You're viewing part of a thread.
In other words, “Death to Israel!!!”
Edit: in before “No no. You have to understand that ‘Death to Israel’ is an aspirational call for peace”
So we're Indians wanting to get rid of the British Raj all genocidal maniacs?
Not a great comparison as Brits have Britain to live in already (I'm British, if it matters).
If you displaced the Brits from India back in the day, they could return to Britain.
If you displace the Jews from Israel now, where could they go?
All the Jewish people in Israel came from other countries though and a very large percentage of the population of Israel maintain dual citizenship. So they can return to the country they are a citizen of, or return to the country there parents or grandparents came from.
Yes, they weren't being treated well in those countries (to put it lightly) but that doesn't make them entitled to someone else's land. He'll the reason most western countries supported creating Israel is because they wanted their Jewish populations to leave.
It would be like unilaterally decided were going to take part of balkans and give it to the Romani people so they have their own country. They are persecuted and don't have a country of their own, so why not?
The vast majority of Israel's Jewish population is native-born at this point. They have no connection to those countries. They likely don't even speak the language. I do not see how that would be a good solution.
There is no easy solution to this where everyone gets what they want and is happy.
There is only least bad solutions.
And and I think dismantling Israel is that least bad solution. They can go to other countries or become part of Palestine. But either way as the colonising population they have the moral duty to bare that burden.
What if the countries their ancestors came from don't want to take them and the Palestinians don't want them there either? I don't think it is a solution.
My solution would be put the whole area under UN control until something equitable can be worked out that will make people at least satisfied. They won't be happy, but they could be satisfied if they were forced to have negotiations.
There's a lot of places where Jews can already live safely
The hilarious part is upper middle class Jews from like New York running over to colonize Palestine to be "safer"
Permanently Deleted
I'm not sure why you went straight for "what about", I'm saying the comparison is bad and that's it.
"yeah I know that this conflict started with the Zionists violently stealing land from the Palestinians but that's irrelevant."
There was never a country of Palestine in all of human history, so this comparison doesn't really work.
You understand you're literally just arguing semantics right?
And even then its still a good comparison because there was never a country of India until after the British took over either.
It's not semantics. Palestinians aren't one people. They're a split between Egyptians and Jordanians lol
So your either a troll or just stupid?
your stupid
Lol
well yes but actually no. Arab states in palestine, yes. However they've been under Turkish occupation for most of their modern history
They weren't under occupation. They were part of the Ottoman empire lol
Jesus dude learn your history
ah yes because being under the rule of a foreign empire doesn't imply occupation by said empire... I think you have a lot to teach to the entire english speaking world
Occupation requires you to own land prior to that Empire, and no Palestinian has ever laid claim to their own territory without that territory belonging to someone else, throughout all of human history.
Before the Ottoman Empire was a mix of caliphates and crusaders. Before that was the Roman empire. Before that was the Persian Empire, before that was the Egyptian Empire and before that it was Israel/Judah.
I skipped a couple of minor empires, but it's pretty much a chain of "someone's" forever, and that "someone" has never referred to themselves as Palestinian prior to the mid-20th century.
The arabs caliphate were arabs and claiming the land was theirs and calling it Palestine. The question you should ask is : why were there no massive independentist fight under the Ottoman rule ?
The people can stay. The borders and government must be dissolved.
I think Jews and Palestinians both need a place where they can feel safe from anyone trying to kill them off since it's something one group has already been through and the other group is going through right now and both are at risk from it happening again in the future. This means they either need to give one group a new homeland, which, at this point, would be ethnic cleansing of either group, or find a way for them to share one homeland safely. No ethnic cleansing should be allowed and future ethnic cleansing should be prevented to the best of the international community's ability.
Personally, I would prefer UN administration of the region until something equitable for both Jews and Palestinians can be resolved.
And the people that stay will be slaughtered.
Yes and what guarantees for the Israeli. Various palestinian factions have been commiting massacre and pogroms since the 1930's where they had a german-sized nazi movement.
The government is what guaranty people's right and safety.
This is exactly why the Palestinian state exist and Arafat refused to integrate into Israel
Why?
Why is apartheid bad?
What is apartheid about the state inside the Green Line?
That's a leap. It means an end to the illegal occupation, apartheid, and Zionism. Give the land back to the indigenous people. I've seen talks of the establishment of a secular state where all can be free, which is the ideal here. Not the genocide and ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians
Give the land back to the indigenous people.
That's easy to say, but means nothing until you define who the "indigenous people" are, which is an extremely fraught topic in this particular case.
People indigenous to the land. It's fairly simple. White European ashkanazi Jews whose descendants lived there 2000 years ago aren't indigenous. They're white, white people aren't from the Middle East, Arabs are.
Most Israelis are Mizrahi Jews from the Middle East.
Give the land back to the indigenous people
Oh my sweet, sweet summer child. That's a statement both sides agree on, but not in the way you think
Jews are the indigenous people, Muslim Arabs came later.
The indigenous people are the (presumably) mesopotamian nomads that eventually became sedentary farmers in the early stages of the Bronze Age.
Are there any of them trying to lay claim to it? And I was making the point that saying one side is fighting for its indigenous land is true for both sides in the conflict, and is pointless to say as a result.
Are there any of them trying to lay claim to it?
Yes. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians probably descended from them. Their common ancestor was first.
Well would you look at that, the Jews are indigenous to the land.
So are the Palestinians. Your point?
The nomads turned settlers were not Jewish. Jews didn't exist back then.
That is my point. Saying the Palestinians are fighting colonizers for their indigenous land is incorrect and stupid because both sides of the conflict are indigenous to the land.
Right…
You just called for the destruction of Israel. You just said Tel Aviv, which was built on land purchased from the Bedouin, is on occupied land.
You just said that Be’eri is on occupied land. Since it’s on occupied land, then Hamas’ murder of 100 people is justified in your mind.
Palestinian policemen massacred non-Zionist Jews in Hebron in 1929. The government of Gaza massacred left-wing Jews in Be’eri in 2023. And you sit here and talk binational bullshit fantasies.
From the river to the sea, you want it to be Judenfrei.
If not destroyed, at the very least reconstituted and subject to Hague tribunals
What does “reconstituted” mean?
If anyone actually bring the Palestinian government to the Hague the country disappear. Without even talking about the two whole ass civil wars they triggered but they also gave a province to international terrorists.
This is btw one of the main reaso I think big countries like France only recognizing Palestine as a "delegation" is actually the best : they recognize their authority and legitimacy but don't have to treat them like they have the same responsibilities and accountability as a state. If France treated Palestine as a full blown state the situation would be dangerously close to having the Foreign Legion marching in Jericho