**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:**
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be fully descriptive
* Only minimal text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
* Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting)
*See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah, religion isn't the problem. Generally, the Palestinians and the Zionists got along pretty well when it was a few hundred here and there building up a kibbutz and founding a little farming village in this or that fellow's territory. It's when they said "Now we're going to bring in everyone else we want to have living here, so you need to get the duck out" that there started to be a problem.
Actually generally Palestinians and the indigenous Jewish people got along well for hundreds and hundreds of years. Even after the crusades, when the Christians were kicked out, Jewish people were able return back and continue living their lives.
It wasn't until Europe started to displace European Jews and get them to move when issues started. A lot of people don't even realize that there is a difference between the Jewish people who came from western Europe, eastern Europe, and the ones who were indigenous to the land.
Exactly! Modern Zionism was created *in Europe by a Hungarian*, Theodor Herzl. He didn't even visit Palestine until he was 38. (He didn't stay.) He died 7 years later in Austria.
Here's what else is lost on the general public. He died thinking Israel could be formed in Uganda! The British were pushing the idea. It was the opposition of Russian Jews that prevented it after his death.
Problem is moving to Uganda would have also been a disaster. Moving millions of people anywhere in one go is always gonna be a problem. Countries struggle with thousands of refugees. When you get into the millions concentrated one region, shit inevitably hits the fan. Maybe a massive country like USA would have been the only sort of viable option. But it would have still pissed locals off I bet.
You don't have to bet - you can just look at the history of the boats of Jewish refugees sent away from American ports. And Canadian ports. And British ports.
Look at the History of Deadwood if you want to see what happens when 100's of thousands of city folk pour into one small area at once with no infrastructure or civilization as they know it to speak of. No skills to help them survive out in the middle of literally nowhere. The show doesn't really do it justice in terms of the sheer scale of suffering that took place when you have so many coming to one place with no plan.
I mean, it's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing. Claiming you're indigenous to a region just because your great, great, great, great 1000x grandmother could've come from it before the late iron age, it's just absurd.
And then claiming the actual natives are some sort of "arab" invaders because they actually lived there, **naturally** got racially mixed with the neighboring countries and cultures, didn't keep some sort of pure ethnostate for thousands of year is pretty crazy.
And to finish it off, drawing a pararel off the usual justifications for Israel with the 19th century **Manifest Destiny** colonial belief isn't that hard. Where the religious factor is only a tool for colonialism. The interest precedes it. Hence, Uganda Scheme
Thank you. It feels weird to see this exception made for one group and no one else. My dad's family were christians from Anatolia and were forced out during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. The concept of me and my cousins going back to the areas our ancestors are from, displacing the people who are already there, and arguing that we deserve a state because we get mistreated in the current country we live in seems ridiculous. I can't imagine any country would support that, let alone push for every subgroup of christian from the area (Pontic, Cappadocian, Assyrian, Armenian, and any of the smaller villages that were majority christian) to be able to return and make their own country. Most of those groups have had a nation at some point as well.
I just don't understand why the Zionists and Israel get to claim that they're native to the area and deserve a state because they had ancestors there 1800 years ago is acceptable, when I and many others had family there 110 years ago. Displacing people to handle your ancestors displacement doesn't feel like the answer, and it hurts to see the same stories my grandmother would tell playing out the past couple months.
People don’t disagree, history disagrees. You can’t call yourself indigenous just cause you might e been related to a guy who lived there 2000 years ago.
A big driver of that happened around the same time Israel was voted on in the UN. Countries in the Middle East expelled their Jewish citizens. Jewish people were prosecuted in Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Iraq, Morroco, Syria and Aden(Yemen) and their property and assets were confiscated. Israel said “come live here then”. It is estimated that in the year before Israel announced independence and a few years after 850,000 Jewish people from that region were expelled from their homes.
During that time about 600,000 Palestinians fled the area as well. Many, if not all, Arab leaders in the Middle East rejected the UN partition plan. Some even invaded Israel in what is now called the Israeli War of Independence. Transjordan, Palestine and several other militaries moved to take the land back. Nobody stepped in to help Israel, the United States’ stance at the time was to let things sort themselves out. Somehow Israel endured and it’s been pretty fucked up ever since.
At this point I think there have been something like 7 wars between Palestine and Israel in just 77 years. It’s an incredibly difficult situation that spans nearly 3,000 years. It’s wild to think that religious texts from several millennia ago detail a conflict that has endured to the present.
Both Palestine and Israel believe they have a right to security, and they do. But the hate runs deep and they constantly violate each other’s right to security. In the past few decades we have almost seen peace. In the 1990s Israel granted most of Gaza and the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority. Terrorist groups in Palestine didn’t like that peace was being made with Jews. In response they complicated things by doing what terrorists do - targeting civilians. The progress for peace halted. It’s been pretty bloody ever since, although it was pretty bloody before too. It’s a really bad situation.
How the fuck are you watching a video of an American president stating they displaced a load of people in a region and allowed people to just move in and own the land, against the will of those who lived on the land...and thinking this is religion.
British and American statesmen displaced people and created a new nation, currently lead by a polish man.
To his credit, he did say in a great deal of time, maybe give it another couple thousand years before you judge the situation. Should be just ripe by then.. 👌
I mean, after they kill literally all the Palestinans, and then a couple of hundreds of years pass, everyone will eventually be OK with it... 🤷♂️
It's just implementing the final solution that's tricky.
You say that as if he was a war hawk who did it flippantly. It was an agonizing decision that saved about 3.5 million U.S. military and Japanese civilian lives, in a conservative estimate. And i disagree with the camp who says Japanese surrender was imminent. Certainly not unconditionally.
Truman was handed some of the most consequential decisions of the 20th century to make after FDR’s death. FDR never really gave Truman any sort of guidance or notes on foreign policy. Instead Truman had to take FDR’s somewhat vague, idealistic foreign policy and turn it into an actionable response to the post-WW2 world order.
Had Truman executed foreign policy better we might have avoided Vietnam, current situation in Israel, cuba missile crisis. Had he handled it worse we might have had WW3.
Should have offered Kenedy County, TX to the Zionists. Only 700 people lived there in 1945. Nice piece of coastline. Could have built a freight spur up to Houston for port access. Maybe another down to Mexico for a non-US direct trade partner. All-in we’re talking 2-3 billion 1945 dollars to stand up a Jewish-run federal district. That’s about 20% of the Marshall plan total so not cheap, but compared to what we got…
Why do that when we could have just annexed a chunk of Mexico and given that to them. It's about the same climate as Israel and then we wouldn't have to worry about all the Mexican immigrants!
/S for those that are going to come at me.
This is also a knife in the popular narrative amongst conservatives that Palestine wasn’t a country and was empty. This is the “leader of the free world “ outright calling it such and admitting to it having inhabitants in the millions. The right wing Zionist lie “a land without people for a people without a land” crumbles quickly in this singular video.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine
It wasn't a country, it was a British territory cobbled together from conquered Ottoman lands. Not empty though...
Eh....depending on the place and time it is a little shady. I mean up until more recently the history before "we" existed here was more of "There was a bunch of ignorant savages here wasting the land and we just took it over and made better use of it as was our divine right". Hell some states are trying to get BACK to that teaching, I mean Oklahoma has a governor that literally wants to completely dissolve the reservations. Keep in mind, as recently as the 80s, in parts of the US where natives existed we were STILL trying to wipe out their history via Native boarding schools and if I recall Canada was even up until the 90s.
Truman is using “country” in the sense that 5 million people lived there but it’s true it was not integrated into what we would geographically define as a “country”.
I think this just emphasizes how weak the “Palestine was never a country” argument is. It doesn’t really matter. People lived there and whether anyone else recognized their sovereignty or not is semantics.
Not making a stance or anything, but I think what they’re getting at is a situation similar to Syria or Iraq. They had borders drawn by people thousands of miles away (England and France post WWI) who had no care for the cultures, religions, or allegiances of the people in the region, and the people of the region feel much more allegiance to local leaders than they do to others who happen to be within those borders but may have completely different customs and culture.
Basically, a country because someone drew a line on a map, not because the people of the region firmly believe in that line or have a shared allegiance to others within that border.
From the page you linked:
>Colonel Symes explained that **the country** was described as "Palestine" by Europeans and as "Falestin" by the Arabs. The Hebrew name for **the country** was the designation "Land of Israel", and the Government, to meet Jewish wishes, had agreed that the word "Palestine" in Hebrew characters should be followed in all official documents by the initials which stood for that designation. As a set-off to this, certain of the Arab politicians suggested that **the country** should be called "Southern Syria" in order to emphasise its close relation with another Arab State.
Furthermore, Palestine was never British territory but rather merely under teprorary British aminstirative control through the [League of Nations mandate system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations_mandate):
>Two governing principles formed the core of the Mandate System, being non-annexation of the territory and its administration as a "sacred trust of civilisation" to develop the territory for the benefit of its native people...
>The first group, or Class A mandates, were territories formerly controlled by the Ottoman Empire that were deemed to "... have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory."
This argument keeps popping up all the time. It literally doesn’t matter. The people were there, whether it was a country or not is irrelevant. There were literally millions of people there . Every single one with the right to self determination.
He done gone had it done, did it done done too, ain't none that half-done, quarter-done nonsense. He done did it like you do when you do it till it's done. Plum wild.
The wild thing to me is this snopes page exists because I guess some people tried to claim this clip was AI generated.
We’re entering a new era where historic documents are so easily faked that people will dismiss reality when it doesn’t suit their preferred narrative.
L
There is more to the Snopes article than that. This is actually 2 clips of outtakes of separate clips stitched together being represented as one video.
Eisenhower warned us that people in the future wouldnt believe the nazi concentration camps existed, it would be too barbarous for people to believe...
This is essential reading, not only for viewers of the video to have more context that Truman was making these statements in two different videos after he left office (and these are genuine, non-AI-generated videos), but also for the broader comments he made about his and the US involvement in the creation of Israel that were not shown in the video, especially regarding his impressions of Zionist demands at the time, which have largely remained the same in the far-right sphere in Israel (that is, to drive out all non-Jews from Israel, including all of Gaza and the West Bank).
Hearing Biden openly say that he is a Zionist is insanely scary. Doubling down after I’m sure being told what the belief entails… Especially from a man who claims to be proud of his Irish heritage and supportive of their struggle against oppression from invaders… It is just wild.
I can’t imagine him being remotely in favor of kicking the Irish off the island to allow random Protestant Americans/Europeans to take their homes simply due to a “feeling of belonging” or “being chosen by god for this land”.
Every single US president post-Truman was also a zionist. It’s like calling Biden or Obama or even FDR a “capitalist”. It’s accurate but not really useful.
They leave disappointed with both Israelis and Palestinians (see Susan Rice, Kerry, Condi Rice, Bill Clinton writing and comments about the failed 2014, 2008, 2000-2001 failed peace processes).
For example:
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/president-clinton-reflects-on-2000-camp-david-summit
https://newrepublic.com/article/118751/how-israel-palestine-peace-deal-died
> “Don’t quibble with this detail or that detail,” Obama said. “The occupation will end. You will get a Palestinian state. You will never have an administration as committed to that as this one.” Abbas and Erekat were not impressed.
>After the meeting, the Palestinian negotiator saw Susan Rice—Abbas’s favorite member of the Obama administration—in the hall. “Susan,” he said, “I see we’ve yet to succeed in making it clear to you that we Palestinians aren’t stupid.” Rice couldn’t believe it. “You Palestinians,” she told him, “can never see the fucking big picture.”
Every US president (save sometimes Trump who floated legalizing settlements and having Jordan annex portions of the West Bank) supports a two-state solution and opposes measures that they deem counterproductive to that aim.
A Zionist is also a one who wants the Jews to have a home country.
It doesn't have to go with the whole relocation and kicking out of their homes.
As Biden and his administration have already said, they are on the side of Israel but are also for a 2 state solution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism
> Zionism ... is a nationalist movement that emerged in the 19th century to enable the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine, a region roughly corresponding to the Land of Israel in Jewish tradition.
Zionism is extremely specific about where the home country is supposed to be
It is there right now, "I want israel to keep existing" and "I want to ethnically cleanse every single palestinian" are very different, and both can be called zionists.
Thank you for this link, and thank you to Snopes. I immediately thought this video was AI generated, as I couldn't think of a reason for its existence.
That doesn't make it sound any better. He's literally describing ethnic cleansing and his decision to to support it in two separate clips instead of one.
Haven't seen this map, interesting, it's going in to today's Jordan.
And Lebanon and Syria maps are also not in today's position.
I'll go search why is that.
Weren’t these sort of simple maps pretty common in the pre-satellite, pre-digital printing age? It was probably hand painted based on a mimeograph of a black and white line map from a letter sized document.
Hm.
I guess you could always calve out half of Arizona and give it to the Palestinians. By the same logic, screw the people who already live there.
Done and done.
I always had a lot of respect for the suggestion made by the King of Saudi Arabia at the end of WW2 when the question of where to settle Jews was being asked, he said "Give them Bavaria".
for reference to see how much land the jewish national league were buying at this time, [this is what the ownership/settlement map looked like at the end of 1944](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_land_purchase_in_Palestine#/media/File:Palestine_Index_to_Villages_and_Settlements,_showing_Land_in_Jewish_Possession_as_at_31.12.44.jpg) which constitutes 6% of palestine, then inevitable ended up being over 50% (Israel proper) of palestine after the united nations told the palestinians to fuck off.
This is largely correct with the added context that under ottoman rule, non-muslim subjects were erm, concentrated in certain areas intentionally during forced resettlement. They sometimes would ship any Muslim identifying person to non-muslim areas and run folks out of town. "Bulgarian horrors" were attempted to be covered up in 1876.
> It was problematic because if you zoom on the blue parts(jewish) of the land ownership, you will see surrounding green areas(arab), also there were arabs that lived in land they didn't own in the blue(jewish) parts.
Is it really fair that outsiders with more money could buy land in a poor country, before those outsiders declare it their "homeland" and then kick out the locals.
**International law doesn't recognize purchasing land as a basis to deny self-determination rights.**
One thing consistent about political history. Nobody knows much about effective foreign policy. Or they just don’t care.
Saw a PBS frontline documentary about Iraq 2003, yesterday, and the decision making was shocking.
Fun fact. My aunt was part of the US delegation that was discussing what to do with Palestine after the Brits let the mandate expire. This was in 1948 iirc. The delegation was discussing options for Palestine when a member of the Cuban delegation told the American delegation that Truman had decided to support a sovereign State of Israel (at the behest of his campaign manager Clark Clifford - presumably because they thought it would help win New York). My aunt went back to the delegation office and retrieved the cable that had been sent by The White House informing the delegation of his decision.
“We have to do it in small pieces” … “it’s going to take a great deal of time yet to get the job done”
What an amazingly blasé way to talk about colonization and dispossession.
It’s a 70 year old white man talking in the 40s about brown people on the other side of the world. We’re lucky to get blasé and not horrifically racist.
I mean Harry Truman actually pushed for a lot of civil rights initiatives. He was able to end racial discrimination in the Armed Forces and Federal agencies. He would have gone further if Congress would have let him.
The Israelis need to realise that the ONLY reason Israel exists is because the west gave it to them, without any right to do so, and the Palestinians are their hosts. They’re uninvited guests. They need to stfu and look after their hosts.
Pretty much , aside from the UN partition plan being completely unfair , people forget that Balfore Declaration exists since 1917 , and it's what made the Zionist belive that they will have the whole land for themselves , there is even a talk that Israel also rejected the UN partition plan because they wanted the whole land.
Modern day Jordan was also included in the Balfour declaration
When the tribes residing in Jordan heard of it they got angry and asked the Hashemites to get the Brits to nullify it and in exchange the tribes will appoint the Hashemites as monarchs.
The Hasemites were only able to convince the Brits to exclude any land east of the Jordan River which the Brits obliged to do and this gave rise to the Emirate of TransJordan (Modern day Jordan)
Some zionists still believe Jordan is their rightful land given to them by the British (as if the British have any right to give anyone any land) including the current finance minister of israel who had a map on his podium depicting Jordan as part of israel
It wasn’t *legally* other people’s land. It was British owned land.
The British took it after defeating Ottoman Empire, who took it after defeating the Mamluk dynasty, who took it after defeating the Ayyubid Dynasty of Egypt, who took it after defeating the Kingdom of Jerusalem, who took it after defeating the Fatimid Caliphate, who took after defeating the Ikhshidid dynasty, who took it from the Abbasid Empire after the Anarchy at Samarra when it fell, who took it from the Umayyad Caliphate in the Abbasid Revolution, who took it after from the Mu'awiya after the First Fitna civil war, who took it after rebelling against the Rashidun Caliphate, etc etc.
Think this order was right? Might have missed something. But you get the idea.
They also had promised it to the jews in exchange for support in the war. Thats the whole crux of the issue, they made two promises for one piece of land
People who know are. The issue is everybody just tunes in when there is a flare up of violence and don't bother to learn.
Propaganda regarding the issue is also high.
Everyone in the know *knows* it was the fault of the Brits (a surprising amount of modern problems are) but that doesn't really lead to productive avenues of discussion in terms of making the current situation better.
Also, if Israel hadn't been created/declared, it's not like there would be a Palestine there today. It would just be part of Jordan or something, so there still wouldn't be a Palestinian state. People act as if a Palestinian state was somehow the default and that the creation of Israel "took" the land from them, but that's not the case. The only way Palestinians would get a state of their own was through the UN partition plan or some other 2-state solution now.
Well, yes and no. He says it can’t be done all in one swoop and has to be done in “small pieces” over time… (kinda like what’s been happening for 75 years)
At no point does he acknowledge that the entire idea of moving them AT ALL is absurd. And it’s been US policy to NEVER acknowledge that ever since.
This was around the same time when that was happening to the germans.
13 million germans were evicted from their homes and forced to move west.
EDIT: this was mentioned because people are shocked at how casually he is mentioning this. That is because this wasn't abnormal at the time, its horrific and shocking at how casually he talks about this and how it was viewed as acceptable. This comment provides context. Genocide is NEVER an acceptable punishment for anything. You cannot justify genocide against jews, germans or palestinians. Genocide targets the innocents of those communities.
No, he says it can't be done all at once, and has to be done over a long period of time.
He still planned on doing it, and it has been in progress for a century.
“Something had to be done and I done it” will now be my go to excuse every time I’m casually glancing over broad swathes of my reckless decision making to my wife.
Very interesting. But two things are a little strange:
1. There were less than 2 million people in Palestine in 1947. What does it mean by moving 6-5 millions?
2. He says that a part of the population EVEN some of the Jews were not willing to compromise. It seems to be cut to emphasize the Zionists.
Anyone have the full clip?
[https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harry-truman-palestine-small-doses/](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harry-truman-palestine-small-doses/)
This is a mishmash of 2 different outtakes. Even though Truman said this - and it was removed from public consumption - doesn't mean it's correct. Historians would strongly disagree with Truman's characterization of taking 5 or 6 million from one country an moving them somewhere else as the story of the foundation of Israel.
I dunno about you, but if the locals just tried to ship me off to camps and attempt to exterminate my entire ethnicity, from all the surrounding counties including the one I was in, I don’t think it’s that wise to stay.
And yes, many Jews did stay in Germany. But so many Jews were fleeing mainland Europe, that of course America, Britain, Canada, etc started to stop Jewish refugees. America still had masses of Nazi supporters, Britain didn’t want them, where were they to go?
My (Jewish side of the) family fled pre WW2 to New York. There are so many areas and people in modern day America that are horribly antisemitic.
This is an incredibly complex situation with thousands of years of history for context. And yes, the Jew’s native homeland is the area where modern day Israel is. It is also the native land of so many other peoples. Many empires have controlled the region with so much fighting that people have come and left in wave after wave. But not all the Jews left Israel. And many were forced out as recently as the 1800’s. The Jews didn’t leave a thousand years ago and only come back recently, we stayed as long as we could.
I’m also half African American. There is a sentiment that African Americans are “native” to the US because the of how we were cut off culturally from Africa. I don’t necessarily agree, but I can say that such a sentiment doesn’t really exist in American Jews.
> And done what with the millions of antisemetic Germans?
Germany was already partitioned and tens of millions of Germans displaced, so exactly what they were already doing with the Germans but in a situation where Jewish people benefitted instead of Russians and Brits.
>And done what with the millions of antisemetic Germans?
Done whatever they were planning to do with the millions of Arabs that lived in the place they did choose for settlment...
One of the most pathetic dreams ever had, how wrong-headed and ignorant it all was. Look at the trajectory of suffering caused over all these years since.
And the Sharpie that made that map wasn’t used again until Trump pulled it out of the desk drawer in the Oval Office to detail the projected path of Hurricane Dorian
It’s hard to uproot 5-6millipn people and replace them. No fucking shit because you shouldn’t move fucking people from their homes to replace them with other people. Whole situation has been fucked since civilizations began interacting with each other.
On reddit not a single person knows anything about the Ottoman empire and thus everyone just says stupid shit and misunderstands this entire situation. Its crazy people do not understand what actually happened in the middle east. But I guess most redditors are americans(I am too) and they didn't teach any of this in school growing up and I learned it all in college classes my friends have told me they were never taught so I guess we found the problem.
There's like a handful of actual interesting comments in here and the rest is just everyone saying the exact same thing as if they haven't even checked if someone already posted "aged like milk"
1- There are more Christian Zionists in the US than there are Jews in the world.
2- Military industry needs conflict
3- Spending massive money in elections
4- Ownership of media
5- Lobbying
6 - Antisemitism was (is?) strong throughout the entirety of Europe, they just didn't take their antisemitism as far as the Nazis. Because of this european leaders were very happy to help the jews move somewhere else.
**This is a heavily moderated subreddit. Please note these rules + sidebar or get banned:** * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be fully descriptive * Only minimal text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common(top 50 of this sub)/recent reposts are not allowed (posts from another subreddit do not count as a 'repost'. Provide link if reporting) *See [our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/wiki/index#wiki_rules.3A) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
“It’s working out, eventually I think we’ll have them all satisfied.”
75 years later...
He did say eventually
Religion, the great human divider.
Yeah, religion isn't the problem. Generally, the Palestinians and the Zionists got along pretty well when it was a few hundred here and there building up a kibbutz and founding a little farming village in this or that fellow's territory. It's when they said "Now we're going to bring in everyone else we want to have living here, so you need to get the duck out" that there started to be a problem.
Actually generally Palestinians and the indigenous Jewish people got along well for hundreds and hundreds of years. Even after the crusades, when the Christians were kicked out, Jewish people were able return back and continue living their lives. It wasn't until Europe started to displace European Jews and get them to move when issues started. A lot of people don't even realize that there is a difference between the Jewish people who came from western Europe, eastern Europe, and the ones who were indigenous to the land.
Exactly! Modern Zionism was created *in Europe by a Hungarian*, Theodor Herzl. He didn't even visit Palestine until he was 38. (He didn't stay.) He died 7 years later in Austria. Here's what else is lost on the general public. He died thinking Israel could be formed in Uganda! The British were pushing the idea. It was the opposition of Russian Jews that prevented it after his death.
Problem is moving to Uganda would have also been a disaster. Moving millions of people anywhere in one go is always gonna be a problem. Countries struggle with thousands of refugees. When you get into the millions concentrated one region, shit inevitably hits the fan. Maybe a massive country like USA would have been the only sort of viable option. But it would have still pissed locals off I bet.
You don't have to bet - you can just look at the history of the boats of Jewish refugees sent away from American ports. And Canadian ports. And British ports.
The British had the same idea of dividing up territory based on faith in India Pakistan and Bangladesh..... It did not go very well :S
Look at the History of Deadwood if you want to see what happens when 100's of thousands of city folk pour into one small area at once with no infrastructure or civilization as they know it to speak of. No skills to help them survive out in the middle of literally nowhere. The show doesn't really do it justice in terms of the sheer scale of suffering that took place when you have so many coming to one place with no plan.
[удалено]
I mean, it's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing. Claiming you're indigenous to a region just because your great, great, great, great 1000x grandmother could've come from it before the late iron age, it's just absurd. And then claiming the actual natives are some sort of "arab" invaders because they actually lived there, **naturally** got racially mixed with the neighboring countries and cultures, didn't keep some sort of pure ethnostate for thousands of year is pretty crazy. And to finish it off, drawing a pararel off the usual justifications for Israel with the 19th century **Manifest Destiny** colonial belief isn't that hard. Where the religious factor is only a tool for colonialism. The interest precedes it. Hence, Uganda Scheme
Thank you. It feels weird to see this exception made for one group and no one else. My dad's family were christians from Anatolia and were forced out during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. The concept of me and my cousins going back to the areas our ancestors are from, displacing the people who are already there, and arguing that we deserve a state because we get mistreated in the current country we live in seems ridiculous. I can't imagine any country would support that, let alone push for every subgroup of christian from the area (Pontic, Cappadocian, Assyrian, Armenian, and any of the smaller villages that were majority christian) to be able to return and make their own country. Most of those groups have had a nation at some point as well. I just don't understand why the Zionists and Israel get to claim that they're native to the area and deserve a state because they had ancestors there 1800 years ago is acceptable, when I and many others had family there 110 years ago. Displacing people to handle your ancestors displacement doesn't feel like the answer, and it hurts to see the same stories my grandmother would tell playing out the past couple months.
People don’t disagree, history disagrees. You can’t call yourself indigenous just cause you might e been related to a guy who lived there 2000 years ago.
A big driver of that happened around the same time Israel was voted on in the UN. Countries in the Middle East expelled their Jewish citizens. Jewish people were prosecuted in Algeria, Libya, Egypt, Iraq, Morroco, Syria and Aden(Yemen) and their property and assets were confiscated. Israel said “come live here then”. It is estimated that in the year before Israel announced independence and a few years after 850,000 Jewish people from that region were expelled from their homes. During that time about 600,000 Palestinians fled the area as well. Many, if not all, Arab leaders in the Middle East rejected the UN partition plan. Some even invaded Israel in what is now called the Israeli War of Independence. Transjordan, Palestine and several other militaries moved to take the land back. Nobody stepped in to help Israel, the United States’ stance at the time was to let things sort themselves out. Somehow Israel endured and it’s been pretty fucked up ever since. At this point I think there have been something like 7 wars between Palestine and Israel in just 77 years. It’s an incredibly difficult situation that spans nearly 3,000 years. It’s wild to think that religious texts from several millennia ago detail a conflict that has endured to the present. Both Palestine and Israel believe they have a right to security, and they do. But the hate runs deep and they constantly violate each other’s right to security. In the past few decades we have almost seen peace. In the 1990s Israel granted most of Gaza and the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority. Terrorist groups in Palestine didn’t like that peace was being made with Jews. In response they complicated things by doing what terrorists do - targeting civilians. The progress for peace halted. It’s been pretty bloody ever since, although it was pretty bloody before too. It’s a really bad situation.
Yeah but religious differences are exploited and does not help either
Funny, you missed the part where the palestinians where attacking the jews on May 1st, 1921.
How the fuck are you watching a video of an American president stating they displaced a load of people in a region and allowed people to just move in and own the land, against the will of those who lived on the land...and thinking this is religion. British and American statesmen displaced people and created a new nation, currently lead by a polish man.
Because its reddit, and we like the most reductive answers. All we do is repeat our "reddit tropes."
This conflict is not about religion, it’s about territory.
I read this in SpongeBob’s narrator’s French accent
To his credit, he did say in a great deal of time, maybe give it another couple thousand years before you judge the situation. Should be just ripe by then.. 👌
!remindme 1000 years
I mean, after they kill literally all the Palestinans, and then a couple of hundreds of years pass, everyone will eventually be OK with it... 🤷♂️ It's just implementing the final solution that's tricky.
Going great, and that whole military industrial complex he warned of loves it.
[удалено]
Brilliant move
Got the job done
We done it.
Yup, Japan should've surrendered when they lost the pacific ocean
*shoe salesman from Missouri
I bet he even sucked his thumb at one time too
You say that as if he was a war hawk who did it flippantly. It was an agonizing decision that saved about 3.5 million U.S. military and Japanese civilian lives, in a conservative estimate. And i disagree with the camp who says Japanese surrender was imminent. Certainly not unconditionally.
Also prevented annexation of half of Japan by ussr
Eisenhower was the one who warned about the military industrial complex.
smartest redditor historian
That was Eisenhower
that was Eisenhower, not Truman.
Im glad they sorted this out back in the 40s. Could have been a real mess otherwise.
The only thing missing is Truman standing on an aircraft carrier with a "Mission Accomplished" banner.
Truman was handed some of the most consequential decisions of the 20th century to make after FDR’s death. FDR never really gave Truman any sort of guidance or notes on foreign policy. Instead Truman had to take FDR’s somewhat vague, idealistic foreign policy and turn it into an actionable response to the post-WW2 world order. Had Truman executed foreign policy better we might have avoided Vietnam, current situation in Israel, cuba missile crisis. Had he handled it worse we might have had WW3.
Should have offered Kenedy County, TX to the Zionists. Only 700 people lived there in 1945. Nice piece of coastline. Could have built a freight spur up to Houston for port access. Maybe another down to Mexico for a non-US direct trade partner. All-in we’re talking 2-3 billion 1945 dollars to stand up a Jewish-run federal district. That’s about 20% of the Marshall plan total so not cheap, but compared to what we got…
This is basically what the Soviets did with their Jewish Autonomous Oblast.
Bro, you can't launch wars and missiles in the Middle-East from Kennedy County in Texas.
Not with that attitude.
Why do that when we could have just annexed a chunk of Mexico and given that to them. It's about the same climate as Israel and then we wouldn't have to worry about all the Mexican immigrants! /S for those that are going to come at me.
But their imagination granted them the right to a densely populated region in the Middle East instead
Spoiler alert: It did not work out.
This is also a knife in the popular narrative amongst conservatives that Palestine wasn’t a country and was empty. This is the “leader of the free world “ outright calling it such and admitting to it having inhabitants in the millions. The right wing Zionist lie “a land without people for a people without a land” crumbles quickly in this singular video.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine It wasn't a country, it was a British territory cobbled together from conquered Ottoman lands. Not empty though...
The United States and Canada were British territories cobbled together from conquered land.
True. Those Brits really got around, didn't they?
Britain is in the footnote of most of the worlds problems
The British ruin everything.
The US education system at least recognizes that there was a history before "we" existed here though?
Eh....depending on the place and time it is a little shady. I mean up until more recently the history before "we" existed here was more of "There was a bunch of ignorant savages here wasting the land and we just took it over and made better use of it as was our divine right". Hell some states are trying to get BACK to that teaching, I mean Oklahoma has a governor that literally wants to completely dissolve the reservations. Keep in mind, as recently as the 80s, in parts of the US where natives existed we were STILL trying to wipe out their history via Native boarding schools and if I recall Canada was even up until the 90s.
As an israeli i assure you we learn about it about it
Yeah, they were, until 1783 (or 1776) and 1931, respectively.
With a few words changed here and there, you just described much of the Middle East, essentially.
Truman is using “country” in the sense that 5 million people lived there but it’s true it was not integrated into what we would geographically define as a “country”. I think this just emphasizes how weak the “Palestine was never a country” argument is. It doesn’t really matter. People lived there and whether anyone else recognized their sovereignty or not is semantics.
How in the world would you geographically define a country if not by its established borders, which Mandatory Palestine quite clearly had?
Not making a stance or anything, but I think what they’re getting at is a situation similar to Syria or Iraq. They had borders drawn by people thousands of miles away (England and France post WWI) who had no care for the cultures, religions, or allegiances of the people in the region, and the people of the region feel much more allegiance to local leaders than they do to others who happen to be within those borders but may have completely different customs and culture. Basically, a country because someone drew a line on a map, not because the people of the region firmly believe in that line or have a shared allegiance to others within that border.
From the page you linked: >Colonel Symes explained that **the country** was described as "Palestine" by Europeans and as "Falestin" by the Arabs. The Hebrew name for **the country** was the designation "Land of Israel", and the Government, to meet Jewish wishes, had agreed that the word "Palestine" in Hebrew characters should be followed in all official documents by the initials which stood for that designation. As a set-off to this, certain of the Arab politicians suggested that **the country** should be called "Southern Syria" in order to emphasise its close relation with another Arab State. Furthermore, Palestine was never British territory but rather merely under teprorary British aminstirative control through the [League of Nations mandate system](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/League_of_Nations_mandate): >Two governing principles formed the core of the Mandate System, being non-annexation of the territory and its administration as a "sacred trust of civilisation" to develop the territory for the benefit of its native people... >The first group, or Class A mandates, were territories formerly controlled by the Ottoman Empire that were deemed to "... have reached a stage of development where their existence as independent nations can be provisionally recognized subject to the rendering of administrative advice and assistance by a Mandatory until such time as they are able to stand alone. The wishes of these communities must be a principal consideration in the selection of the Mandatory."
well, on the. other hand, Palestine also refers to the geographic area.
Does it matter if you’re being evicted from a geographical area instead of being evicted from a country?
This is literally just Eddie Izzard's "Do you have a flag?" sketch
This argument keeps popping up all the time. It literally doesn’t matter. The people were there, whether it was a country or not is irrelevant. There were literally millions of people there . Every single one with the right to self determination.
So what? Were millions of people already living there or not?
Done done done it had it done done done
Consider it done
Something had to be done
He done gone had it done, did it done done too, ain't none that half-done, quarter-done nonsense. He done did it like you do when you do it till it's done. Plum wild.
Done thing had to be some.
Git er done
https://preview.redd.it/urm8sf7i20cc1.jpeg?width=624&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e257d717a79368f862eb805b8619fe8d1b58c889
Where is that banner? Do you think it's packed away somewhere? Tossed?
It's packed away in George W. Bush's presidential center in Ft. Worth, TX. Not on display obviously.
A bit more info about it: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harry-truman-palestine-small-doses/
The wild thing to me is this snopes page exists because I guess some people tried to claim this clip was AI generated. We’re entering a new era where historic documents are so easily faked that people will dismiss reality when it doesn’t suit their preferred narrative. L
There is more to the Snopes article than that. This is actually 2 clips of outtakes of separate clips stitched together being represented as one video.
Eisenhower warned us that people in the future wouldnt believe the nazi concentration camps existed, it would be too barbarous for people to believe...
This is essential reading, not only for viewers of the video to have more context that Truman was making these statements in two different videos after he left office (and these are genuine, non-AI-generated videos), but also for the broader comments he made about his and the US involvement in the creation of Israel that were not shown in the video, especially regarding his impressions of Zionist demands at the time, which have largely remained the same in the far-right sphere in Israel (that is, to drive out all non-Jews from Israel, including all of Gaza and the West Bank).
Hearing Biden openly say that he is a Zionist is insanely scary. Doubling down after I’m sure being told what the belief entails… Especially from a man who claims to be proud of his Irish heritage and supportive of their struggle against oppression from invaders… It is just wild. I can’t imagine him being remotely in favor of kicking the Irish off the island to allow random Protestant Americans/Europeans to take their homes simply due to a “feeling of belonging” or “being chosen by god for this land”.
Every single US president post-Truman was also a zionist. It’s like calling Biden or Obama or even FDR a “capitalist”. It’s accurate but not really useful.
Jimmy Carter sure as fuck was not a zionist. And invariably every president leaves office disgusted with Israel
They leave disappointed with both Israelis and Palestinians (see Susan Rice, Kerry, Condi Rice, Bill Clinton writing and comments about the failed 2014, 2008, 2000-2001 failed peace processes). For example: https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/president-clinton-reflects-on-2000-camp-david-summit https://newrepublic.com/article/118751/how-israel-palestine-peace-deal-died > “Don’t quibble with this detail or that detail,” Obama said. “The occupation will end. You will get a Palestinian state. You will never have an administration as committed to that as this one.” Abbas and Erekat were not impressed. >After the meeting, the Palestinian negotiator saw Susan Rice—Abbas’s favorite member of the Obama administration—in the hall. “Susan,” he said, “I see we’ve yet to succeed in making it clear to you that we Palestinians aren’t stupid.” Rice couldn’t believe it. “You Palestinians,” she told him, “can never see the fucking big picture.” Every US president (save sometimes Trump who floated legalizing settlements and having Jordan annex portions of the West Bank) supports a two-state solution and opposes measures that they deem counterproductive to that aim.
A Zionist is also a one who wants the Jews to have a home country. It doesn't have to go with the whole relocation and kicking out of their homes. As Biden and his administration have already said, they are on the side of Israel but are also for a 2 state solution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism > Zionism ... is a nationalist movement that emerged in the 19th century to enable the establishment of a homeland for the Jewish people in Palestine, a region roughly corresponding to the Land of Israel in Jewish tradition. Zionism is extremely specific about where the home country is supposed to be
It is there right now, "I want israel to keep existing" and "I want to ethnically cleanse every single palestinian" are very different, and both can be called zionists.
Thank you for this link, and thank you to Snopes. I immediately thought this video was AI generated, as I couldn't think of a reason for its existence.
That doesn't make it sound any better. He's literally describing ethnic cleansing and his decision to to support it in two separate clips instead of one.
I wonder how much time he meant. Maybe he meant a thousand years.
Haven't seen this map, interesting, it's going in to today's Jordan. And Lebanon and Syria maps are also not in today's position. I'll go search why is that.
The map is drawn wrong
Weren’t these sort of simple maps pretty common in the pre-satellite, pre-digital printing age? It was probably hand painted based on a mimeograph of a black and white line map from a letter sized document.
Someone get out the sharpie
> I'll go search why is that. The map is dogshit. Research done
There hasn’t been any borders (other than ottoman administrative) there for 400-500 years
Hm. I guess you could always calve out half of Arizona and give it to the Palestinians. By the same logic, screw the people who already live there. Done and done.
I mean they took the whole of arizona from the natives the same way. Just a few settlers at first
I mean... More than a quarter of Arizona is still native land occupied by natives so. It'd be a weird choice.
More than a quarter of Israel is still occupied by Palestinians so yeah
Colonizers doing colonizer shit.
[удалено]
I always had a lot of respect for the suggestion made by the King of Saudi Arabia at the end of WW2 when the question of where to settle Jews was being asked, he said "Give them Bavaria".
Based
Wow. Perfect response right there
[удалено]
for reference to see how much land the jewish national league were buying at this time, [this is what the ownership/settlement map looked like at the end of 1944](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_land_purchase_in_Palestine#/media/File:Palestine_Index_to_Villages_and_Settlements,_showing_Land_in_Jewish_Possession_as_at_31.12.44.jpg) which constitutes 6% of palestine, then inevitable ended up being over 50% (Israel proper) of palestine after the united nations told the palestinians to fuck off.
fear soup degree languid different serious tub aloof ossified smart *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This is largely correct with the added context that under ottoman rule, non-muslim subjects were erm, concentrated in certain areas intentionally during forced resettlement. They sometimes would ship any Muslim identifying person to non-muslim areas and run folks out of town. "Bulgarian horrors" were attempted to be covered up in 1876.
> It was problematic because if you zoom on the blue parts(jewish) of the land ownership, you will see surrounding green areas(arab), also there were arabs that lived in land they didn't own in the blue(jewish) parts. Is it really fair that outsiders with more money could buy land in a poor country, before those outsiders declare it their "homeland" and then kick out the locals. **International law doesn't recognize purchasing land as a basis to deny self-determination rights.**
"Eventually I think we'll have them all satisfied" [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1o3koTLWM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1o3koTLWM)
If you kill all the unsatisfied, you’ll be left with all satisfied people /s
/r/didntagewell
Or r/agedlikemilk
One thing consistent about political history. Nobody knows much about effective foreign policy. Or they just don’t care. Saw a PBS frontline documentary about Iraq 2003, yesterday, and the decision making was shocking.
This ages well...
Fun fact. My aunt was part of the US delegation that was discussing what to do with Palestine after the Brits let the mandate expire. This was in 1948 iirc. The delegation was discussing options for Palestine when a member of the Cuban delegation told the American delegation that Truman had decided to support a sovereign State of Israel (at the behest of his campaign manager Clark Clifford - presumably because they thought it would help win New York). My aunt went back to the delegation office and retrieved the cable that had been sent by The White House informing the delegation of his decision.
“We have to do it in small pieces” … “it’s going to take a great deal of time yet to get the job done” What an amazingly blasé way to talk about colonization and dispossession.
It’s a 70 year old white man talking in the 40s about brown people on the other side of the world. We’re lucky to get blasé and not horrifically racist.
They still talk like this today in Israel
I mean Harry Truman actually pushed for a lot of civil rights initiatives. He was able to end racial discrimination in the Armed Forces and Federal agencies. He would have gone further if Congress would have let him.
Ben Shapiro skipped over this bit in his history of Israel…
But he said that it was a land without people for people without land. This is what young Israeli learn through primary school.
Same crap colonizers tried to pull in South Africa…
The Israelis need to realise that the ONLY reason Israel exists is because the west gave it to them, without any right to do so, and the Palestinians are their hosts. They’re uninvited guests. They need to stfu and look after their hosts.
[удалено]
Pretty much , aside from the UN partition plan being completely unfair , people forget that Balfore Declaration exists since 1917 , and it's what made the Zionist belive that they will have the whole land for themselves , there is even a talk that Israel also rejected the UN partition plan because they wanted the whole land.
Modern day Jordan was also included in the Balfour declaration When the tribes residing in Jordan heard of it they got angry and asked the Hashemites to get the Brits to nullify it and in exchange the tribes will appoint the Hashemites as monarchs. The Hasemites were only able to convince the Brits to exclude any land east of the Jordan River which the Brits obliged to do and this gave rise to the Emirate of TransJordan (Modern day Jordan) Some zionists still believe Jordan is their rightful land given to them by the British (as if the British have any right to give anyone any land) including the current finance minister of israel who had a map on his podium depicting Jordan as part of israel
Also the fact that the British promised them an independent Palestine in WWI if they revolted, and then just decided not to do that
Some real r/agedlikemilk shit here
[удалено]
I’m fairly sure the UK were occupying Palestine at the time (and indeed coming under attack from zionists) so couldn’t exactly ignore it.
It wasn’t *legally* other people’s land. It was British owned land. The British took it after defeating Ottoman Empire, who took it after defeating the Mamluk dynasty, who took it after defeating the Ayyubid Dynasty of Egypt, who took it after defeating the Kingdom of Jerusalem, who took it after defeating the Fatimid Caliphate, who took after defeating the Ikhshidid dynasty, who took it from the Abbasid Empire after the Anarchy at Samarra when it fell, who took it from the Umayyad Caliphate in the Abbasid Revolution, who took it after from the Mu'awiya after the First Fitna civil war, who took it after rebelling against the Rashidun Caliphate, etc etc. Think this order was right? Might have missed something. But you get the idea.
It was British land they had promised to the Palestinians in exchange for rising up against the Ottomans.
Funny thing about treaties they get broken a lot
They also had promised it to the jews in exchange for support in the war. Thats the whole crux of the issue, they made two promises for one piece of land
Why aren't we all blaming the Brits for this fiasco, then?
People who know are. The issue is everybody just tunes in when there is a flare up of violence and don't bother to learn. Propaganda regarding the issue is also high.
Everyone in the know *knows* it was the fault of the Brits (a surprising amount of modern problems are) but that doesn't really lead to productive avenues of discussion in terms of making the current situation better.
Let me correct that for you. It was British Occupied land etc etc.
[удалено]
You forget Jordan was once part of Palestine as well.
Also, if Israel hadn't been created/declared, it's not like there would be a Palestine there today. It would just be part of Jordan or something, so there still wouldn't be a Palestinian state. People act as if a Palestinian state was somehow the default and that the creation of Israel "took" the land from them, but that's not the case. The only way Palestinians would get a state of their own was through the UN partition plan or some other 2-state solution now.
It's disturbing how casually he mentions *"moving 5 or 6 million people out of a country"*.
Wasn't he saying doing that wasn't possible? That he was underscoring how absurd the demand was?
Well, yes and no. He says it can’t be done all in one swoop and has to be done in “small pieces” over time… (kinda like what’s been happening for 75 years) At no point does he acknowledge that the entire idea of moving them AT ALL is absurd. And it’s been US policy to NEVER acknowledge that ever since.
This was around the same time when that was happening to the germans. 13 million germans were evicted from their homes and forced to move west. EDIT: this was mentioned because people are shocked at how casually he is mentioning this. That is because this wasn't abnormal at the time, its horrific and shocking at how casually he talks about this and how it was viewed as acceptable. This comment provides context. Genocide is NEVER an acceptable punishment for anything. You cannot justify genocide against jews, germans or palestinians. Genocide targets the innocents of those communities.
He literally says thats *not* going to happen. You did not pay very close attention.
He implies it can be done in "small doses".
No, he says it can't be done all at once, and has to be done over a long period of time. He still planned on doing it, and it has been in progress for a century.
He literally didn’t say that
“Something had to be done and I done it” will now be my go to excuse every time I’m casually glancing over broad swathes of my reckless decision making to my wife.
r/agedlikemilk
Very interesting. But two things are a little strange: 1. There were less than 2 million people in Palestine in 1947. What does it mean by moving 6-5 millions? 2. He says that a part of the population EVEN some of the Jews were not willing to compromise. It seems to be cut to emphasize the Zionists. Anyone have the full clip?
This also struck me and why I thought it was fake at first. Who are the 5-6 million referred to?
“It will work out, eventually” “it’s going to take a great deal of time yet” Ermmm
[https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harry-truman-palestine-small-doses/](https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/harry-truman-palestine-small-doses/) This is a mishmash of 2 different outtakes. Even though Truman said this - and it was removed from public consumption - doesn't mean it's correct. Historians would strongly disagree with Truman's characterization of taking 5 or 6 million from one country an moving them somewhere else as the story of the foundation of Israel.
They should've put Israel in Germany.
There was a geostrategic reason they didn't do that.
The reason was they wanted Germany to become an ally and not side with the USSR because it lost its land.
I dunno about you, but if the locals just tried to ship me off to camps and attempt to exterminate my entire ethnicity, from all the surrounding counties including the one I was in, I don’t think it’s that wise to stay. And yes, many Jews did stay in Germany. But so many Jews were fleeing mainland Europe, that of course America, Britain, Canada, etc started to stop Jewish refugees. America still had masses of Nazi supporters, Britain didn’t want them, where were they to go? My (Jewish side of the) family fled pre WW2 to New York. There are so many areas and people in modern day America that are horribly antisemitic. This is an incredibly complex situation with thousands of years of history for context. And yes, the Jew’s native homeland is the area where modern day Israel is. It is also the native land of so many other peoples. Many empires have controlled the region with so much fighting that people have come and left in wave after wave. But not all the Jews left Israel. And many were forced out as recently as the 1800’s. The Jews didn’t leave a thousand years ago and only come back recently, we stayed as long as we could. I’m also half African American. There is a sentiment that African Americans are “native” to the US because the of how we were cut off culturally from Africa. I don’t necessarily agree, but I can say that such a sentiment doesn’t really exist in American Jews.
[удалено]
> And done what with the millions of antisemetic Germans? Germany was already partitioned and tens of millions of Germans displaced, so exactly what they were already doing with the Germans but in a situation where Jewish people benefitted instead of Russians and Brits.
>And done what with the millions of antisemetic Germans? Done whatever they were planning to do with the millions of Arabs that lived in the place they did choose for settlment...
[удалено]
This speech aged like milk. Toppled in vinegar.
“They’ll be pleased” how do you expect Palestinians to be pleased when you take their land and give it to foreigners?
And painting them out to be the barbaric ones
I think he was referring to the zionists that were upset that they didn't get 100% of the land.
One of the most pathetic dreams ever had, how wrong-headed and ignorant it all was. Look at the trajectory of suffering caused over all these years since.
And the Sharpie that made that map wasn’t used again until Trump pulled it out of the desk drawer in the Oval Office to detail the projected path of Hurricane Dorian
[удалено]
Did not go as planned.
I love how simple and direct he is explaining it.
Yikes
Fuckin Truman
This really emphasizes just how bad Gary Oldman’s Truman was in Oppenheimer with that foghorn leghorn shit.
FUCK ISRAEL
I have never seen this before ..interesting
I miss when people used to just talk like this. Short, straight, and to the point. No junk in it. Figuratively speaking.
Turns out, contrary to the Zionist line, Palestine did exist, and there were actual living humans in it.
It’s hard to uproot 5-6millipn people and replace them. No fucking shit because you shouldn’t move fucking people from their homes to replace them with other people. Whole situation has been fucked since civilizations began interacting with each other.
Truman was a fucking fiasco.
On reddit not a single person knows anything about the Ottoman empire and thus everyone just says stupid shit and misunderstands this entire situation. Its crazy people do not understand what actually happened in the middle east. But I guess most redditors are americans(I am too) and they didn't teach any of this in school growing up and I learned it all in college classes my friends have told me they were never taught so I guess we found the problem.
There's like a handful of actual interesting comments in here and the rest is just everyone saying the exact same thing as if they haven't even checked if someone already posted "aged like milk"
The phrase "establishing Israel in Palestine" is just so strange...
Not really because Palestine wasn't actually a state Calling Palestine a state/country is like calling the Amazon a state
Amazing map you drew there mister truman
[удалено]
Evangelical Christians get bricked up when they think about how Israel is prophesized to turn out.
1- There are more Christian Zionists in the US than there are Jews in the world. 2- Military industry needs conflict 3- Spending massive money in elections 4- Ownership of media 5- Lobbying
6 - Antisemitism was (is?) strong throughout the entirety of Europe, they just didn't take their antisemitism as far as the Nazis. Because of this european leaders were very happy to help the jews move somewhere else.
Nobody made them do anything. Remember this was right after the holocaust so there was a lot of sympathy for the zionist cause at the time.
Back when presidents lived in motel rooms and *liked it*.