Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby bentheimmigrant » Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:25 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Again, you appear to be suggesting that Israel was carved out of some existing land. It wasn't.

I know it's just a wording thing, but you appear to be suggesting that there was no land there until we came along and created it. What exactly do you mean by this? There was no one who lived there that disagreed with Britain's actions? I highly doubt that.
Zamfir wrote:To clarify: my statement was that there aren't people (or at least not many) who believe these two things at the same time:

I'm pretty sure Jules got that - it's fair to say that anyone who believes both is not reasonable.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:08 pm UTC

jules.lt wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:I want to show that Britain made the correct choice in choosing to establish a Jewish state. Jews lived there, so when you're drawing borders you have to do it to what ethnic groups exist there. There was no carving a state out of Arab land as the Arabs didn't govern the land: nobody did. They weren't carving anything out of anything, they were creating a country, and thus control wasn't taken from anybody, but rather it was given to people.

Those jews were mostly recent immigrants, and the whole area had been Arab land for many generations (regardless of government).
This claim at the very least highly debatable.


Most of the Arabs there by the time of the creation of Israel were immigrants as well. What does them being recent immigrants have to do with it? They lived there and they lived there rightfully. Isn't that what matters?

bentheimmigrant wrote:I know it's just a wording thing, but you appear to be suggesting that there was no land there until we came along and created it

No, I'm saying that there was no country before we came along and created it. And because nobody really had control of the land, it is impossible to carve any country out of any other country. If any country or combination of countries are given, people are only gaining autonomy, not losing it. The only debate is how one should draw the lines, not whether or not they should.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

zmatt
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby zmatt » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:59 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:No, I'm saying that there was no country before we came along and created it. And because nobody really had control of the land, it is impossible to carve any country out of any other country. If any country or combination of countries are given, people are only gaining autonomy, not losing it. The only debate is how one should draw the lines, not whether or not they should.


Well The ottomans and then England controlled it. But i do agree with you that the concept of Palestine as a state is silly. There never was one. The history of the region can more or less be summed up as powers from elsewhere controlled it one after the other.
clockworkmonk wrote:Except for Warren G. Harding. Fuck that guy.

User avatar
Antimony-120
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat.

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Antimony-120 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:07 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:No, I'm saying that there was no country before we came along and created it. And because nobody really had control of the land, it is impossible to carve any country out of any other country. If any country or combination of countries are given, people are only gaining autonomy, not losing it. The only debate is how one should draw the lines, not whether or not they should.


Okay fine, but the argument is that the lines, when they were drawn, i.e., de facto when the Brits began their plan to create a jewish state at some point in the future, not the de jure treaty, the lines should not have been drawn the way they were. In essence the argument comes from the fact that the treaty of Transjordan already drew a line creating an area where it was known that at some point the jews would be taking that land in spite of he fact that they had no proper claim to it at the moment.

Now I tend to disagree, and think that the British mandate was a fairly reasonable solution and it's failings, while they certainly existed, are more due to the fact that there was no perfect answer rather than the plan being intrinsically bad. however I'll acknowledge the existance of the other argument.
Wolydarg wrote:That was like a roller coaster of mathematical reasoning. Problems! Solutions! More problems!


****************Signature Dehosted, New Signature Under Construction************************

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Iulus Cofield » Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:12 pm UTC

There was no perfect answer to what?

User avatar
Antimony-120
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat.

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Antimony-120 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 5:17 pm UTC

The question of a jewish homeland, and after that the British handling of the Palestine Mandate.
Wolydarg wrote:That was like a roller coaster of mathematical reasoning. Problems! Solutions! More problems!


****************Signature Dehosted, New Signature Under Construction************************

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby nitePhyyre » Wed Apr 13, 2011 6:57 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:What? But they didn't have that land to begin with. there was no country there. One could say with as much validity "The argument for Palestine not existing is that the British had no right to carve an Arab state out of the old Ottoman territories."
The idea that because people living on a large swath of land didn't conform to a western/sedentary lifestyle they should have no rights to said land, is extremely arrogant. It is also highly insulting to even basic human dignity.

A little off-topic, what happened to the jews in between the time of Jesus and 1900?
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4581
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby LaserGuy » Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:23 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Zamfir wrote:Sourmilk, could you be a bit more clear what kind of claim you hope to establish?


I want to show that Britain made the correct choice in choosing to establish a Jewish state. Jews lived there, so when you're drawing borders you have to do it to what ethnic groups exist there. There was no carving a state out of Arab land as the Arabs didn't govern the land: nobody did. They weren't carving anything out of anything, they were creating a country, and thus control wasn't taken from anybody, but rather it was given to people.


I would say that there are a couple of ways to dispute the claim that Britain made the correct choice on this matter.

Firstly, was a Jewish state necessary at all? Why was it necessary to partition the lands into Jewish and Arab rather than just make one unified state? As you've already argued (might have been in the other thread, I don't recall), prior to 1948, the Jews and Arabs in the region coexisted relatively peaceably--thus it seems to me that it would be perfectly reasonable to argue that a less disruptive solution might be to essentially maintain the status quo, except with a more formal governance structure and a suitable constitution. There are certainly countries that exist with mixed ethnic populations that have been successful (and others that have been abject failures...), but certainly based on the evidence available to Britain at the time, I don't see that there was any immediate reason to reject such a solution.

Secondly, I think that the British displayed a serious lack of judgment in not properly consulting or taking into account the wishes of the Palestinian Arabs or the neighbouring countries in the matter. You are correct in noting that the Jewish people accepted the partition plan (with reservations); you are no doubt aware, however, that the plan rejected outright by the Palestinian Arabs. Should the British not have made the effort to make a plan acceptable to all stakeholders? I think it is notable that while the partition plan was ultimately accepted by the United Nations, it was voted against by every UN member in the Middle East (possibly excepting the USSR, depending on how you'd like to count them).

Finally, even at the time, there were significant reservations about whether or not the British (or the League of Nations/UN) even have the authority to create a state out of whole cloth in the manner that they did.

bobjoesmith
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 9:32 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby bobjoesmith » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:20 pm UTC

I would say Israel has a fairly strong claim. Not even just thinking about the Native Americans, California, Arizona, New Mexico, and a ton of other states used to belong to Mexico. They probably have a legitimate land claim, but who won the Mexican-American War? The people who currently, and have for quite a long time now, own it. Similarly, who won the Israeli Wars? Palestine has every right to its own state, but Israel does have legitimacy to its claims. If the Arab states had won, I would not say that Israel has a claim to those lands. Whether it have taken it from Britain immorally, or taken extra lands by war, the fact is, with Israel's occupation of it, it is given legitimacy. The status quo has Israel owning the land, and reality breeds legitimacy. Palestine may have wonderful speeches, or historical documents to back its claim, but those articles don't give it the land in question. Israel's claims are backed by martial might and political support- obviously stronger.

In the question of legitimacy, Israel's claims cannot be discounted by the method they are obtained. That is a question of morality or ethics, not of actual political claims to physical locations.

User avatar
Antimony-120
Posts: 830
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:16 am UTC
Location: Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat.

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Antimony-120 » Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:08 pm UTC

Yeaaaaah, politics doesn't really work that way. There's a reason I've been using the words de facto (read as: the practical reality) and de jure (read as: the legalities on paper). They are different things. It is obvious that de jure claims without de facto hold do not make for a country, but they do have some importance. For example The Republic of China (ROC, Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China (PRC, China) both claim to own themselves and the other's territory. Neither does. However, if the PRC were to take over the ROC it would be met with less internal and external anger than if, as a random country in the region, Japan were to do so.

Thus, the legitimacy of the PRC's claims to the ROC's territory are greater than Japan's, in spite of the fact that neither the PRC nor Japan owns Taiwan, and that de facto, Japan has had control over Taiwan more recently than the PRC.

In short, possession is not actually nine-tenths of the law, at least not when it comes to legitimacy.
Wolydarg wrote:That was like a roller coaster of mathematical reasoning. Problems! Solutions! More problems!


****************Signature Dehosted, New Signature Under Construction************************

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:48 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:Firstly, was a Jewish state necessary at all? Why was it necessary to partition the lands into Jewish and Arab rather than just make one unified state? As you've already argued (might have been in the other thread, I don't recall), prior to 1948, the Jews and Arabs in the region coexisted relatively peaceably


Not that peaceably. There weren't any outright wars, but there still things like the 1920's Palestine riots. They were peaceful enough not to go to war with each other, but things weren't really so amicable that they would be able to live together in a same country.

Secondly, I think that the British displayed a serious lack of judgment in not properly consulting or taking into account the wishes of the Palestinian Arabs or the neighbouring countries in the matter.

The surrounding Arab countries were not satisfied that a state of Israel existed. They didn't care where the lines were drawn: they figured that if the lines were drawn at all, it was too much. I've explained the problem with that reasoning before.

nitePhyyre wrote:The idea that because people living on a large swath of land didn't conform to a western/sedentary lifestyle they should have no rights to said land, is extremely arrogant. It is also highly insulting to even basic human dignity.

When did I say that?

A little off-topic, what happened to the jews in between the time of Jesus and 1900?

So, after the destruction of the temple, Masada, and then later the Bar Kochba revolt, nearly all of the Jews were kicked out of Palestine. Most went to places in Europe or elsewhere in the Middle East where they integrated with the cultures with varying degrees of success. For quite a long time there was a large and successful Jewish community in Baghdad, and there were many places in Europe where the Jews were considered part of the culture. Obviously there were times and places where things didn't work out so well, e.g. the Spanish Inquisition, various pogroms, etc. In the mid-19th century, during the enlightenment, Jews realized that they were never going to be fully accepted into European culture. The soon-to-follow pogroms didn't help either. So, some of them emigrated to the USA, and others emigrated to Israel, which was a virtually ungoverned and abandoned area of the Ottoman empire. And the rest is history...
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby nitePhyyre » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:15 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
nitePhyyre wrote:The idea that because people living on a large swath of land didn't conform to a western/sedentary lifestyle they should have no rights to said land, is extremely arrogant. It is also highly insulting to even basic human dignity.

When did I say that?

sourmìlk wrote:What? But they didn't have that land to begin with. there was no country there. One could say with as much validity "The argument for Palestine not existing is that the British had no right to carve an Arab state out of the old Ottoman territories."


sourmìlk wrote:So, after the destruction of the temple, Masada, and then later the Bar Kochba revolt, nearly all of the Jews were kicked out of Palestine. Most went to places in Europe or elsewhere in the Middle East where they integrated with the cultures with varying degrees of success. For quite a long time there was a large and successful Jewish community in Baghdad, and there were many places in Europe where the Jews were considered part of the culture. Obviously there were times and places where things didn't work out so well, e.g. the Spanish Inquisition, various pogroms, etc. In the mid-19th century, during the enlightenment, Jews realized that they were never going to be fully accepted into European culture. The soon-to-follow pogroms didn't help either. So, some of them emigrated to the USA, and others emigrated to Israel, which was a virtually ungoverned and abandoned area of the Ottoman empire. And the rest is history...
Thanks :)
As to the bolded part, who did the kicking? Romans I'm assuming?
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:31 am UTC

nitePhyyre wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
nitePhyyre wrote:The idea that because people living on a large swath of land didn't conform to a western/sedentary lifestyle they should have no rights to said land, is extremely arrogant. It is also highly insulting to even basic human dignity.

When did I say that?

sourmìlk wrote:What? But they didn't have that land to begin with. there was no country there. One could say with as much validity "The argument for Palestine not existing is that the British had no right to carve an Arab state out of the old Ottoman territories."


Yeah, I don't understand how that equates to what you said.

sourmìlk wrote:So, after the destruction of the temple, Masada, and then later the Bar Kochba revolt, nearly all of the Jews were kicked out of Palestine. Most went to places in Europe or elsewhere in the Middle East where they integrated with the cultures with varying degrees of success. For quite a long time there was a large and successful Jewish community in Baghdad, and there were many places in Europe where the Jews were considered part of the culture. Obviously there were times and places where things didn't work out so well, e.g. the Spanish Inquisition, various pogroms, etc. In the mid-19th century, during the enlightenment, Jews realized that they were never going to be fully accepted into European culture. The soon-to-follow pogroms didn't help either. So, some of them emigrated to the USA, and others emigrated to Israel, which was a virtually ungoverned and abandoned area of the Ottoman empire. And the rest is history...
Thanks :)
As to the bolded part, who did the kicking? Romans I'm assuming?


Yeah, the Romans.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Iulus Cofield
WINNING
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2010 9:31 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Iulus Cofield » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:33 am UTC

It was indeed the Romans, who did lots of things considered abhorrent today in order to pacify regions, including massacres and forced resettlements. The province Judea had revolted or attempted to revolt several times and the expulsion was the method of the last suppression.

Fun facts: The Samaritans remained mostly unmolested in the area for another four hundred years when the Emperor Justinian outlawed their religion in response to an attempted revolt. They seem to have endured until the Muslim Conquests when they were mostly tolerated as People of the Book, although they were intermittently persecuted or forced to convert. Around 1900 there was only about 100 left, IIRC, and today they've managed to grow to about 700 according to Wikipedia. They're a neat little culture/ethnic group that's managed, more or less, to hold onto their holy mountain for 2700 years.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:37 am UTC

Iulus Cofield wrote:Around 1900 there was only about 100 left, IIRC, and today they've managed to grow to about 700 according to Wikipedia. They're a neat little culture/ethnic group that's managed, more or less, to hold onto their holy mountain for 2700 years.


O_O

That can't be a sufficient genetic sample to maintain a healthy population.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10493
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:48 am UTC

It's not. They are in a genetic crisis, and they know it, so they allow their men to marry Jewish women (but not their women to marry Jewish men).

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5401
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby mosc » Thu Apr 14, 2011 12:33 pm UTC

zmatt wrote: Almost all of them were not born in "Palestine" but instead were born in refugee camps so any direct relation they may have to the area is tedious at best.

Bullshit! Why do people keep spewing this nonsense. Palestinians don't live in refugee camps or some similar concoction of a "reservation" ffs, they live in the same towns they always did with very few exceptions. Very few people are physically displaced in this conflict. Mostly it's a border dispute. Again, the only people who would actually need to re-locate in any of the proposed two-state solutions would be Israelis. They'd likely have to vacate some of the more recent "settlements" (meaning formerly unpopulated and inhospitable desert turned into houses).

The only time you get into any "my grandparents used to live there, now the other guy lives there" is in a very select few places mostly dating back to the 1920-1948 period along with the area surrounding the old city of Jerusalem. But honestly, that kind of thing has been going on for thousands of years in the old city of Jerusalem. There have been many "districts", and many "re-districting" processes over the centuries in Jerusalem in what is, and always has been, a very religiously contested few square miles.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby nitePhyyre » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:08 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:What? But they didn't have that land to begin with. there was no country there. One could say with as much validity "The argument for Palestine not existing is that the British had no right to carve an Arab state out of the old Ottoman territories."

Yeah, I don't understand how that equates to what you said.

Could you explain what you meant then? I went ahead and asked 2 other people, they both interpreted it the same way I did.
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 2:28 pm UTC

nitePhyyre wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:What? But they didn't have that land to begin with. there was no country there. One could say with as much validity "The argument for Palestine not existing is that the British had no right to carve an Arab state out of the old Ottoman territories."

Yeah, I don't understand how that equates to what you said.

Could you explain what you meant then? I went ahead and asked 2 other people, they both interpreted it the same way I did.


Both Jews and Arabs lived in Palestine before the British got there. A country had to be made for them. If one was going to say that Britain couldn't carve a country out for the Jews, then they also couldn't for the Arabs, seeing as both peoples lived in that area. There's no reason Britain should have been able to grant self-autonomy to one ethnicity but not the other.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Griffin
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:46 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Griffin » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:19 pm UTC

I still think we should have just given them a nice chunk of the US or something and the world would now be a better place for it, rather than putting them in the middle of a dozen countries that don't want them there. But now that they are there, I think they have a legitimate claim to hold on to their territory. I also think it would be prudent for them to give up some of it, as they have in the past, and put a hold on settling, but I do think their claim is legitimate.
Bdthemag: "I don't always GM, but when I do I prefer to put my player's in situations that include pain and torture. Stay creative my friends."

Bayobeasts - the Pokemon: Orthoclase project.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4581
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby LaserGuy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 3:51 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Firstly, was a JewSo, after the destruction of the temple, Masada, and then later the Bar Kochba revolt, nearly all of the Jews were kicked out of Palestine. Most went to places in Europe or elsewhere in the Middle East where they integrated with the cultures with varying degrees of success. For quite a long time there was a large and successful Jewish community in Baghdad, and there were many places in Europe where the Jews were considered part of the culture. Obviously there were times and places where things didn't work out so well, e.g. the Spanish Inquisition, various pogroms, etc. In the mid-19th century, during the enlightenment, Jews realized that they were never going to be fully accepted into European culture. The soon-to-follow pogroms didn't help either. So, some of them emigrated to the USA, and others emigrated to Israel, which was a virtually ungoverned and abandoned area of the Ottoman empire. And the rest is history...


Just so we're clear here, you're saying that the Israeli claim to that land is based on events that happened two thousand years ago, and there were few Jewish people in the region during the intervening period?

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7588
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Zamfir » Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:13 pm UTC

I thought the standard history was that most people stayed after the rebellions, and their ancestors eventually went up in the wider population and eventually converted to Islam. There must have been lots of jews in Roman Judea, those didn't all ship in and move out. At least someone at the time would have mentioned it if almost everyone had left the area.

In those days, there were already large Jewish populations elsewhere. When Judaism was oppressed in the former Judea, those other communities became the main Jewish community. But that doesn't mean the Jews from Judea literally moved away to form that community.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:59 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:Firstly, was a JewSo, after the destruction of the temple, Masada, and then later the Bar Kochba revolt, nearly all of the Jews were kicked out of Palestine. Most went to places in Europe or elsewhere in the Middle East where they integrated with the cultures with varying degrees of success. For quite a long time there was a large and successful Jewish community in Baghdad, and there were many places in Europe where the Jews were considered part of the culture. Obviously there were times and places where things didn't work out so well, e.g. the Spanish Inquisition, various pogroms, etc. In the mid-19th century, during the enlightenment, Jews realized that they were never going to be fully accepted into European culture. The soon-to-follow pogroms didn't help either. So, some of them emigrated to the USA, and others emigrated to Israel, which was a virtually ungoverned and abandoned area of the Ottoman empire. And the rest is history...


Just so we're clear here, you're saying that the Israeli claim to that land is based on events that happened two thousand years ago, and there were few Jewish people in the region during the intervening period?


No, somebody just asked about the history of the area and I gave it. I never offered it as justification for Israel's existence. The justification for Israel's existence is that the Jewish people emigrated to a virtually unpopulated and ungoverned area of the Ottoman empire having being pushed out or reviled in most every other country, and seeing as they now lived there, when country lines were being drawn they should have been drawn in consideration of the ethnicities residing in that area. and they were.

Griffin wrote:I still think we should have just given them a nice chunk of the US or something and the world would now be a better place for it, rather than putting them in the middle of a dozen countries that don't want them there. But now that they are there, I think they have a legitimate claim to hold on to their territory. I also think it would be prudent for them to give up some of it, as they have in the past, and put a hold on settling, but I do think their claim is legitimate.


Unfortunately, that would have required relocating 1 million Jews who lived in Israel over to the USA.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Griffin
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:46 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Griffin » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:06 pm UTC

Haven't several million already relocated to Isreal though? I mean, honestly, I think may have been worth the price long term. And they wouldn't have been forced to relocate, just had it offered to them "Here is a place for you", just like no one was forced to relocate to the CURRENT Isreal. Hell, thats less than the number of Jewish people that live in New York, isn't it?

Also, what does Israel use to determine whether or not someone is Jewish? Are islamic arabs of Jewish descent considered Jewish?
Bdthemag: "I don't always GM, but when I do I prefer to put my player's in situations that include pain and torture. Stay creative my friends."

Bayobeasts - the Pokemon: Orthoclase project.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:39 pm UTC

Griffin wrote:Haven't several million already relocated to Isreal though? I mean, honestly, I think may have been worth the price long term. And they wouldn't have been forced to relocate, just had it offered to them "Here is a place for you", just like no one was forced to relocate to the CURRENT Isreal. Hell, thats less than the number of Jewish people that live in New York, isn't it?

Also, what does Israel use to determine whether or not someone is Jewish? Are islamic arabs of Jewish descent considered Jewish?


You're missing the point of what I said: it wouldn't make sense to relocate the Jews to America just because people were nicer there when there were already Jews living in Israel. You get to draw country lines around where people live, but you don't get to move people to fit the lines you want.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

zmatt
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby zmatt » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:43 pm UTC

mosc wrote:Bullshit! Why do people keep spewing this nonsense. Palestinians don't live in refugee camps or some similar concoction of a "reservation" ffs, they live in the same towns they always did with very few exceptions. Very few people are physically displaced in this conflict. Mostly it's a border dispute. Again, the only people who would actually need to re-locate in any of the proposed two-state solutions would be Israelis. They'd likely have to vacate some of the more recent "settlements" (meaning formerly unpopulated and inhospitable desert turned into houses).

The only time you get into any "my grandparents used to live there, now the other guy lives there" is in a very select few places mostly dating back to the 1920-1948 period along with the area surrounding the old city of Jerusalem. But honestly, that kind of thing has been going on for thousands of years in the old city of Jerusalem. There have been many "districts", and many "re-districting" processes over the centuries in Jerusalem in what is, and always has been, a very religiously contested few square miles.


Citations needed.

here are my own.

During the 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and the 1948 Arab–Israeli War that followed, around 750,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled from their homes. In 1951, the UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine estimated that the number of Palestinian refugees displaced from Israel was 711,000.[57] This number did not include displaced Palestinians inside Israeli-held territory. The list of villages depopulated during the Arab-Israeli conflict includes more than 400 Arab villages. It also includes about ten Jewish villages and neighbourhoods.

The Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus are a controversial topic among historians.[58]


A lot of people were displaced during the 1948 war. it is a known fact. The PLO is known to have had bases in refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and the west bank and Gaza strip. Most of the more extreme members of the PLO are in some way directly associated with these camps.
clockworkmonk wrote:Except for Warren G. Harding. Fuck that guy.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 6:49 pm UTC

zmatt wrote:
mosc wrote:Bullshit! Why do people keep spewing this nonsense. Palestinians don't live in refugee camps or some similar concoction of a "reservation" ffs, they live in the same towns they always did with very few exceptions. Very few people are physically displaced in this conflict. Mostly it's a border dispute. Again, the only people who would actually need to re-locate in any of the proposed two-state solutions would be Israelis. They'd likely have to vacate some of the more recent "settlements" (meaning formerly unpopulated and inhospitable desert turned into houses).

The only time you get into any "my grandparents used to live there, now the other guy lives there" is in a very select few places mostly dating back to the 1920-1948 period along with the area surrounding the old city of Jerusalem. But honestly, that kind of thing has been going on for thousands of years in the old city of Jerusalem. There have been many "districts", and many "re-districting" processes over the centuries in Jerusalem in what is, and always has been, a very religiously contested few square miles.


Citations needed.

here are my own.

During the 1947-1948 Civil War in Mandatory Palestine and the 1948 Arab–Israeli War that followed, around 750,000 Palestinians fled or were expelled from their homes. In 1951, the UN Conciliation Commission for Palestine estimated that the number of Palestinian refugees displaced from Israel was 711,000.[57] This number did not include displaced Palestinians inside Israeli-held territory. The list of villages depopulated during the Arab-Israeli conflict includes more than 400 Arab villages. It also includes about ten Jewish villages and neighbourhoods.

The Causes of the 1948 Palestinian exodus are a controversial topic among historians.[58]


A lot of people were displaced during the 1948 war. it is a known fact. The PLO is known to have had bases in refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and the west bank and Gaza strip. Most of the more extreme members of the PLO are in some way directly associated with these camps.


Why are you assuming that the Israelis displaced those Palestinians? The Arabs started a war that terrorized them out of their homes, the Arabs told the Palestinians to leave because they said they were going to destroy the areas, and then the Arabs refused to absorb the Palestinians that they made refugees into their own countries. And Israel, to make up for the actions of the Arabs, is now attempting to give the Palestinians their own country in the West Bank and Gaza.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

zmatt
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby zmatt » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:06 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Why are you assuming that the Israelis displaced those Palestinians? The Arabs started a war that terrorized them out of their homes, the Arabs told the Palestinians to leave because they said they were going to destroy the areas, and then the Arabs refused to absorb the Palestinians that they made refugees into their own countries. And Israel, to make up for the actions of the Arabs, is now attempting to give the Palestinians their own country in the West Bank and Gaza.


That is an extremely one sided view of things, but I know you are an Israeli so I understand your position. I really don't care that much about either side beyond I don't like it when people kill each other over intangible things such as land rights. So I would like to think I am being a little more objective about this than others.

Who started the 1948 war is irrelevant. What is relevant is that there were a lot of Palestinian refugees that were no longer living in what was now Israel and they weren't assimilating into the societies that they refugee camps were located in. the reasons for this vary from camp to camp. The point in bringing this up was to support my stance that the current generation of militant PLO members are people who have no individual claim to the contested areas as a home, because they were born after the 1948 war. This is something you should be sympathetic too because it helps your argument. You seem more concerned with attacking anyone who has anything less than praise for Israel though.
clockworkmonk wrote:Except for Warren G. Harding. Fuck that guy.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:24 pm UTC

zmatt wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:Why are you assuming that the Israelis displaced those Palestinians? The Arabs started a war that terrorized them out of their homes, the Arabs told the Palestinians to leave because they said they were going to destroy the areas, and then the Arabs refused to absorb the Palestinians that they made refugees into their own countries. And Israel, to make up for the actions of the Arabs, is now attempting to give the Palestinians their own country in the West Bank and Gaza.


That is an extremely one sided view of things, but I know you are an Israeli so I understand your position. I really don't care that much about either side beyond I don't like it when people kill each other over intangible things such as land rights. So I would like to think I am being a little more objective about this than others.

I'm not Israeli.

Who started the 1948 war is irrelevant.

Not true. If the Palestinians were pushed out by inevitable terrors of war, and many of them were, then it is absolutely the fault of whoever started that war.

What is relevant is that there were a lot of Palestinian refugees that were no longer living in what was now Israel and they weren't assimilating into the societies that they refugee camps were located in. the reasons for this vary from camp to camp. The point in bringing this up was to support my stance that the current generation of militant PLO members are people who have no individual claim to the contested areas as a home, because they were born after the 1948 war. This is something you should be sympathetic too because it helps your argument. You seem more concerned with attacking anyone who has anything less than praise for Israel though.


So, I wasn't sure of why you brought the PLO up, so thank you for clarifying. That aside, potentially accusing the Israelis of ethnic cleansing is somewhat worse than not giving praise to Israel.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Griffin
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:46 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Griffin » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:36 pm UTC

You're missing the point of what I said: it wouldn't make sense to relocate the Jews to America just because people were nicer there when there were already Jews living in Israel. You get to draw country lines around where people live, but you don't get to move people to fit the lines you want.


Haha, that's a laugh. Israel is an artificial country created explicitly so Jews could travel there for safe haven. The whole concept was built around moving people to fit the lines they wanted (or more spefically, allowing them to move to the created country.)

What you're saying doesn't even make any sense - why is it okay to relocate Jews to the middle east to fill your new country, but not to America?
Bdthemag: "I don't always GM, but when I do I prefer to put my player's in situations that include pain and torture. Stay creative my friends."

Bayobeasts - the Pokemon: Orthoclase project.

zmatt
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby zmatt » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:39 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:I'm not Israeli.


Really? my bad, I thought you were.

sourmìlk wrote:Not true. If the Palestinians were pushed out by inevitable terrors of war, and many of them were, then it is absolutely the fault of whoever started that war.


Ah but, they don't care if it was an Arab instigated conflict. Their justification goes beyond that. The leader of Hamas wants Israel to stop existing, so arguing who started it is of little concern. We are way past that.


sourmìlk wrote:So, I wasn't sure of why you brought the PLO up, so thank you for clarifying. That aside, potentially accusing the Israelis of ethnic cleansing is somewhat worse than not giving praise to Israel.


Pretty sure I didn't claim the Israelis were committing ethnic cleaning. I kept in the part about the cause being a point of contention so people would show I'm trying to be as objective as possible. Again the debate over who started it doesn't matter. You speak as if proving the Israelis didn't start it would make Hamas and the PLO at large say, "oh my bad, we thought you started it, we take everything back." Yeah. Right. Again, it has gone way beyond that point. We need to talk about how to end it, not why or how it started.
clockworkmonk wrote:Except for Warren G. Harding. Fuck that guy.

User avatar
mosc
Doesn't care what you think.
Posts: 5401
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 3:03 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby mosc » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:43 pm UTC

Griffin wrote:Haha, that's a laugh. Israel is an artificial country created explicitly so Jews could travel there for safe haven. The whole concept was built around moving people to fit the lines they wanted (or more spefically, allowing them to move to the created country.)

What you're saying doesn't even make any sense - why is it okay to relocate Jews to the middle east to fill your new country, but not to America?

This made me nauseous. You seriously need to open your mind and try to understand the situation even remotely before you try to talk about it again. Please, this is so much intolerance it's hard to understate. Jews have lived in the region we now call Israel for well over 3,000 years. It's not just another piece of dirt, it's also the center of their religious lives. You call them Jews because they are religious people and then you ask them to move to the middle of nowhere, completely ignoring their long standing ties to a region dating back to the dawn of written history.

Your statement wouldn't be any less intolerant if you said something like "religion is dumb, who cares where you live. All people who care where they live are idiots. They should live where I tell them and be thankful that I allow them to live there in the first place". We do that to cattle, not humans.
Title: It was given by the XKCD moderators to me because they didn't care what I thought (I made some rantings, etc). I care what YOU think, the joke is forums.xkcd doesn't care what I think.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:44 pm UTC

Griffin wrote:
You're missing the point of what I said: it wouldn't make sense to relocate the Jews to America just because people were nicer there when there were already Jews living in Israel. You get to draw country lines around where people live, but you don't get to move people to fit the lines you want.


Haha, that's a laugh. Israel is an artificial country created explicitly so Jews could travel there for safe haven. The whole concept was built around moving people to fit the lines they wanted (or more spefically, allowing them to move to the created country.)

What you're saying doesn't even make any sense - why is it okay to relocate Jews to the middle east to fill your new country, but not to America?


It's not okay to relocate Jews to fill your country, it's okay to allow Jews to relocate themselves to fill your country. Your proposal suggested forcefully relocating people.

zmatt wrote:Ah but, they don't care if it was an Arab instigated conflict. Their justification goes beyond that. The leader of Hamas wants Israel to stop existing, so arguing who started it is of little concern. We are way past that.


Are we really though? Hamas would be attacking somebody for something that they didn't do.

Pretty sure I didn't claim the Israelis were committing ethnic cleaning. I kept in the part about the cause being a point of contention so people would show I'm trying to be as objective as possible. Again the debate over who started it doesn't matter. You speak as if proving the Israelis didn't start it would make Hamas and the PLO at large say, "oh my bad, we thought you started it, we take everything back." Yeah. Right. Again, it has gone way beyond that point. We need to talk about how to end it, not why or how it started.

Hah, no, I don't suppose to change the opinions of the PLO. They may actually know what happened and not care. Also, taking the middle ground isn't objectivity if one side is objectively correct. But as for ending it: terrorism needs to stop. Israel's tried negotiations (which didn't work, as the intifadas show), they've tried force (which inhibits but does not halt the violence), and they've tried just plain leaving the Palestinians alone (which Hamas showed doesn't work), so after having tried that it's really up to the Palestinian leadership to end the violence.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Griffin
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:46 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Griffin » Thu Apr 14, 2011 7:52 pm UTC

me wrote:I still think we should have just given them a nice chunk of the US or something

sourmilk wrote:Unfortunately, that would have required relocating 1 million Jews who lived in Israel over to the USA.

me wrote:Haven't several million already relocated to Isreal though? I mean, honestly, I think may have been worth the price long term. And they wouldn't have been forced to relocate, just had it offered to them "Here is a place for you", just like no one was forced to relocate to the CURRENT Isreal.

sourmìlk wrote:It's not okay to relocate Jews to fill your country, it's okay to allow Jews to relocate themselves to fill your country. Your proposal suggested forcefully relocating people.


I am boggled by your response. Do you really just make up things to argue against? I suggest "We should have set aside a chunk of the US to be their safe haven", then YOU suggest doing so would force someone (who?) to relocate a million Jews. Then I explicitly say "no, no one would force them to anything" and you continue on your little tangent?
Bdthemag: "I don't always GM, but when I do I prefer to put my player's in situations that include pain and torture. Stay creative my friends."

Bayobeasts - the Pokemon: Orthoclase project.

zmatt
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby zmatt » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:16 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Are we really though? Hamas would be attacking somebody for something that they didn't do.


Yes I think we are way past that.

sourmìlk wrote:Hah, no, I don't suppose to change the opinions of the PLO. They may actually know what happened and not care. Also, taking the middle ground isn't objectivity if one side is objectively correct. But as for ending it: terrorism needs to stop. Israel's tried negotiations (which didn't work, as the intifadas show), they've tried force (which inhibits but does not halt the violence), and they've tried just plain leaving the Palestinians alone (which Hamas showed doesn't work), so after having tried that it's really up to the Palestinian leadership to end the violence.



I can't speak for the Israelis or the Palestinians in general, but going off my interactions with rational people in every day life I am going to assume that the majority aren't too concerned about the politics behind the conflict and just want a safe home and a steady job. I think the problem lies with Palestinian extremists who are too caught up on the concept of Palestine as a country and amongst some of them antisemitism, and in the Israeli government a trigger happy stance that thinks that preemptive strikes and Mossad operations are the solution to everything and that they owe the world nothing. Israel is definitely not without blame and i honestly think that both sides are equally to blame in this situation. But as I have said before childishly arguing over how was there first or who displaced who or whose attack was merely retribution for another gets you nowhere. It doesn't fucking matter. They will still fight and hate each other. Revenge only begets revenge. If the Israelis and Palestinians really want peace (and I have my doubts) then they need to grow up and learn to bury the hatchet.
clockworkmonk wrote:Except for Warren G. Harding. Fuck that guy.

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby nitePhyyre » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:49 pm UTC

mosc wrote:You seriously need to open your mind and try to understand the situation even remotely before you try to talk about it again. Please, this is so much intolerance it's hard to understate. Jews have lived in the region we now call Israel for well over 3,000 years.

You seriously need to read the fucking thread, instead of spouting bullshit.

Spoiler:
sourmìlk wrote:So, after the destruction of the temple, Masada, and then later the Bar Kochba revolt, nearly all of the Jews were kicked out of Palestine. Most went to places in Europe or elsewhere in the Middle East where they integrated with the cultures with varying degrees of success. For quite a long time there was a large and successful Jewish community in Baghdad, and there were many places in Europe where the Jews were considered part of the culture. Obviously there were times and places where things didn't work out so well, e.g. the Spanish Inquisition, various pogroms, etc. In the mid-19th century, during the enlightenment, Jews realized that they were never going to be fully accepted into European culture. The soon-to-follow pogroms didn't help either. So, some of them emigrated to the USA, and others emigrated to Israel, which was a virtually ungoverned and abandoned area of the Ottoman empire. And the rest is history...


Zamfir wrote:I thought the standard history was that most people stayed after the rebellions, and their ancestors eventually went up in the wider population and eventually converted to Islam. There must have been lots of jews in Roman Judea, those didn't all ship in and move out. At least someone at the time would have mentioned it if almost everyone had left the area.

In those days, there were already large Jewish populations elsewhere. When Judaism was oppressed in the former Judea, those other communities became the main Jewish community. But that doesn't mean the Jews from Judea literally moved away to form that community.

If you have issue with the fact on the table, you are more than welcome to bring up citations to show why the facts everyone else is agreeing to is wrong. If you are too lazy or ignorant to be bothered, don't fucking post. Especially with your heavy handed moral righteousnesses bullshit.
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:50 pm UTC

Griffin wrote:
me wrote:I still think we should have just given them a nice chunk of the US or something

sourmilk wrote:Unfortunately, that would have required relocating 1 million Jews who lived in Israel over to the USA.

me wrote:Haven't several million already relocated to Isreal though? I mean, honestly, I think may have been worth the price long term. And they wouldn't have been forced to relocate, just had it offered to them "Here is a place for you", just like no one was forced to relocate to the CURRENT Isreal.

sourmìlk wrote:It's not okay to relocate Jews to fill your country, it's okay to allow Jews to relocate themselves to fill your country. Your proposal suggested forcefully relocating people.


I am boggled by your response. Do you really just make up things to argue against? I suggest "We should have set aside a chunk of the US to be their safe haven", then YOU suggest doing so would force someone (who?) to relocate a million Jews. Then I explicitly say "no, no one would force them to anything" and you continue on your little tangent?


You put my responses against the wrong quotes. You said "why is it okay to relocate Jews to the middle east...?" etc. and I responded that it's not. Setting aside a chunk in the USA for Jews wouldn't require forcefully relocating Jews unless you expected any Jews to live there. They weren't going to move from Israel.

zmatt wrote:I can't speak for the Israelis or the Palestinians in general, but going off my interactions with rational people in every day life I am going to assume that the majority aren't too concerned about the politics behind the conflict and just want a safe home and a steady job. I think the problem lies with Palestinian extremists who are too caught up on the concept of Palestine as a country and amongst some of them antisemitism, and in the Israeli government a trigger happy stance that thinks that preemptive strikes and Mossad operations are the solution to everything and that they owe the world nothing. Israel is definitely not without blame and i honestly think that both sides are equally to blame in this situation. But as I have said before childishly arguing over how was there first or who displaced who or whose attack was merely retribution for another gets you nowhere. It doesn't fucking matter. They will still fight and hate each other. Revenge only begets revenge. If the Israelis and Palestinians really want peace (and I have my doubts) then they need to grow up and learn to bury the hatchet.


I've explained the problem with this reasoning. You seem to forget that Israel hasn't only tried violence. If they had, I might agree with you. No, they've tried negotiations, which lead to the second and first intifadas, they've tried leaving them alone, which lead to the rise of power of Hamas, and they've tried force, which suppresses but does not eliminate the attacks. Israel has tried not responding and it hasn't worked. It is up to the Palestinians to stop their aggression, not Israel to stop defending itself.

As for assigning equal blame: Hamas unprovokedly targets and kills civilians, then they use their own civilians as shields to ward off a response. Israel has only ever responded in self-defense, and most of the time they don't even respond. How can you possibly assign equal blame to Israel and a terrorist group?

nitePhyyre: your insults and obscenities are not an appropriate way of expressing your disagreement with mosc. Please don't do that again. And by the way, he isn't wrong. I said that most Jews left Israel, not all of them. He was absolutely correct in saying that Jews had lived in Israel for over 3000 years.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Griffin
Posts: 1363
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:46 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby Griffin » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:07 pm UTC

You put my responses against the wrong quotes. You said "why is it okay to relocate Jews to the middle east...?" etc. and I responded that it's not. Setting aside a chunk in the USA for Jews wouldn't require forcefully relocating Jews unless you expected any Jews to live there. They weren't going to move from Israel.


You need to reread, I think. You are the one who brought up relocation, period. At no point did I suggest forcefully relocating anyone.

And if they weren't going to move from the place that was at the time not actually Israel that is their own problem, similar to how those jews who chose to continue to live in the US do so of their own volition, and that is their problem (and in both cases, is not actually a problem).

Israel, the modern one, not the pretend one where these jews lived before it created, not the historical one that was destroyed a long time ago, could have been founded elsewhere and still worked.
Bdthemag: "I don't always GM, but when I do I prefer to put my player's in situations that include pain and torture. Stay creative my friends."

Bayobeasts - the Pokemon: Orthoclase project.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:11 pm UTC

Griffin wrote:
You put my responses against the wrong quotes. You said "why is it okay to relocate Jews to the middle east...?" etc. and I responded that it's not. Setting aside a chunk in the USA for Jews wouldn't require forcefully relocating Jews unless you expected any Jews to live there. They weren't going to move from Israel.


You need to reread, I think. You are the one who brought up relocation, period. At no point did I suggest forcefully relocating anyone.

Your proposition heavily implied relocation. You said that there shouldn't be a Jewish state in Israel, but rather in America. Then question then is, where do the Jews in Israel go?

Israel, the modern one, not the pretend one where these jews lived before it created, not the historical one that was destroyed a long time ago, could have been founded elsewhere and still worked.

It couldn't have been founded elsewhere in 1948 and still worked because there were too many Jews living in Israel.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Legitimacy of Israeli Land Claims

Postby nitePhyyre » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:58 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:You put my responses against the wrong quotes. You said "why is it okay to relocate Jews to the middle east...?" etc. and I responded that it's not. Setting aside a chunk in the USA for Jews wouldn't require forcefully relocating Jews unless you expected any Jews to live there. They weren't going to move from Israel.
I think Griffin is talking more about the 11, 000, 000 Jews living spread across the world at the turn of the last century, not the odd 78,000 living in Israel at the time.

sourmìlk wrote:I've explained the problem with this reasoning. You seem to forget that Israel hasn't only tried violence. If they had, I might agree with you. No, they've tried negotiations, which lead to the second and first intifadas, they've tried leaving them alone, which lead to the rise of power of Hamas, and they've tried force, which suppresses but does not eliminate the attacks. Israel has tried not responding and it hasn't worked. It is up to the Palestinians to stop their aggression, not Israel to stop defending itself.
Citation needed.

sourmìlk wrote:As for assigning equal blame: Hamas unprovokedly targets and kills civilians, then they use their own civilians as shields to ward off a response. Israel has only ever responded in self-defense, and most of the time they don't even respond. How can you possibly assign equal blame to Israel and a terrorist group?
Because both their hands are bloody and dirty. From Le Monde Diplomatic:
This way of describing Israeli recourse to force ignores the foundational issue: were the attacks in any legal sense “defensive” in character in the first place? An inquiry into the surrounding circumstances shows an absence of any kind of defensive necessity: a temporary ceasefire between Israel and Hamas that had been in effect since 19 July 2008 had succeeded in reducing cross-border violence virtually to zero; Hamas consistently offered to extend the ceasefire, even to a longer period of ten years; the breakdown of the ceasefire is not primarily the result of Hamas rocket fire, but came about mainly as a result of an Israeli air attack on 4 November that killed six Hamas fighters in Gaza.
This^, by the way says the exact opposite of what you claimed above.
These two sides should not be viewed as equally responsible for the recent events. Israel initiated the Gaza campaign without adequate legal foundation or just cause, and was responsible for causing the overwhelming proportion of devastation and the entirety of civilian suffering. Israeli reliance on a military approach to defeat or punish Gaza was intrinsically “criminal”, and as such demonstrative of both violations of the law of war and the commission of crimes against humanity.

There is another element that strengthens the allegation of aggression. The population of Gaza had been subjected to a punitive blockade for 18 months when Israel launched its attacks. This blockade was widely, and correctly, viewed as collective punishment in a form that violated Articles 33 and 55 of the Fourth Geneva Convention governing the conduct of an occupying power in relation to the civilian population living under occupation. This policy was itself condemned as a crime against humanity, as well as a grave breach of international humanitarian law.

From flotilla raids, to cast lead and goldstone, to blockades. Israel hands are just as dirty as anybody else's.

sourmìlk wrote:nitePhyyre: your insults and obscenities are not an appropriate way of expressing your disagreement with mosc. Please don't do that again. And by the way, he isn't wrong. I said that most Jews left Israel, not all of them. He was absolutely correct in saying that Jews had lived in Israel for over 3000 years.
You are right, I apologize to everyone who isn't mosc for disrupting what is more or less civil discussion.
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests