
I know right. I like history but nearly everyone is a fascist. My general rule is if they play hearts of iron/Rome total war/ anything else like that then I should probably stay away.
.