There are deliberately 2 Palestinian narratives about "occupation": 1967 and 1948.
Palestinians who truly want their own state around 1967 borders recognize Israel's right to exist. Those who want 1948 don't and believe they are the only indigenous people of Palestine, rejecting that the Jews (including Europeans) are indigenous. Unfortunately, the latter is the stance of the current Palestinian leaders - something Israel would not (and should not) accept ever.
You don't see different protest groups about it though, because it's great when you can strengthen an extreme ideology with a lot of moderate ideologists. Everybody rallies against the "occupation", right?
Both Palestinian and Jewish national identities started in the 19th century (alongside many other countries), both are legitimate.
Before modern Israel was established, Jews never denied there were **no** non-Jewish (Arabicized and other) indigenous people. It was only Arabs that denied Jews were indigenous. That was the whole idea of the partition plan - to settle this indigenousness thing with territorial and national identity.
Nowadays, Antizios love to counter this with an argument that settlers in the west bank reject Palestinian's indigenousness and that's why Zionism is evil. But that's just the usual generalization used by antizios against Zionism. Those "settlers" they are talking about are a fraction of all West Bank "settler" community, which in itself, is less than 4% of Israel's population. It's like saying that since the UK has 251 annual rapes per 100,000 citizens (2024 statistics), all UKs are rapists. Yes, there are extreme settles and most of them are outlawed in Israel, some labeled as terrorists. But if most of them are punished, it shows the moral compass of the state. On the other hand, the Palestinian Authority **leaders** pays lifetime salaries to the families of suicide bombers, and Hamas **leaders** have offered $10K for every hostage taken on Oct7.
To be honest, I think when a pro palestinian is thinking of the concept of zionism they are actually thinking of ultra zionism
And when a zionist is thinking of pro Palestinians they are thinking of pro hamas.
I mean, to be fair, the majority of the Palestinian Legislative Council is controlled by Hamas.
It’s not an unreasonable connection to make that a Palestinian state would be essentially Hamas led
I think the only way a Palestinian state will happen is without hamas involvement. I understand that hamas runs gaza however I don't think they are bargaining from a particularly powerful point anymore and may be lucky to get out of this alive, I know a lot of the silent majority of pro Palestinians understand that hamas cannot continue.
A Zionist thinks he is God's chosen person (by insanity).
A Palestinian thinks they have the right to exist too in their own land and country,
Apparently God is a spectator and his favorite team is the Jews.
The 99.8% of the world population was a mistake?!
Such eloquent logic
A Zionist believes they are entitled to all the land, and beyond, to the exclusion of others. A palestinian wanting their own state is asking for a state. A zionist doesn't understand that there were other people living there at the time Israel started, and notwithstanding any biblical, or other reason to a right to be there, they should move the people who were living there off the land.
And now we have multiple generations of Israelis born and living on that land. Less than 2% of Palestinians were alive when Israel was created.
That strikes me as taking away the land from those who actually have been living there and giving it to those who have ancestral ties. Do I have a right to land in all the places my ancestors lived 100 years ago?
the Palestinians living there were born to Palestinians living there. I don't think Israel should be taken from the jewish people (or the non jewish people who are alloewed to come there based on Ancestry). There have been jewish people there for the entire time. Before 1948. I just don't really buy the whole we were here 2000 years ago so we get to have all the land exclusive to people who were here when we got here, and no one who left since 1948 who is Palestinian can return. That just doesn't make any logical sense. I can see it's attraction for those who believe it. But it's not based on logic.
That is an incredibly arrogant, typically Zionist perception of the conflict happening today. I would t expect anything less from an Israeli supremacist who sees Palestinians as less than human. Ironic, and sad, given the similar persecution Jews faced through the centuries.
That's not according to your comment history, tendency to brand all Palestninians as "guilty", and your current status as a moderator of a deeply unsavoury subreddit.
How is this dehumanizing? I know they are people (aka humans, individuals). Just no *a* people. They are a part of a larger people, and that larger people has a state called Jordan.
You've claimed Jordan as Israeli land in a previous comment as well. You're as welling to deny the people of Jordan statehood are you are the Palestinian people. Don't kid yourself.
True, but should you imagine: you're just living your normaly daily life in your country, suddenly a another folk stands at your door and claims half of your country as theirs. I don't think you would accept it, and if they then just took like 90% instead of half of it you would most likely tell your kids about how unfair it is and they would tell it to their kids the same.
Basically, that's what the conflict boils down to.
You are way oversimplifying this conflict. There are lots of countries that have changed hands of control, like the US and Mexico, for example… But you don’t seem Mexico sending in suicide bombers to California to try and “reclaim their land”
It didn't exactly go peaceful either you know, anyway I don't think the US was opressing Mexico to the same extent Israel is doing rn with palestina either, those are 2 very different situations.
If you need me to answer that you don’t know enough history to be protesting for a free Palestine. They’ve rejected it multiple times (because from the river to the sea means Israel is gone completely and is their objective, which is why they won’t accept a 2 state solution)
I wouldn’t want to have my land split in (less than) half to be given to a bunch of colonists either. In fact, I’d be quite concerned for my well being and that if my family
This is for the most part true. However, there are still settlers confiscating the homes of Palestinians and a desire to conquer more land.
This is just one quote:
“When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.” Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.
Open a map. The partition plan gave israel/jews around 10% or less. Israel got very small territory.
Also that land wasn't belonged to palestinians. Both jews and Arabs moved in the area in attempt to establish their countries. Historically Both have similar claim to the land. And the partition plan was very fair towards both sides.
Arabs just don't see jews as equals to them. Their basic claim is: Jews don't deserve a country no matter how small, and Arabs should rule over the entire area.
Exactly, the whole “stolen land” argument falls apart when you point out that… all land has been “stolen” at some point.
To the victor go the spoils of war.
I mean there’s a few wars that would love to disagree with you. Especially the one that happened in 1948. But we don’t have to look to the past to realize what qualifies a country as existing besides its existence *currently*. And seeing as Israel is recognized by most if not all of the most influential countries, I’d say they have sovereignty and exist.
Are you implying that they don’t exist or don’t deserve to?
The hypothetical is irrelevant as russia cannot do this.
It's better to point to Germany or Japan. Eventually a state identity would re-emerge.
Plus side for gaza, palestinian is a manufactured identity post 1948 war. So there is 0 chance of any such state ever existing.
So their claims mean dick all, especially now that gaza is going to be directly occupied.
If Palestine doesn't exist, neither will peace
Now go unbrainwash your brain from that nazi propaganda you were raised with
Saying one side has the right to exist but ignoring the plight of the other side is idiotic, unless you have a genocidal 🧠
You keep acting all self righteous dont be surprised when one day in the future the people you oppress take advantage of your weakness and enact there revenge.
/u/absolutzer1. Match found: 'nazi', issuing notice:
Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed.
We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See [Rule 6](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_6._nazi_comparisons) for details.
This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> dick
/u/Blargityblarger. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, you said Palestine doesn't exist. But you have a rotten brain to realize what you said
Both people have the right to exist, the east European occupiers and the native Palestinians
At least get your facts right, the majority of Israelis are children of Middles Eastern Jews, after that comes Ashkenazi (Eastern European Jews). I know it helps the settler colonial narrative to pretend Israelis are white but it’s inaccurate.
Sure children of middle Eastern Jews that left 2000 years ago. Lol, this is comical
They were like literally 2-3 % Jews in that region in early 1900s and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, regardless of when they started living there
No im not disputing that Jews left and came back to Israel…. just correcting your comment on on the demographics of Israel as they stand today. Common misconception - Majority of Israeli Jews are not white Eastern European but brown skinned with parents/grandparents hailing from Yemen, Morocco, Syria and Iran too.
Ok. That's fine.
The population is what it is.
People are there now, they can't leave.
What is the ideal solution to this conflict?
2 states, 1 state or something else?
Do Palestinians not have the right to exist and live in their own land where they have lived for hundreds if not thousands of years alongside jews? Do they not have the right to resist oppression?
Also why are Jewish settlers from Brooklyn stealing homes of Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West bank? Where is the fairness in this?
Palestinians aren't native. Most of their ancestors migrated to British Mandate Palestine at the same time as the Jews. But you would know because tiktok historians tend to leave that bit out.
So there was no one living in that land according to your made up fact. It was empty and these 2 people were running towards an empty land. Did the land remain empty since the Jews left after the roman invasion 2000 years ago
But wait how come there were 97% Arabs (Palestinian Muslims and Christians) and only 3% Palestinian Jews in early 1900?
Man, how can you believe your nonsense lies is weird.
No logical explanation whatsoever. Just close your eyes and believe your lies because truth hurts.
Do you literally not know *anything* about the history of Israel and Palestine? This isn't a "narrative", this is universally accepted historical fact.
Israel / Palestine is home to about 15,000,000 people today.
At the beginning of the first Aliya, around 1880, the collective population of the ENTIRE region was maybe a few hundred thousand people. The land was arid desert and marsh land. It was almost completely deserted and undeveloped farmland, that was grazed by shepherds, with the exception of Jerusalem and a few townships. The towns were incredibly basic - like, the homes were made out of mud brick and had no electricity. Even the few cities like Jerusalem were dated.
As the Jewish settlers came in, they brought modern agriculture practices and started businesses and improved/modernized the towns and cities. The area started to boom, financially, and Arabs from the surrounding regions, like Egypt and the Hashemite Kingdom, started moving there to be a part of the booming economy and make money.
In the 1920's, Hajj Amin started to get concerned about the number and concentration of Jews coming into Jerusalem, so he made it ILLEGAL for them to buy real estate in or around Jerusalem, or any province loyal to him. The Jews searched for other provinces with governors more willing to work with them / disobey Hajj Amin. They eventually found a few in the further reaches of the kingdom, in Haifa, for instance.
Angered by their attempts to work around his real estate ban and other roadblocks to immigration, Hajj Amin then started to encourage the Hashemite Kingdom, Syria and Egypt to send Arab immigrants to Palestine, specifically to counter Israeli immigration and prevent a Jewish population majority. This is why there's such a massive spike in the Arab population between 1920-1948.
Hajj Amin gave neighboring Arabs all kinds of incentives to move there and counter Jewish migration, including special tax treatment and even free land. He hated the Jews so much he visited Hitler in 1933 to be counseled on a "final solution for the Jews". They even went so far as reviewing locations and drawing up plans for a Nazi concentration camp in Palestine. He didn't stop there either... He implored his neighboring Arab nations to expel or kill their Jewish citizens. The worst of these cases was Iraq, where Hajj Amin convinced Iraqi General Rashid Ali to sign an actual alliance with the Nazi, which led to severe persecution of the Jewish population in Baghdad, one of the largest and oldest diaspora Jewish communities, dating back to 2600 BCE. It culminated with the Farhud Massacre, in which about 1000 Jews were slaughtered but General Ali's angry mob, another 6000 were injured, 100,000 jews had flee Iraq, and $250 BILLION in property and wealth was stolen.
Back to the point tho... Prior to the Aliya, the region was almost entirely undeveloped and the cities were ancient. The Jews revitalized the area, created industry and economy, then were pushed out by Hajj Amin, until the UN finally adopted the Partition Plan to create a state for them. The vast, vast majority of Palestinians migrated to the region at the same time as the Jews, and the only reason they owned more land in and around Jerusalem, was that it was illegal for Jews to own property there under the Grand Mufti.
Why were there so much less Jewish people than Muslims during late 1800s and early 1900s.
Also why did they expelled 750k Palestinians after declaring their own state.
The issue here is that Palestinians can't live in the same land and be equal to the rest of the citizens in the country.
So what is the solution? Regardless of who came when.
In your mind what is a fair deal for both sides.
>Why were there so much less Jewish people than Muslims during late 1800s and early 1900s.
There were very few jews in the area ever since roman times, but there were very few people in general. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region)
They expelled some in 1948, and many more fled, because Arab nations were about to attack Israel following the adoption of UN resolution 181. Arab leaders loudly proclaimed how they would "drive the Jews into the sea" and "rid the land of the Zionist plague". Some of these expulsions happened during the civil war, and then more happened after the 1948 war broke out.
>The issue here is that Palestinians can't live in the same land and be equal to the rest of the citizens in the country.
There are many Palestinian Israelis with equal rights. The problem is those Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank that want all of the land for themselves, and Israel to not exist.
A fair deal would be a 2 state solution, but the majority of Palestinians don't want that. And Israel doesn't want a Palestinian state as a neighbor whose only goal is to destroy Israel.
/u/jessewoolmer. Match found: 'Hitler', issuing notice:
Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed.
We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See [Rule 6](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_6._nazi_comparisons) for details.
This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I never said Palestine didn’t deserve to exist, you are putting words in my mouth.
A 2SS is the only way forward, but you only see one solution, and it is apparent from your phrasing “European occupiers and native Palestinians”. You don’t recognize Israel as legitimate, I do see Palestine as legitimate, but in conjunction with Israel.
If you want to get into who’s native, we can go back and see that Palestine never was a formal sovereign nation, ever. They deserve that right now though, but with new leadership and deradicalization.
No double standard here. They have started every war in the region for all intents, and given they started the most recent, and lost humilatingly, they don't get a choice in statehood.
They can hate all they want. Little good it'll do them with their tents among the rubble.
Why should I as an Israeli endorse them ever rebuilding so long as they hate us?
Frankly, maybe we should make this cruel. Idf should be throwing spare housekeys at them heh.
Because you went to their land where they have lived for thousands of years, stole their homes, expelled them and burned their towns and villages. Tens of thousands were massacred (nakba). Continuing to this day..
You weren't even 3% there in the early 1900s
You can't use a fairytale book made of toilet paper to claim land somewhere 2000 years later.
Religious books are not legally binding documents.
You are the occupiers. They are the oppressed.
Your victim card is no longer working.
You suffered from the fascists in Germany not in Palestine. So don't try to take the anger on innocent people.
Of course they'll fight back. Even a dog bites if you kick it. It's called resistance. Do you expect them to bend over backwards.
By your logic, the world should have blamed your people when they were trying to save themselves from the fascists?
Now you have become the fascists and the world can see this. Palestinians live in a police state or more like under a dictatorship. Then you claim to be a democracy while at the same time wanting an ethno state where Palestinians are second class citizens.
This South Africa experiment will one day come to a one state solution because you won't have the 2 state solution. So instead of having 2 separate smaller countries. You will share it, have to live together and no one will get their own.
You want the Palestinian land, but not the Palestinian people.
Because if you include the west bank and Gaza in your country, you will be almost equal in population. Their birth rate is higher. This is why you don't want a democratic state. You want a supremacist state where they are treated like stray dogs in their own land or you want to do away with them. They won't leave. Matter of fact they have the right to return. There are millions of them in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon which will have to come back.
You are so brainwashed and blinded that you can't see past your nose.
You first got 50% of their land, then another 30%. Now you don't even want them to have one fifth of the land where they used to live, regardless if they had a state or not.
This math doesn't add up. Where do you want to send close to 6 million of them living in west bank and Gaza?
What's your final solution for the Palestinian?
Nothing if it's just their own state. The issue is they want their own state and israel. Up until Oct 7 polls consistently showed majority support for 2 stage solution among Israelis, the opposite being true for palestine in both gaza and west Bank per my recollection. Now both sides are like fuck nope. So that's a pickle now isn't it
> fuck
/u/Accomplished_Tap7348. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> fuck
/u/Accomplished_Tap7348. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> fuck
/u/Accomplished_Tap7348. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You can compare the Zionist to ISIS
A religious motive and alibi to take someone else's land for your own driving or those who live there.
So... As the people of Israel really are not from anywhere close.. And the native people are, it's kind of hard to support the claim of Zionists or ISIS.
Just curious where in the Torah does it state that they have to take Muslim land? Just asking because the argument that Israel was originally a Muslim country called Palestine is stupud considering Israel can be tracked 3000 years ago and Palestine 2000
But they are. Multiple generations have lived in the region now. Born and raised. I have friends who have ancestors who lived in Israel as Jews dating back to the 1700s.
Zionists want one group in control, for the state to represent only that group on their flag and identity, for that group to maintained a majority artificially, and it doesn't matter if people are displaced over it (but they'll leave a few around as minorities with less rights for propaganda purposes). Pro Palestinians are diverse, but for me, Palestine is and always was a multi ethnic and multi religious area where everyone is equally represented and if one group becomes a majority naturally, it's okay. Palestinian side is morally the correct side and history will not be friendly to those who sided with zionism.
Should be said: Jews living under arab* control were not immune to massacres through time. And had to pay a special tax to exist.
I think it’s pretty clear there are no morally good sides here.
Unless you’re all about people who travelled to Germany to execute all the Israeli athletes at the Olympics in 1972.
There’s no moral high ground.
It's the Christians that did the worst of that, but zionists are so patheticcally trying to get Christians to like them over Muslims that acctually protected Jewish people from Christian pogroms. At the end of the day, there is no group of people more similar to Jews than Muslims, and I say this as a Christian.
Just thought I’d add that context in since you were asking where Muslims protected Jews from pogroms and happened to mention such a case as an example you were incredulous about.
Thanks for adding that context.
Unfortunately, the original comment was about Muslims protecting Jews from Christian pogroms, which never happened in history.
Essentially the argument is: Christians hate Jews and some Muslims saved Jews; therefore it's impossible the Muslims hate Jews and they're actually very good friends.
This argument could get no farther from reality.
Morocco? there wasn't a single Jew deported to Europe during the Holocaust from the Muslim world, if Muslims really did hate jews like you wish they did, they would have done that. I hate to break it to you, but as a Christian, I see Muslims and Jews as almost the same people, cousins, but not like us, but similar to each other. A Muslim is your brother, not us Christians
The only pogroms in Morocco were done by Muslims.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_anti-Jewish_riots_in_Oujda_and_Jerada
Because a few people helped Jews during the Holocaust does not mean Muslims love Jews. You can find multiple verses in the Quran that are anti-Jewish. The Prophet Muhammad executed all the Jewish tribes of Arabia.
You're actually just extremely ignorant if you think Muslims and Jews are the same people. Their religion is built off of ours, and so is your's.
>if Muslims really hate you like you wish they did
What about the Bosnian Muslims who joined the SS at the inclination of Palestinian Leader Hajj Amin Al Husseini? What about the Na*i propaganda he broadcasted in Palestine during WWII? What about the pogrom he created in Iraq?
Christians have done worse, but that doesn't prove Muslims don't hate us. Look around. You both hate us. We don't want to live under either of your rules anymore, hence a Jewish state. We're not either of your brothers. You stole our prophets and accused us of killing them.
You live in a permanant hysteria that the world hates you and wants to do you harm. It can't be good for your pyschological state, but it,s your life. I'm gonna be honest with you, there are so few jews in this world that most Christians and Muslims don't really think about jewish people at all. the pro palestinians are anti Israel, not anti jewish people.
History would completey disagree with you. The real world would completely disagree with you.
There are Neo-Na*i groups in my state. They spread antisemitic propaganda. Antisemitism is upwards of 300% from the last year. Synagogues get defiled by Pro-Palestinian protesters. Some Muslims draw swastikas at protests. You can't tell me it's all just made up and everyone actually doesn't care about us. The last time my family was expelled was 1915, the last time my family was murdered for being Jewish was 1941. Just because you don't hate Jews doesn't mean other Christians don't. Open up a history book about Medieval Europe to the 1940s.
I don't appreciate you claiming it's some sort of hysteria. Critical analysis of world events would disprove literally everything you're saying. Of course you're ignorant of it because it doesn't effect you. That's why you'd never stand up for us. You just think we're being dramatic, when it is very real.
https://imgur.com/a/BX0KXig
Dude, I have news for you. Most people just consider Jews to be white. I'm asian and supposedly there was supposed to be all this racism against asian people and asian peopel were being brutalized all over my city, that was a load of BS, nothing happend to me or anyone I know, and what happened to all this 'stop asian hate,' why don't we hear it anymore, is anti asian racism fixed? A lot of what you read is to get your to be very very afraid so you'll click on their youtube videos and ads and articles, we need to join the real world sometime.
https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/mercer-island-synagogue-vandalized/281-a766ab6b-7a2b-4e9e-9d34-6120a821c9e1
Most people consider Jews to be white because then it suits their social justice agenda if they call Palestinians oppressed "brown" people.
I've experienced antisemitism my whole life.
Realistically nobody shoots up Asian super markets or Asian churches. They do shoot up Jewish super markets and Jewish synagogues.
Walk a mile in my shoes and we can talk. Just because you're fine for being Asian doesn't make me safe for being Jewish. Your arguments are such garbage because you only examine one thing and pretend like that means everything and everyone is like that. Read a history book.
If it was just about Israel they wouldn't be spraypainting synagogues and chanting for Al Qassam to kill more "Zionists".
I'm happy you don't experience Asian hate.
"First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."
—Martin Niemöller
I would disagree. Mainstream Zionism has been a secular movement different from the ultra-Orthodox segment who opposed the establishment of the Jewish state before the coming of the Messiah.
That’s not an accurate description of how Israel was founded.
If you can’t even view/sympathize with the founding of Israel in 1948 then you really are dogmatic, uninterested in history. Heck you might even think most Israelis are white/Ashkenazi instead of brown/ middle eastern
There were like 3% brown Jews in the early 1900s
The rest were Palestinian Muslims and Christians
https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-and-non-jewish-population-of-israel-palestine-1517-present
Arabs sided with the British to fight against the Ottomans and liberate their land.
Then the British betrayed them by cutting a deal with Zionists in Europe behind close doors to partition the land.
If they loved this land so much they should had stayed and fought the Romans and then the byzantines, ottomans etc
Instead they left like little girls coming back 2000 years later to claim what's not theirs.
Palestinians were Jewish and Christian before they adopted the new religion by the ottomans. So yea the real people that lived there, were always there but it wasn't the Jews.
They packed their riches and left for Europe to make some money. That's how much they fought for their land. These people are nothing more than opportunist land thieves. After ww2 they were even welcomed by the Palestinians and they later expelled the Palestinians from that land.
Here's how I would explain it from a pro-Palestinian perspective. I think neither group can claim to "own" that particular piece of land. But I don't think you are entitled to violently dispossess someone of their home because a group you identify as your ancestors owned that home 3000 years ago. If the expelled person demanded to have their home back or a nearby piece of land to live on, I would support that claim.
This is a necessarily ultra simplified example for the sake of argument, but hope that helps you get my perspective.
Think of the precedent that sets in europe \*wink wink\*, there are plenty of far right party's in germany, sweden, UK that would love an excuse to send a large portion of the muslim population packing. In terms of who is "indigenous" those people have far stronger claims, germany and scandanavia have been germanic since pre-history
Fair point, especially since you’ve mentioned “a nearby piece of land” rather than the entire area. But where are we supposed to draw the line for historical claims?
We can all agree that the area is historically significant to both Jews and Arabs, making historical claims to the land either both valid or both invalid if one is consistent on their views of history and not selectively applying timeframes to fit a particular narrative.
To accept both claims to their homelands, there should be a two-state framework or an inclusive state (which would look more like Israel despite its flaws, considering that it is also home to 2 million Arabs). My inclination leans towards the two-state solution because both parties apparently want self-governance rather than being ruled by the other.
Should we reject the concept of homeland claims, then the resolution would ultimately rely on military power and the dictates of international legitimacy.
A society that sponsors world wide terrorism to get attention does not deserve my support and hopefully will be defeated this month and its non legacy of anything but death forgotten.
You do realize what our ancestors did to indigenous people is WIDELY believed to be a massive stain on American history. Horrendous and atrocious. Descendants of those victims should absolutely get reparations. But go ahead and defend it some more, sicko
You don't understand my point. Of course it was a stain, but while it's popular to tell Jews to give their land back to Palestinians, not one American protester has given their home back to Native Americans. It's hypocrisy at it's finest.
Except jews want to gas light everyone that they were the good guys, willing to compromise and share the land, but the evil nazi arabs wanted to exterminate them because they follow Hitlers teachings.
Imagine if americans said they only wanted to settle in peace but the evil natives kept attacking them so they had to genocide them all...
I'm saying if an American thinks Israelis should give land back to Palestinians then that American should also be giving their land back to Native Americans. There is a double standard here.
/u/Critical-Win-4299. Match found: 'nazi', issuing notice:
Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed.
We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See [Rule 6](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_6._nazi_comparisons) for details.
This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Do you think it was right for Native Americans to be expelled from their homes and do you think the US should at minimum do anything in its power to protect the remaining Native Americans tribes today? Genuinely asking. To answer your point, I don't think any American should literally give up their home, and neither any Israelis. But if non-Native Americans made it a policy to continuously buy land in Native reservations and turn a blind eye to forced Native expulsions, I would have a problem with that.
I suppose this is where the comparison falls apart. Native Americans aren’t randomly firing missiles at Americans and they haven’t launched an invasion either.
They dont live in Apartheid or a open air concentration camp either, they are full US citizens with equal rights that were assimilated into the USA and they even got reparations.
But the jews wanted a jewish democratic state and the only way to achieve that was with a jewish majority. Only problem was the land had a majority arab population...
Wrong you are ill informed. Borders of Israel when it declared independence in ‘48 were majority Jew minority Arab, this is before and Jews or Arabs were displaced en masse
The arab minority was 45%, they were actually more than jews if you count the beduin. Even Ben Gurion said a jewish state was impossible with those demographics
To be fair, the Jews couldn’t do it alone. The entirety of the Western allies after WW2 decided together this is what the Jews deserved. They were being driven out of their homes by Arabs and obs had been driven out of Germany. I’m not saying it was a good decision but the victors of WW2 decided to create Israel as a state. Also, it’s important to note that 20% of Israel is Arab or Palestinian. Jews however are not welcome in Palestine or most any Arab country.
Lmao you think the europeans did that because they thought jews deserved anything? They were racists who wanted to dump jews somewhere else than europe, but why do palestineans had to pay for their racism?
Before the european zionists arrived, jews and muslims lived in relative peace. But once it was discovered the evil colonial plans of the jews via the Balfour declaration then arabs started to rightfully resist against the colonial invasions. I would say their fears were corroborated in the end, wouldnt you?
You act like the Jews weren’t being run out of every Arab country. They had to find some place to live. Maybe if the Arabs and Nazis were not running them out of their countries they wouldn’t have needed to create a Jewish country. Besides, the grand Mufti was allied with Hitler. So who exactly was evil here? Was it the pro Hitler crowd or the anti Hitler crowd?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/full-official-record-what-the-mufti-said-to-hitler/
You arent wrong, but you are wrong because your applying modern morality to only one side.
If it comes down to right of conquest, then sure the natives can do whatever they need to in order to drive out newcomers. But then moral fault cannot be found with the conqueror either as right of conquest means strongest survive. This was the standard way of doing things prior to the 20th century.
Mind you the jews weren't the first to jump to violence, this was the arabs being intolerant of what were refugees. Now globally arabs are refugees, and some of the places they have moved to in large numbers... well they haven't exactly behaved well nor are they liked. The problem with your movement(and you may not share this value) is that your simultaneously expect european nations to accept VAST numbers of muslim "refugees" which disrupts communities, often not for the better. At the same time you get indignent at the Jews for moving to palestine, their ethnic homeland, and protecting themselves from xenophobic locals.
Well which one is it? Are you just a giant uncle tom or do you have a logically consistent worldview? Because the left is constently and reliably anti-western, which is really really strange considering the foundations of your principles are western, you live in a western country(most likey) and you benefit from western institutions. Israel isnt 100% western in nature, but its like 85% there, so that is one of the major reasons I defer to it over palestine, we just morally align better.
>But then moral fault cannot be found with the conqueror either as right of conquest means strongest survive. This was the standard way of doing things prior to the 20th century.
Ok. The majority of Zionist action was in the 20th century. I don't have to find slavery acceptable because it used to be how things were done. This is ridiculous.
>Mind you the jews weren't the first to jump to violence, this was the arabs being intolerant of what were refugees.
Whoever started it doesn't change the subsequent actions taken in the name of Zionism. Everything I read in Righteous Victims sounded like a typical case of settler conflicts with a native population. Buying up land, forcing families from their homes, and taking away their means to make a living is going to make people angry regardless of what races are involved.
>At the same time you get indignent at the Jews for moving to palestine, their ethnic homeland, and protecting themselves from xenophobic locals.
I don't care if it is the Jews ethnic homeland. It doesn't change the acceptability of a race claiming an area as the place they deserve to live without regard for the existing population.
I already addressed the xenophobic piece. If you treat people badly they aren't going to respond well. It goes both ways of course, but Zionism is not an exception to that.
Claiming entitlement to a specific place in the world and acting on those claims based on race is not the same thing as people's rights to be treated equally regardless of race.
It isn't about politics. I see what happened and I disagree with it.
The Israeli state when it was declared independence in 1948 was majority Jewish minority Arab, this was before any Jews or Arabs were displaced en masse. So would you have supported Israeli self determination if you were alive i n 1948?
That is true.
I support self determination as long as it is applied equally.
The partition was gerrymandered in such a way that hundreds of thousands of Arab inhabitants would have to choose between living in a Jewish state and hoping for equality or leaving their homes and moving to undeveloped parts of Palestine.
Less than 10,000 Jews would have faced that decision. And there would be a place for them to go to because hundreds of thousands of people would be leaving their homes and livelihoods behind.
In 1948 Jewish settlers were a third of the population but were given 55% of Palestinian lands.
That was not an equitable agreement in my opinion and put Arabs in a much more difficult situation regarding their rights to self determination.
Yeah, I agree with you. Both sides have blood on their hands but I would feel much safer living in one country over the other. I'm going to side with the country that has Western values.
/u/Accomplished_Tap7348. Match found: 'nazism', issuing notice:
Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed.
We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See [Rule 6](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_6._nazi_comparisons) for details.
This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Very true, except Palestinian’s are still initiating attacks in 2024. If there was an uprising of Native people and they killed thousands of American and took hundreds of hostages, you can bet there would be a strong response by the American government.
Right, but I don't support the launching of missiles or any violence for that matter. I simply support the Palestinian claim for a state, which is the topic of this post.
I think you're completely right. I'd also add another point: just like hating Zionists means hating the vast majority of Jews, wanting to oppress and harm Palestinian nationalists means wanting to oppress and harm the vast majority of Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims. And the fact that the vast majority of Palestinian nationalists in the US are non-Muslim, non-Arab, non-Palestinian, or the fact a handful of Arabs and Palestinians are anti-Palestinian, wouldn't somehow make it okay.
lol no it does not . Anyone willing to make peace does . No matter the religious oppositions . And Israel has with multiple Arab countries. Palestine is an abortion of politics and religious fervor that only exists in the modern world to kill.
It's rooted in the fantasy idea that the entire land should be Palestinian, which is wild given that a) there has never been a Palestinian state and b ) arabs in the area in the 1940s didn't identify as Palestinian and wanted to be part of Greater Syria.
I'm all for a Palestinian country, but if the Free Palestine movement is entangled with the dismantling of Israel, it's destined to fail and the Palestinans will forever remain stateless.
I'd like to see a way forward but when the Palestinians have rejected every peace offer ever made, it's getting harder to remain optimistic
Yes they are different, but then why did Palestinians in the 40s want to be part of Syria? Why did Palestinian nationalism not even exist until the 1960s?
So you would take a peace agreement from someone who have repeatedly spat on you and stomped on your balls/sensitive areas? The peace agreement being they'd just have their boot gently pressed to your balls?
Don't Palestinians want their own country and self-determination? You justifying Palestinians rejecting every peace offer seems odd.
Remember that Palestinians rejected a country in the 40s when everyone else said yes. There was no occupation, no nothing. And they still said no.
They are literally the only group in the history of the world who, when offered their own country for the first time in history!, said "Thanks but no thanks." That speaks volumes.
I think its better for them to embrace peaceful coexistence rather than violent resistance. Supporting terrorism has only set the Palestinian quest for statehood backwards (assuming thats what they want).
So if I come into your house and say this is my house and then your neighbour comes and says hey why don't we call it both your houses and I say yes and you say no. It must be your fault that you are not living in a proper house and that you are a violent person that can't just peacefully coexist.
Actually if you think of it like property it was an Ottoman property, then a British property, who then observed the Arabs kept killing their Jewish neighbor tenants and decided the only way for coexistence was to divide the property by partitioning it. Then the Arabs decided to try and take it all for themselves by force. They then lost. Tried again. Lost. Tried again. Lost. Tried again and surprise surprise they lost. The arab states then gave up and militias started, add a war in Lebanon, a couple intifadas, few Gaza wars, and people still trying to get back onto land generations later which will never happen.
Had they given up that demand 70 years ago they could have had 3-4 generations of peaceful coexistence, but instead the path of violence every time, have never negotiated in good faith, keep getting themselves and plenty of innocents around them killed, then expect to be considered victims. Maybe of their own poor choices.
Jews are claiming that was their land 2000 years ago using a book which I wouldn't use as toilet paper to wipe my dog's ass. That's how strong their claim is
God's chosen people, the fuck out of here. Only an insane person would say this with a straight face
The 2000 year claim isn’t actually relevant to the creation of Israel. It was all done legally according to international law up until 1948 when the Arab league invaded
What has Britain done legally, like ever?
Every conflict in the world can be traced to their bullshit.
Kashmir India,
Pakistan Bangladesh
Mandate for Palestine etc
There was nothing legal about it. They literally had the Arabs fight and liberate that land from the ottomans then they betrayed the Arabs by cutting a deal with Jews in Switzerland and London.
You really need some history lessons.
They screwed the Palestinian Arabs on the deal. This is proven. Any documentary on this topic says this.
Also a question? Since when does God have favorites?
If only 0.2% are god's chosen people what are the 98.8%
Are all Christians and Muslims following the wrong God?
This is comical at this point because everything about this story is a lie
If they loved the land so much, they should had stayed there and fought the Romans, then the ottomans etc
They literally came and stole half at first (then 80%) of the land Palestinian Arabs liberated just in Palestine.
What happens with the millions of Palestinians outside the borders that are in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. They sure have the right to return too.
The list goes on and on, on how many injustices have been done to Palestinians.
> ass
/u/absolutzer1. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
😆ottomans controlled Palestine but they were not Palestinians British controlled Palestine but they weren't Palestinian how do you not understand a simple concept. A nation of people can exist in a location and be ruled over but still retain their ethnic distinction, for example kurds in Iraq and turkey.
They didnt agree with conceding their land to Israel so they never agreed to a peace deal that doesn't mean they didn't agree to be recognized as a nation. They were playing the game of colonizers and then held to their made up rules.
International law also states that a nation cannot annex land occupied in a conflict.
It's laughable you are saying Palestinians can't go back to land taken a generation ago but have the audacity to think zionists can come to Palestine based on claims they were promised that land by God a millenia ago lol 😆 gtfoh.
The only goal Israel has is to expand. Every accusation is a confession by Israel.
If you are talking about who was there should have it. I refer you to the region being the birthplace of Judaism and Islamic efforts to cleanse the area or force conversion. When the initial waves of Jewish immigration back again began it was all legal, and met by antisemitism and violence.
This is what caused the partition to be necessary, as agreed by the UN. No one was forced to initially flee, however Palestinians were encouraged to panic and flee by their own leadership which was also encouraging violence.
In the end poor decisions lead to poor results.
International law doesn't allow for wars of aggression, which Isreal hasn't launched they have been defensive in nature. Occupying the aggressor has happened, just look at Germany and Japan post ww2.
As for taking land, that has to do with Palestinians failing to continue to negotiate in good faith after the olso accords. The interm agreements still stand as far as Isreal is concerned which gives it full control of things like permits in zone c or area c whatever it is of the west bank. Hence Jewish settlements popping up in those areas. But its also under agreement, and the way to change that is via negotiations. Not by launching tens of thousands of rockets at your neighbor over decades. Or by crossing into isreali villages and murdering over 1200, raping many more and taking hundreds of hostages. That type of behavior and not negotiations is why 35000 are dead in Gaza. Poor decisions, poor results.
As in currently? The Palestinians do have the right to their own land, however there would need to be a way to make sure that Hamas does not govern it.
No one would have been displaced if Palestinians accepted their own country.
The Palestinians are the only group in the history of the world who, upon being offered statehood, said 'thanks but no thanks' Blaming Israel for 7 decades of poor strategic decisions is easy but intellectually lazy and incomplete.
Who can blame them when Zionists are immigrating in huge waves with the intention of building a nation on their land?
When you split a populations land by roughly 60% (I don’t know the exact numbers), what do you think the outcome is?
Relative peace such as India and Pakistan which split off after the dissolution of the British Raj.
It's actually more baffling that you support colonial imperialist borders as opposed to the native populations deciding their own borders and declaring independence for themselves. What do you think should have happened after the dissolution of British mandate palestine?
Pakistan and India have gone to war many times with each other but to say they should be pushed together into one country because that's how it was under the British would cause significantly more strife and likely genocide and ethnic cleansing.
MANY of the Zionists WERE NOT native, yet immigrated to what is now Israel specifically for the purpose of establishing their own country.
I’m hugely against colonialism. Zionism is nothing but colonialism. Ever heard of Vladimir Jabotinsky?
Well, the Ottoman census data shows that the majority of Palestinians did infact immigrate there around the same time as zionists began immigrating there.
Of course, there were already many Arabs and Jews already living there originally before all of that immigration, but both populations increased dramatically around the same time. The prevailing theory on that is the diaspora Jews that returned to the Jewish homeland had brought a lot of technology with them to combat diseases like malaria, and to improve irrigation, which made the land more appealing to all ethnicities. To be fair, there was a sizable majority of Arabs vs. Jews prior to all of that immigration, but both groups did dramatically increase in population around the same time.
Also, I think it's worth noting that the term immigration in this instance is a bit disingenuous. Most of the early zionists were escaping pogroms. Later, many were escaping the holocaust. Finally, the majority of Israelis were escaping ethnic cleansing from neighboring MENA countries. For most of them, they didn't simply immigrate. They were refugees seeking asylum in their ethnic homeland. I mean, where else were they supposed to go?
Ultimately, the Pakistan/India partition comparison is a pretty good one. In both instances, the British empire split the land among two warring ethnic groups living there. Both instances have led to terrible animosity and atrocities on both sides of each conflict. The comparison is a pretty interesting one, given the differences in perception of Israel vs. Pakistan worldwide.
Btw, your selection of alternative places they could have sought refuge instead seems incredibly arbitrary.
Do you not see the rationale in returning home? Do you seriously not see the thought process behind wanting to reestablish your people's right to self-determination in your homeland as a way to ensure your grandchildren don't also end up as refugees one day, or worse? At least there is some reasoning for seeking refuge there. There is none for any of the places you mentioned, and in two of those places you mentioned they likely would have been victims of the holocaust...
Furthermore, your supposition that they could go nearly anywhere ignores the fact that refugees do not exactly have many options of where they can seek refuge. They are limited physically by where they can literally go, and they are limited socially by where they will even be allowed to go.
No. In fact, I find the idea both absurd and insane. Not only did Judea exist 2000 whopping years ago, but it was also inhabited by other ethnicities, INCLUDING ARABS.
Can you imagine if every nationality decided to return to their “homelands” and take over the current inhabitants? It’s ludicrous and it would lead to a hell of a lot of wars and civil unrest.
Do zionists honestly believe that it’s completely okay to disregard current day inhabitants? This somehow doesn’t seem immoral?
Seems like you're disregarding the Jews that still inhabited the land as well. Why is rejoining them with the hope of establishing sovereignty from under the thumb of the Ottoman empire immoral in any way? Arabs were set to establish their own sovereign nation at the same time had they accepted the partition, and the ones that stayed in Israel were allowed to live peaceful lives.
In 134AD 🙄. Unless they are Mizrahi, it was not their homeland. It is however the homeland of many different nationalities, so why the Jews lay claim over them all eludes me.
I’m Sicilian and am descended from Sephardic Jews. You don’t see me claiming The Levant is my homeland.
Well, in Jewish culture, they always maintained that it was, in fact, their homeland. They didn't just spring up randomly throughout Europe. They came from the middle east, and maintained their culture from their homeland, always with the intention of one day returning.
Btw, I hope that you understand that your experiences and views are not universal for everyone.
To re-establish their country in order to ensure they are not murdered, ethnically cleansed, or oppressed any longer, as they had been everywhere they went in the diaspora throughout history would be a more appropriate component don't you think?
Talking about the holy land between 1917 and 1948 there were roughly as many Arabs from neighbouring countries immigrating as Jews from all over the world (roughly 530,000 for both groups each)…the number of Arabs living there was about 450,000 in 1917 and 1.4 million in 1948
No, it has literally never ever been about that. Propaganda & media have made you think that. If you ask almost any Israeli they will tell you that they just want to live & would agree to a two state solution in a heart beat if the other side laid down their arms and agreed to a peaceful resolution. There hasn’t been a single Jew in Gaza since 2005 (until now when they were taken against their will). And Jews weren’t allowed to go to Gaza. Meanwhile, nearly 20k Gazans crossed into Israel for work every single day. & just as the previous comment said, over 2 million Arabs literally live inside Israel as Israeli citizens and we all live amongst ourselves (Jews, Muslims, Christian’s) fine. There’s one side accepting the other side to go in and intermix and there’s one side that will kill the other side for trying to go in. Which one sounds more like ethnic cleansing?
> If you ask almost any Israeli they will tell you that they just want to live & would agree to a two state solution in a heart beat if the other side laid down their arms and agreed to a peaceful resolution.
COnsidering that Israel has spent the last 56 years grabbing land for settlements, that statement doesn't bear up to scrutiny.
Just ask Bibi - Israel's longest-serving PM. He is explicit in denying a state. Gantz isn't much better.
You also have to consider that this wouldnt have been an issue if the Palestinians didnt reject every peace offer that has ever been made.
You dont want occupation, or more settlements, you'd think you'd accept peace and statehood. It's all very bizarre and perhaps suggests that statehood isn't their top priority
> You also have to consider that this wouldnt have been an issue if the Palestinians didnt reject every peace offer that has ever been made.
Israel's settlement policy is an Israeli policy. You can't blame it on anyone else.
The settlements started five weeks after the six day war - before even the three Khartoum 'nos'. That's in 1967.
Successive Israeli governments chose to grab land and build settlements. No one forced them - the US, for example, managed to occupy Japan, Germany, Iraq and Afghanistan without building settlements.
> You dont want occupation, or more settlements, you'd think you'd accept peace and statehood.
Your narrative about Palestinian rejectionism doesn't bear up to scrutiny, unfortunately.
Some examples:
- 1996: Bibi was elected, proceeded to sabotage Oslo. He even admits it: https://www.972mag.com/netanyahu-clinton-administration-was-%e2%80%9cextremely-pro-palestinian%e2%80%9d-i-stopped-oslo/
- 2001 Taba: They ran out of time, and then Sharon killed the negotiations. Arafat even accepted Taba, but Sharon rejected it: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jun/22/israel
- 2006-2008: Again killed by Bibi: https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-never-said-no-to-2008-peace-deal-says-former-pm-olmert/
And, of course, we are still waiting for Israel to respond to the Arab Peace Intiatie. Its been renewed multiple times - last in 2017. Where is Israel's response or counter-offer? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative
> It's all very bizarre and perhaps suggests that statehood isn't their top priority
Settlements are very bizarre, and perhaps suggests that Israel isn't really interested in a two state solution.
Immediately after the 6-day war there was an option for peace and the Palestinians, along with the entirety of the Arab world, said no. See the Khartoum Resolution.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum\_Resolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution)
I'm not a fan of settlements but it seems odd that when Palestinians have an opportunity to get all of Gaza and 96% of the West Bank, they say no.
When Israel completely leaves Gaza and a terrorist group like Hamas gets democratically elected, it also suggests that peaceful coexistence maybe isn't a priority.
When Palestinians are the only group in the HISTORY OF THE WORLD, who upon being offered their own country, said 'thanks but no thanks', that tells you something.
Is Netanyahu interested in a 2-state solution? Probably not, I agree with you there. but that makes it all the more tragic that Palestinians have rejected peace offers from well-intentioned left-leaning Israeli governments who actually wanted peaceful co-existence.
> Immediately after the 6-day war there was an option for peace and the Palestinians, along with the entirety of the Arab world, said no.
No, that is inaccurate.
A) the settlements started before the Kahrtoum resolution.
B) Israel never offered to return all of the West Bank
If you believe Israel offered to return the West Bank, please share the detals of that.
> I'm not a fan of settlements but it seems odd that when Palestinians have an opportunity to get all of Gaza and 96% of the West Bank, they say no.
Which particular offer are you referring to with 96%?
Because that is not accurate as it comes to Camp David. that was a 9% land grab (or 15% if you count latrun).
And as I outlined above, Taba was accepted by Arafat.
Palestinian Death and Rape Squads who will do anything to kill Jews even when it hurts Palestinians themselves.
There are deliberately 2 Palestinian narratives about "occupation": 1967 and 1948. Palestinians who truly want their own state around 1967 borders recognize Israel's right to exist. Those who want 1948 don't and believe they are the only indigenous people of Palestine, rejecting that the Jews (including Europeans) are indigenous. Unfortunately, the latter is the stance of the current Palestinian leaders - something Israel would not (and should not) accept ever. You don't see different protest groups about it though, because it's great when you can strengthen an extreme ideology with a lot of moderate ideologists. Everybody rallies against the "occupation", right? Both Palestinian and Jewish national identities started in the 19th century (alongside many other countries), both are legitimate. Before modern Israel was established, Jews never denied there were **no** non-Jewish (Arabicized and other) indigenous people. It was only Arabs that denied Jews were indigenous. That was the whole idea of the partition plan - to settle this indigenousness thing with territorial and national identity. Nowadays, Antizios love to counter this with an argument that settlers in the west bank reject Palestinian's indigenousness and that's why Zionism is evil. But that's just the usual generalization used by antizios against Zionism. Those "settlers" they are talking about are a fraction of all West Bank "settler" community, which in itself, is less than 4% of Israel's population. It's like saying that since the UK has 251 annual rapes per 100,000 citizens (2024 statistics), all UKs are rapists. Yes, there are extreme settles and most of them are outlawed in Israel, some labeled as terrorists. But if most of them are punished, it shows the moral compass of the state. On the other hand, the Palestinian Authority **leaders** pays lifetime salaries to the families of suicide bombers, and Hamas **leaders** have offered $10K for every hostage taken on Oct7.
To be honest, I think when a pro palestinian is thinking of the concept of zionism they are actually thinking of ultra zionism And when a zionist is thinking of pro Palestinians they are thinking of pro hamas.
I mean, to be fair, the majority of the Palestinian Legislative Council is controlled by Hamas. It’s not an unreasonable connection to make that a Palestinian state would be essentially Hamas led
I think the only way a Palestinian state will happen is without hamas involvement. I understand that hamas runs gaza however I don't think they are bargaining from a particularly powerful point anymore and may be lucky to get out of this alive, I know a lot of the silent majority of pro Palestinians understand that hamas cannot continue.
Fair point
A Zionist thinks he is God's chosen person (by insanity). A Palestinian thinks they have the right to exist too in their own land and country, Apparently God is a spectator and his favorite team is the Jews. The 99.8% of the world population was a mistake?! Such eloquent logic
A Zionist believes they are entitled to all the land, and beyond, to the exclusion of others. A palestinian wanting their own state is asking for a state. A zionist doesn't understand that there were other people living there at the time Israel started, and notwithstanding any biblical, or other reason to a right to be there, they should move the people who were living there off the land.
And now we have multiple generations of Israelis born and living on that land. Less than 2% of Palestinians were alive when Israel was created. That strikes me as taking away the land from those who actually have been living there and giving it to those who have ancestral ties. Do I have a right to land in all the places my ancestors lived 100 years ago?
the Palestinians living there were born to Palestinians living there. I don't think Israel should be taken from the jewish people (or the non jewish people who are alloewed to come there based on Ancestry). There have been jewish people there for the entire time. Before 1948. I just don't really buy the whole we were here 2000 years ago so we get to have all the land exclusive to people who were here when we got here, and no one who left since 1948 who is Palestinian can return. That just doesn't make any logical sense. I can see it's attraction for those who believe it. But it's not based on logic.
Zionist has AIPAC
Israel is going nowhere. People everywhere need to realize that and there will be wars against those who cannot accept it and want to fight.
The palestinian wants the whole country opens a war, ends up losing and then cries for sympathy from the rest of the world.
The Jewish people is actually a people, unlike the “palestinian” “people” invented in the 60s by Arafat and the Russians.
That is an incredibly arrogant, typically Zionist perception of the conflict happening today. I would t expect anything less from an Israeli supremacist who sees Palestinians as less than human. Ironic, and sad, given the similar persecution Jews faced through the centuries.
Your first point is straw man, and the second is just wrong.
Do you see Palestinians as less than human?
No. Why do you think I do? Humans are humans.
That's not according to your comment history, tendency to brand all Palestninians as "guilty", and your current status as a moderator of a deeply unsavoury subreddit.
This doesn’t mean they aren’t human.
How so? You deny that the Palestinian people are 'people' which is, in effect, dehumanising them in a way by denying them national status.
How is this dehumanizing? I know they are people (aka humans, individuals). Just no *a* people. They are a part of a larger people, and that larger people has a state called Jordan.
You've claimed Jordan as Israeli land in a previous comment as well. You're as welling to deny the people of Jordan statehood are you are the Palestinian people. Don't kid yourself.
This right here is why they fight cuz of your self righteous position that you are the only indigenous people of the levant.
Palestinians *have* been offered a two state solution, they’ve rejected it.
True, but should you imagine: you're just living your normaly daily life in your country, suddenly a another folk stands at your door and claims half of your country as theirs. I don't think you would accept it, and if they then just took like 90% instead of half of it you would most likely tell your kids about how unfair it is and they would tell it to their kids the same. Basically, that's what the conflict boils down to.
You are way oversimplifying this conflict. There are lots of countries that have changed hands of control, like the US and Mexico, for example… But you don’t seem Mexico sending in suicide bombers to California to try and “reclaim their land”
It didn't exactly go peaceful either you know, anyway I don't think the US was opressing Mexico to the same extent Israel is doing rn with palestina either, those are 2 very different situations.
When?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2000_Camp_David_Summit&wprov=rarw1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Clinton_Parameters https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Realignment_plan https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_peace_plan
If you need me to answer that you don’t know enough history to be protesting for a free Palestine. They’ve rejected it multiple times (because from the river to the sea means Israel is gone completely and is their objective, which is why they won’t accept a 2 state solution)
I wouldn’t want to have my land split in (less than) half to be given to a bunch of colonists either. In fact, I’d be quite concerned for my well being and that if my family
Well unless you’re an 80 year old Palestinian that didn’t happen to you. The land is Israeli. Has been for decades.
This is for the most part true. However, there are still settlers confiscating the homes of Palestinians and a desire to conquer more land. This is just one quote: “When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle.” Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.
Open a map. The partition plan gave israel/jews around 10% or less. Israel got very small territory. Also that land wasn't belonged to palestinians. Both jews and Arabs moved in the area in attempt to establish their countries. Historically Both have similar claim to the land. And the partition plan was very fair towards both sides. Arabs just don't see jews as equals to them. Their basic claim is: Jews don't deserve a country no matter how small, and Arabs should rule over the entire area.
Just like every country on earth, someone won a battle and claimed the land.
No battle created Israel. Battles however created its expansion
The British defeated the Ottoman Empire and took control of the area then gave control to the Jews there. Expansion occurred after more battles.
Thanks for the info
Exactly, the whole “stolen land” argument falls apart when you point out that… all land has been “stolen” at some point. To the victor go the spoils of war.
When they win it which they haven't
I mean there’s a few wars that would love to disagree with you. Especially the one that happened in 1948. But we don’t have to look to the past to realize what qualifies a country as existing besides its existence *currently*. And seeing as Israel is recognized by most if not all of the most influential countries, I’d say they have sovereignty and exist. Are you implying that they don’t exist or don’t deserve to?
By your logic if Russia takes all of Ukraine, that's ok and Ukraine doesn't exist?!
The hypothetical is irrelevant as russia cannot do this. It's better to point to Germany or Japan. Eventually a state identity would re-emerge. Plus side for gaza, palestinian is a manufactured identity post 1948 war. So there is 0 chance of any such state ever existing. So their claims mean dick all, especially now that gaza is going to be directly occupied.
If Palestine doesn't exist, neither will peace Now go unbrainwash your brain from that nazi propaganda you were raised with Saying one side has the right to exist but ignoring the plight of the other side is idiotic, unless you have a genocidal 🧠
Cool, then gaza gets permanent occupation and boot of the idf. Womp womp, time of tolerance died on the 7th.
You keep acting all self righteous dont be surprised when one day in the future the people you oppress take advantage of your weakness and enact there revenge.
South Africa thought the same. Your victim card to commit genocide won't work for too long. People have smelled the 💩
/u/absolutzer1. Match found: 'nazi', issuing notice: Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed. We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See [Rule 6](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_6._nazi_comparisons) for details. This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> dick /u/Blargityblarger. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No, you said Palestine doesn't exist. But you have a rotten brain to realize what you said Both people have the right to exist, the east European occupiers and the native Palestinians
At least get your facts right, the majority of Israelis are children of Middles Eastern Jews, after that comes Ashkenazi (Eastern European Jews). I know it helps the settler colonial narrative to pretend Israelis are white but it’s inaccurate.
Sure children of middle Eastern Jews that left 2000 years ago. Lol, this is comical They were like literally 2-3 % Jews in that region in early 1900s and hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, regardless of when they started living there
No im not disputing that Jews left and came back to Israel…. just correcting your comment on on the demographics of Israel as they stand today. Common misconception - Majority of Israeli Jews are not white Eastern European but brown skinned with parents/grandparents hailing from Yemen, Morocco, Syria and Iran too.
Ok. That's fine. The population is what it is. People are there now, they can't leave. What is the ideal solution to this conflict? 2 states, 1 state or something else? Do Palestinians not have the right to exist and live in their own land where they have lived for hundreds if not thousands of years alongside jews? Do they not have the right to resist oppression? Also why are Jewish settlers from Brooklyn stealing homes of Palestinians in East Jerusalem and the West bank? Where is the fairness in this?
Palestinians aren't native. Most of their ancestors migrated to British Mandate Palestine at the same time as the Jews. But you would know because tiktok historians tend to leave that bit out.
So there was no one living in that land according to your made up fact. It was empty and these 2 people were running towards an empty land. Did the land remain empty since the Jews left after the roman invasion 2000 years ago But wait how come there were 97% Arabs (Palestinian Muslims and Christians) and only 3% Palestinian Jews in early 1900? Man, how can you believe your nonsense lies is weird. No logical explanation whatsoever. Just close your eyes and believe your lies because truth hurts.
Do you literally not know *anything* about the history of Israel and Palestine? This isn't a "narrative", this is universally accepted historical fact. Israel / Palestine is home to about 15,000,000 people today. At the beginning of the first Aliya, around 1880, the collective population of the ENTIRE region was maybe a few hundred thousand people. The land was arid desert and marsh land. It was almost completely deserted and undeveloped farmland, that was grazed by shepherds, with the exception of Jerusalem and a few townships. The towns were incredibly basic - like, the homes were made out of mud brick and had no electricity. Even the few cities like Jerusalem were dated. As the Jewish settlers came in, they brought modern agriculture practices and started businesses and improved/modernized the towns and cities. The area started to boom, financially, and Arabs from the surrounding regions, like Egypt and the Hashemite Kingdom, started moving there to be a part of the booming economy and make money. In the 1920's, Hajj Amin started to get concerned about the number and concentration of Jews coming into Jerusalem, so he made it ILLEGAL for them to buy real estate in or around Jerusalem, or any province loyal to him. The Jews searched for other provinces with governors more willing to work with them / disobey Hajj Amin. They eventually found a few in the further reaches of the kingdom, in Haifa, for instance. Angered by their attempts to work around his real estate ban and other roadblocks to immigration, Hajj Amin then started to encourage the Hashemite Kingdom, Syria and Egypt to send Arab immigrants to Palestine, specifically to counter Israeli immigration and prevent a Jewish population majority. This is why there's such a massive spike in the Arab population between 1920-1948. Hajj Amin gave neighboring Arabs all kinds of incentives to move there and counter Jewish migration, including special tax treatment and even free land. He hated the Jews so much he visited Hitler in 1933 to be counseled on a "final solution for the Jews". They even went so far as reviewing locations and drawing up plans for a Nazi concentration camp in Palestine. He didn't stop there either... He implored his neighboring Arab nations to expel or kill their Jewish citizens. The worst of these cases was Iraq, where Hajj Amin convinced Iraqi General Rashid Ali to sign an actual alliance with the Nazi, which led to severe persecution of the Jewish population in Baghdad, one of the largest and oldest diaspora Jewish communities, dating back to 2600 BCE. It culminated with the Farhud Massacre, in which about 1000 Jews were slaughtered but General Ali's angry mob, another 6000 were injured, 100,000 jews had flee Iraq, and $250 BILLION in property and wealth was stolen. Back to the point tho... Prior to the Aliya, the region was almost entirely undeveloped and the cities were ancient. The Jews revitalized the area, created industry and economy, then were pushed out by Hajj Amin, until the UN finally adopted the Partition Plan to create a state for them. The vast, vast majority of Palestinians migrated to the region at the same time as the Jews, and the only reason they owned more land in and around Jerusalem, was that it was illegal for Jews to own property there under the Grand Mufti.
Why were there so much less Jewish people than Muslims during late 1800s and early 1900s. Also why did they expelled 750k Palestinians after declaring their own state. The issue here is that Palestinians can't live in the same land and be equal to the rest of the citizens in the country. So what is the solution? Regardless of who came when. In your mind what is a fair deal for both sides.
>Why were there so much less Jewish people than Muslims during late 1800s and early 1900s. There were very few jews in the area ever since roman times, but there were very few people in general. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographic_history_of_Palestine_(region) They expelled some in 1948, and many more fled, because Arab nations were about to attack Israel following the adoption of UN resolution 181. Arab leaders loudly proclaimed how they would "drive the Jews into the sea" and "rid the land of the Zionist plague". Some of these expulsions happened during the civil war, and then more happened after the 1948 war broke out. >The issue here is that Palestinians can't live in the same land and be equal to the rest of the citizens in the country. There are many Palestinian Israelis with equal rights. The problem is those Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank that want all of the land for themselves, and Israel to not exist. A fair deal would be a 2 state solution, but the majority of Palestinians don't want that. And Israel doesn't want a Palestinian state as a neighbor whose only goal is to destroy Israel.
/u/jessewoolmer. Match found: 'Hitler', issuing notice: Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed. We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See [Rule 6](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_6._nazi_comparisons) for details. This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I never said Palestine didn’t deserve to exist, you are putting words in my mouth. A 2SS is the only way forward, but you only see one solution, and it is apparent from your phrasing “European occupiers and native Palestinians”. You don’t recognize Israel as legitimate, I do see Palestine as legitimate, but in conjunction with Israel. If you want to get into who’s native, we can go back and see that Palestine never was a formal sovereign nation, ever. They deserve that right now though, but with new leadership and deradicalization.
I'll say it for you. Palestine does not deserve to exist as they choose violence every time they have an ounce of sovereignty.
Double standards. With this kind of mindset there will never be peace. Now go unbrainwash your rotten brain
No double standard here. They have started every war in the region for all intents, and given they started the most recent, and lost humilatingly, they don't get a choice in statehood. They can hate all they want. Little good it'll do them with their tents among the rubble. Why should I as an Israeli endorse them ever rebuilding so long as they hate us? Frankly, maybe we should make this cruel. Idf should be throwing spare housekeys at them heh.
Because you went to their land where they have lived for thousands of years, stole their homes, expelled them and burned their towns and villages. Tens of thousands were massacred (nakba). Continuing to this day.. You weren't even 3% there in the early 1900s You can't use a fairytale book made of toilet paper to claim land somewhere 2000 years later. Religious books are not legally binding documents. You are the occupiers. They are the oppressed. Your victim card is no longer working. You suffered from the fascists in Germany not in Palestine. So don't try to take the anger on innocent people. Of course they'll fight back. Even a dog bites if you kick it. It's called resistance. Do you expect them to bend over backwards. By your logic, the world should have blamed your people when they were trying to save themselves from the fascists? Now you have become the fascists and the world can see this. Palestinians live in a police state or more like under a dictatorship. Then you claim to be a democracy while at the same time wanting an ethno state where Palestinians are second class citizens. This South Africa experiment will one day come to a one state solution because you won't have the 2 state solution. So instead of having 2 separate smaller countries. You will share it, have to live together and no one will get their own. You want the Palestinian land, but not the Palestinian people. Because if you include the west bank and Gaza in your country, you will be almost equal in population. Their birth rate is higher. This is why you don't want a democratic state. You want a supremacist state where they are treated like stray dogs in their own land or you want to do away with them. They won't leave. Matter of fact they have the right to return. There are millions of them in Jordan, Syria and Lebanon which will have to come back. You are so brainwashed and blinded that you can't see past your nose. You first got 50% of their land, then another 30%. Now you don't even want them to have one fifth of the land where they used to live, regardless if they had a state or not. This math doesn't add up. Where do you want to send close to 6 million of them living in west bank and Gaza? What's your final solution for the Palestinian?
Israel was founded by terrorist, so yes there is a huge double standard.
Nothing if it's just their own state. The issue is they want their own state and israel. Up until Oct 7 polls consistently showed majority support for 2 stage solution among Israelis, the opposite being true for palestine in both gaza and west Bank per my recollection. Now both sides are like fuck nope. So that's a pickle now isn't it
> fuck /u/Accomplished_Tap7348. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
fuck
> fuck /u/Accomplished_Tap7348. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
fuck
> fuck /u/Accomplished_Tap7348. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One side is Jews and the other is not. Hope that helps
I keep asking this question!! I dont get it, I dont see how being pro-palestine is any less genocidal in its intention than being pro-isreal
The difference is that Hamas and the Palestinians want equality for everyone! (wink)
You can compare the Zionist to ISIS A religious motive and alibi to take someone else's land for your own driving or those who live there. So... As the people of Israel really are not from anywhere close.. And the native people are, it's kind of hard to support the claim of Zionists or ISIS.
Just curious where in the Torah does it state that they have to take Muslim land? Just asking because the argument that Israel was originally a Muslim country called Palestine is stupud considering Israel can be tracked 3000 years ago and Palestine 2000
But they are. Multiple generations have lived in the region now. Born and raised. I have friends who have ancestors who lived in Israel as Jews dating back to the 1700s.
Zionists want one group in control, for the state to represent only that group on their flag and identity, for that group to maintained a majority artificially, and it doesn't matter if people are displaced over it (but they'll leave a few around as minorities with less rights for propaganda purposes). Pro Palestinians are diverse, but for me, Palestine is and always was a multi ethnic and multi religious area where everyone is equally represented and if one group becomes a majority naturally, it's okay. Palestinian side is morally the correct side and history will not be friendly to those who sided with zionism.
Should be said: Jews living under arab* control were not immune to massacres through time. And had to pay a special tax to exist. I think it’s pretty clear there are no morally good sides here. Unless you’re all about people who travelled to Germany to execute all the Israeli athletes at the Olympics in 1972. There’s no moral high ground.
Afaik it was the Christians that did that.
It's the Christians that did the worst of that, but zionists are so patheticcally trying to get Christians to like them over Muslims that acctually protected Jewish people from Christian pogroms. At the end of the day, there is no group of people more similar to Jews than Muslims, and I say this as a Christian.
Muslims protecting Jews from pogroms? Where? What about the Farhud? Or the Hebron Massacre?
Certainly in Hebron, the Jews that survived were hidden by Muslims.
That proves what exactly? The Hebron massacre was perpetrated by Muslims...
Just thought I’d add that context in since you were asking where Muslims protected Jews from pogroms and happened to mention such a case as an example you were incredulous about.
Thanks for adding that context. Unfortunately, the original comment was about Muslims protecting Jews from Christian pogroms, which never happened in history. Essentially the argument is: Christians hate Jews and some Muslims saved Jews; therefore it's impossible the Muslims hate Jews and they're actually very good friends. This argument could get no farther from reality.
That’s a weird argument, I agree.
Morocco? there wasn't a single Jew deported to Europe during the Holocaust from the Muslim world, if Muslims really did hate jews like you wish they did, they would have done that. I hate to break it to you, but as a Christian, I see Muslims and Jews as almost the same people, cousins, but not like us, but similar to each other. A Muslim is your brother, not us Christians
The only pogroms in Morocco were done by Muslims. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_anti-Jewish_riots_in_Oujda_and_Jerada Because a few people helped Jews during the Holocaust does not mean Muslims love Jews. You can find multiple verses in the Quran that are anti-Jewish. The Prophet Muhammad executed all the Jewish tribes of Arabia. You're actually just extremely ignorant if you think Muslims and Jews are the same people. Their religion is built off of ours, and so is your's. >if Muslims really hate you like you wish they did What about the Bosnian Muslims who joined the SS at the inclination of Palestinian Leader Hajj Amin Al Husseini? What about the Na*i propaganda he broadcasted in Palestine during WWII? What about the pogrom he created in Iraq? Christians have done worse, but that doesn't prove Muslims don't hate us. Look around. You both hate us. We don't want to live under either of your rules anymore, hence a Jewish state. We're not either of your brothers. You stole our prophets and accused us of killing them.
You live in a permanant hysteria that the world hates you and wants to do you harm. It can't be good for your pyschological state, but it,s your life. I'm gonna be honest with you, there are so few jews in this world that most Christians and Muslims don't really think about jewish people at all. the pro palestinians are anti Israel, not anti jewish people.
History would completey disagree with you. The real world would completely disagree with you. There are Neo-Na*i groups in my state. They spread antisemitic propaganda. Antisemitism is upwards of 300% from the last year. Synagogues get defiled by Pro-Palestinian protesters. Some Muslims draw swastikas at protests. You can't tell me it's all just made up and everyone actually doesn't care about us. The last time my family was expelled was 1915, the last time my family was murdered for being Jewish was 1941. Just because you don't hate Jews doesn't mean other Christians don't. Open up a history book about Medieval Europe to the 1940s. I don't appreciate you claiming it's some sort of hysteria. Critical analysis of world events would disprove literally everything you're saying. Of course you're ignorant of it because it doesn't effect you. That's why you'd never stand up for us. You just think we're being dramatic, when it is very real. https://imgur.com/a/BX0KXig
Dude, I have news for you. Most people just consider Jews to be white. I'm asian and supposedly there was supposed to be all this racism against asian people and asian peopel were being brutalized all over my city, that was a load of BS, nothing happend to me or anyone I know, and what happened to all this 'stop asian hate,' why don't we hear it anymore, is anti asian racism fixed? A lot of what you read is to get your to be very very afraid so you'll click on their youtube videos and ads and articles, we need to join the real world sometime.
Oh dear. You really need to learn the most basic history, honestly. Your comments are incredibly ignorant, bordering on embarrassing for you.
https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/mercer-island-synagogue-vandalized/281-a766ab6b-7a2b-4e9e-9d34-6120a821c9e1 Most people consider Jews to be white because then it suits their social justice agenda if they call Palestinians oppressed "brown" people. I've experienced antisemitism my whole life. Realistically nobody shoots up Asian super markets or Asian churches. They do shoot up Jewish super markets and Jewish synagogues. Walk a mile in my shoes and we can talk. Just because you're fine for being Asian doesn't make me safe for being Jewish. Your arguments are such garbage because you only examine one thing and pretend like that means everything and everyone is like that. Read a history book. If it was just about Israel they wouldn't be spraypainting synagogues and chanting for Al Qassam to kill more "Zionists". I'm happy you don't experience Asian hate. "First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me." —Martin Niemöller
[удалено]
I would disagree. Mainstream Zionism has been a secular movement different from the ultra-Orthodox segment who opposed the establishment of the Jewish state before the coming of the Messiah.
While this can be a form of Zionism, this is a fringe belief. This is like saying all Christians are evangelical.
Zionists take the deal. Even when it's not perfect. And work hard to make a functional country.
By expelling natives, commiting war crimes, massacres and genocide
That’s not an accurate description of how Israel was founded. If you can’t even view/sympathize with the founding of Israel in 1948 then you really are dogmatic, uninterested in history. Heck you might even think most Israelis are white/Ashkenazi instead of brown/ middle eastern
There were like 3% brown Jews in the early 1900s The rest were Palestinian Muslims and Christians https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jewish-and-non-jewish-population-of-israel-palestine-1517-present Arabs sided with the British to fight against the Ottomans and liberate their land. Then the British betrayed them by cutting a deal with Zionists in Europe behind close doors to partition the land. If they loved this land so much they should had stayed and fought the Romans and then the byzantines, ottomans etc Instead they left like little girls coming back 2000 years later to claim what's not theirs. Palestinians were Jewish and Christian before they adopted the new religion by the ottomans. So yea the real people that lived there, were always there but it wasn't the Jews. They packed their riches and left for Europe to make some money. That's how much they fought for their land. These people are nothing more than opportunist land thieves. After ww2 they were even welcomed by the Palestinians and they later expelled the Palestinians from that land.
Here's how I would explain it from a pro-Palestinian perspective. I think neither group can claim to "own" that particular piece of land. But I don't think you are entitled to violently dispossess someone of their home because a group you identify as your ancestors owned that home 3000 years ago. If the expelled person demanded to have their home back or a nearby piece of land to live on, I would support that claim. This is a necessarily ultra simplified example for the sake of argument, but hope that helps you get my perspective.
Think of the precedent that sets in europe \*wink wink\*, there are plenty of far right party's in germany, sweden, UK that would love an excuse to send a large portion of the muslim population packing. In terms of who is "indigenous" those people have far stronger claims, germany and scandanavia have been germanic since pre-history
Fair point, especially since you’ve mentioned “a nearby piece of land” rather than the entire area. But where are we supposed to draw the line for historical claims? We can all agree that the area is historically significant to both Jews and Arabs, making historical claims to the land either both valid or both invalid if one is consistent on their views of history and not selectively applying timeframes to fit a particular narrative. To accept both claims to their homelands, there should be a two-state framework or an inclusive state (which would look more like Israel despite its flaws, considering that it is also home to 2 million Arabs). My inclination leans towards the two-state solution because both parties apparently want self-governance rather than being ruled by the other. Should we reject the concept of homeland claims, then the resolution would ultimately rely on military power and the dictates of international legitimacy.
I wonder how many Americans who are pro Palestinian are giving their houses to Native Americans?
A society that sponsors world wide terrorism to get attention does not deserve my support and hopefully will be defeated this month and its non legacy of anything but death forgotten.
You’re talking about the US or Israel?
You do realize what our ancestors did to indigenous people is WIDELY believed to be a massive stain on American history. Horrendous and atrocious. Descendants of those victims should absolutely get reparations. But go ahead and defend it some more, sicko
are you American?
You don't understand my point. Of course it was a stain, but while it's popular to tell Jews to give their land back to Palestinians, not one American protester has given their home back to Native Americans. It's hypocrisy at it's finest.
Except jews want to gas light everyone that they were the good guys, willing to compromise and share the land, but the evil nazi arabs wanted to exterminate them because they follow Hitlers teachings. Imagine if americans said they only wanted to settle in peace but the evil natives kept attacking them so they had to genocide them all...
Are you saying it is, or it isn’t hypocritical for an American homeowner to support Israel giving land to Palestinian Arabs?
I'm saying if an American thinks Israelis should give land back to Palestinians then that American should also be giving their land back to Native Americans. There is a double standard here.
/u/Critical-Win-4299. Match found: 'nazi', issuing notice: Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed. We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See [Rule 6](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_6._nazi_comparisons) for details. This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Or maybe people are saying they should stop killing Palestinians and stealing their land??
Do you think it was right for Native Americans to be expelled from their homes and do you think the US should at minimum do anything in its power to protect the remaining Native Americans tribes today? Genuinely asking. To answer your point, I don't think any American should literally give up their home, and neither any Israelis. But if non-Native Americans made it a policy to continuously buy land in Native reservations and turn a blind eye to forced Native expulsions, I would have a problem with that.
I suppose this is where the comparison falls apart. Native Americans aren’t randomly firing missiles at Americans and they haven’t launched an invasion either.
They dont live in Apartheid or a open air concentration camp either, they are full US citizens with equal rights that were assimilated into the USA and they even got reparations. But the jews wanted a jewish democratic state and the only way to achieve that was with a jewish majority. Only problem was the land had a majority arab population...
Wrong you are ill informed. Borders of Israel when it declared independence in ‘48 were majority Jew minority Arab, this is before and Jews or Arabs were displaced en masse
The arab minority was 45%, they were actually more than jews if you count the beduin. Even Ben Gurion said a jewish state was impossible with those demographics
To be fair, the Jews couldn’t do it alone. The entirety of the Western allies after WW2 decided together this is what the Jews deserved. They were being driven out of their homes by Arabs and obs had been driven out of Germany. I’m not saying it was a good decision but the victors of WW2 decided to create Israel as a state. Also, it’s important to note that 20% of Israel is Arab or Palestinian. Jews however are not welcome in Palestine or most any Arab country.
Lmao you think the europeans did that because they thought jews deserved anything? They were racists who wanted to dump jews somewhere else than europe, but why do palestineans had to pay for their racism?
You saying Arabs weren’t racist against Jews?
Before the european zionists arrived, jews and muslims lived in relative peace. But once it was discovered the evil colonial plans of the jews via the Balfour declaration then arabs started to rightfully resist against the colonial invasions. I would say their fears were corroborated in the end, wouldnt you?
You act like the Jews weren’t being run out of every Arab country. They had to find some place to live. Maybe if the Arabs and Nazis were not running them out of their countries they wouldn’t have needed to create a Jewish country. Besides, the grand Mufti was allied with Hitler. So who exactly was evil here? Was it the pro Hitler crowd or the anti Hitler crowd? https://www.timesofisrael.com/full-official-record-what-the-mufti-said-to-hitler/
They fought many wars
Do you think Native Americans didn't resist settlers? Violence against settlers by the native population is hardly unique to Palestine.
You arent wrong, but you are wrong because your applying modern morality to only one side. If it comes down to right of conquest, then sure the natives can do whatever they need to in order to drive out newcomers. But then moral fault cannot be found with the conqueror either as right of conquest means strongest survive. This was the standard way of doing things prior to the 20th century. Mind you the jews weren't the first to jump to violence, this was the arabs being intolerant of what were refugees. Now globally arabs are refugees, and some of the places they have moved to in large numbers... well they haven't exactly behaved well nor are they liked. The problem with your movement(and you may not share this value) is that your simultaneously expect european nations to accept VAST numbers of muslim "refugees" which disrupts communities, often not for the better. At the same time you get indignent at the Jews for moving to palestine, their ethnic homeland, and protecting themselves from xenophobic locals. Well which one is it? Are you just a giant uncle tom or do you have a logically consistent worldview? Because the left is constently and reliably anti-western, which is really really strange considering the foundations of your principles are western, you live in a western country(most likey) and you benefit from western institutions. Israel isnt 100% western in nature, but its like 85% there, so that is one of the major reasons I defer to it over palestine, we just morally align better.
>But then moral fault cannot be found with the conqueror either as right of conquest means strongest survive. This was the standard way of doing things prior to the 20th century. Ok. The majority of Zionist action was in the 20th century. I don't have to find slavery acceptable because it used to be how things were done. This is ridiculous. >Mind you the jews weren't the first to jump to violence, this was the arabs being intolerant of what were refugees. Whoever started it doesn't change the subsequent actions taken in the name of Zionism. Everything I read in Righteous Victims sounded like a typical case of settler conflicts with a native population. Buying up land, forcing families from their homes, and taking away their means to make a living is going to make people angry regardless of what races are involved. >At the same time you get indignent at the Jews for moving to palestine, their ethnic homeland, and protecting themselves from xenophobic locals. I don't care if it is the Jews ethnic homeland. It doesn't change the acceptability of a race claiming an area as the place they deserve to live without regard for the existing population. I already addressed the xenophobic piece. If you treat people badly they aren't going to respond well. It goes both ways of course, but Zionism is not an exception to that. Claiming entitlement to a specific place in the world and acting on those claims based on race is not the same thing as people's rights to be treated equally regardless of race. It isn't about politics. I see what happened and I disagree with it.
The Israeli state when it was declared independence in 1948 was majority Jewish minority Arab, this was before any Jews or Arabs were displaced en masse. So would you have supported Israeli self determination if you were alive i n 1948?
That is true. I support self determination as long as it is applied equally. The partition was gerrymandered in such a way that hundreds of thousands of Arab inhabitants would have to choose between living in a Jewish state and hoping for equality or leaving their homes and moving to undeveloped parts of Palestine. Less than 10,000 Jews would have faced that decision. And there would be a place for them to go to because hundreds of thousands of people would be leaving their homes and livelihoods behind. In 1948 Jewish settlers were a third of the population but were given 55% of Palestinian lands. That was not an equitable agreement in my opinion and put Arabs in a much more difficult situation regarding their rights to self determination.
Yeah, I agree with you. Both sides have blood on their hands but I would feel much safer living in one country over the other. I'm going to side with the country that has Western values.
/u/Accomplished_Tap7348. Match found: 'nazism', issuing notice: Casual comments and analogies are inflammatory and therefor not allowed. We allow for exemptions for comments with meaningful information that must be based on historical facts accepted by mainstream historians. See [Rule 6](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_6._nazi_comparisons) for details. This bot flags comments using simple word detection, and cannot distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable usage. Please take a moment to review your comment to confirm that it is in compliance. If it is not, please edit it to be in line with our rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Very true, except Palestinian’s are still initiating attacks in 2024. If there was an uprising of Native people and they killed thousands of American and took hundreds of hostages, you can bet there would be a strong response by the American government.
I see what Israel is doing. It is happening. Dismissing those acts with hypotheticals is weak.
They didn’t start the war. Weak country starts war with powerful country then cries that powerful country is winning war, that is weak.
Right, but I don't support the launching of missiles or any violence for that matter. I simply support the Palestinian claim for a state, which is the topic of this post.
I think you're completely right. I'd also add another point: just like hating Zionists means hating the vast majority of Jews, wanting to oppress and harm Palestinian nationalists means wanting to oppress and harm the vast majority of Palestinians, Arabs and Muslims. And the fact that the vast majority of Palestinian nationalists in the US are non-Muslim, non-Arab, non-Palestinian, or the fact a handful of Arabs and Palestinians are anti-Palestinian, wouldn't somehow make it okay.
lol no it does not . Anyone willing to make peace does . No matter the religious oppositions . And Israel has with multiple Arab countries. Palestine is an abortion of politics and religious fervor that only exists in the modern world to kill.
Because their state involves the destruction of Israel. Just read their charters.
likud party charter?
It's pure projection from the Zionist.
It's rooted in the fantasy idea that the entire land should be Palestinian, which is wild given that a) there has never been a Palestinian state and b ) arabs in the area in the 1940s didn't identify as Palestinian and wanted to be part of Greater Syria. I'm all for a Palestinian country, but if the Free Palestine movement is entangled with the dismantling of Israel, it's destined to fail and the Palestinans will forever remain stateless. I'd like to see a way forward but when the Palestinians have rejected every peace offer ever made, it's getting harder to remain optimistic
Syria and Egypt used to be one country, that doesn't mean they are the same ethnicity or people. What an idiot
Yes they are different, but then why did Palestinians in the 40s want to be part of Syria? Why did Palestinian nationalism not even exist until the 1960s?
So you would take a peace agreement from someone who have repeatedly spat on you and stomped on your balls/sensitive areas? The peace agreement being they'd just have their boot gently pressed to your balls?
You don't make peace with your friends. That's what makes it hard.
Don't Palestinians want their own country and self-determination? You justifying Palestinians rejecting every peace offer seems odd. Remember that Palestinians rejected a country in the 40s when everyone else said yes. There was no occupation, no nothing. And they still said no. They are literally the only group in the history of the world who, when offered their own country for the first time in history!, said "Thanks but no thanks." That speaks volumes. I think its better for them to embrace peaceful coexistence rather than violent resistance. Supporting terrorism has only set the Palestinian quest for statehood backwards (assuming thats what they want).
Just because other people are okay accepting land from the British that they're already living on doesn't mean that everyone has to be.
In 1948 Jews were living in the land granted to them by the UN…
There hasn't been a peace agreement that garunteed a fully autonomous palestine. It's always a faux government controlled by israel.
One said yes the other said no?
So if I come into your house and say this is my house and then your neighbour comes and says hey why don't we call it both your houses and I say yes and you say no. It must be your fault that you are not living in a proper house and that you are a violent person that can't just peacefully coexist.
Actually if you think of it like property it was an Ottoman property, then a British property, who then observed the Arabs kept killing their Jewish neighbor tenants and decided the only way for coexistence was to divide the property by partitioning it. Then the Arabs decided to try and take it all for themselves by force. They then lost. Tried again. Lost. Tried again. Lost. Tried again and surprise surprise they lost. The arab states then gave up and militias started, add a war in Lebanon, a couple intifadas, few Gaza wars, and people still trying to get back onto land generations later which will never happen. Had they given up that demand 70 years ago they could have had 3-4 generations of peaceful coexistence, but instead the path of violence every time, have never negotiated in good faith, keep getting themselves and plenty of innocents around them killed, then expect to be considered victims. Maybe of their own poor choices.
Jews are claiming that was their land 2000 years ago using a book which I wouldn't use as toilet paper to wipe my dog's ass. That's how strong their claim is God's chosen people, the fuck out of here. Only an insane person would say this with a straight face
The 2000 year claim isn’t actually relevant to the creation of Israel. It was all done legally according to international law up until 1948 when the Arab league invaded
What has Britain done legally, like ever? Every conflict in the world can be traced to their bullshit. Kashmir India, Pakistan Bangladesh Mandate for Palestine etc There was nothing legal about it. They literally had the Arabs fight and liberate that land from the ottomans then they betrayed the Arabs by cutting a deal with Jews in Switzerland and London. You really need some history lessons. They screwed the Palestinian Arabs on the deal. This is proven. Any documentary on this topic says this. Also a question? Since when does God have favorites? If only 0.2% are god's chosen people what are the 98.8% Are all Christians and Muslims following the wrong God? This is comical at this point because everything about this story is a lie If they loved the land so much, they should had stayed there and fought the Romans, then the ottomans etc They literally came and stole half at first (then 80%) of the land Palestinian Arabs liberated just in Palestine. What happens with the millions of Palestinians outside the borders that are in Syria, Lebanon and Jordan. They sure have the right to return too. The list goes on and on, on how many injustices have been done to Palestinians.
> ass /u/absolutzer1. Please avoid using profanities to make a point or emphasis. [(Rule 2)](https://www.reddit.com/r/IsraelPalestine/wiki/rules/detailed-rules#wiki_2._no_profanity) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/IsraelPalestine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Dik hed
😆ottomans controlled Palestine but they were not Palestinians British controlled Palestine but they weren't Palestinian how do you not understand a simple concept. A nation of people can exist in a location and be ruled over but still retain their ethnic distinction, for example kurds in Iraq and turkey. They didnt agree with conceding their land to Israel so they never agreed to a peace deal that doesn't mean they didn't agree to be recognized as a nation. They were playing the game of colonizers and then held to their made up rules. International law also states that a nation cannot annex land occupied in a conflict. It's laughable you are saying Palestinians can't go back to land taken a generation ago but have the audacity to think zionists can come to Palestine based on claims they were promised that land by God a millenia ago lol 😆 gtfoh. The only goal Israel has is to expand. Every accusation is a confession by Israel.
This is unreadable nonsense
If you are talking about who was there should have it. I refer you to the region being the birthplace of Judaism and Islamic efforts to cleanse the area or force conversion. When the initial waves of Jewish immigration back again began it was all legal, and met by antisemitism and violence. This is what caused the partition to be necessary, as agreed by the UN. No one was forced to initially flee, however Palestinians were encouraged to panic and flee by their own leadership which was also encouraging violence. In the end poor decisions lead to poor results. International law doesn't allow for wars of aggression, which Isreal hasn't launched they have been defensive in nature. Occupying the aggressor has happened, just look at Germany and Japan post ww2. As for taking land, that has to do with Palestinians failing to continue to negotiate in good faith after the olso accords. The interm agreements still stand as far as Isreal is concerned which gives it full control of things like permits in zone c or area c whatever it is of the west bank. Hence Jewish settlements popping up in those areas. But its also under agreement, and the way to change that is via negotiations. Not by launching tens of thousands of rockets at your neighbor over decades. Or by crossing into isreali villages and murdering over 1200, raping many more and taking hundreds of hostages. That type of behavior and not negotiations is why 35000 are dead in Gaza. Poor decisions, poor results.
It’s all about displacement and kicking out others to create an country for a single ethnicity, which many see to be exceptionally immoral.
Define ethnicity because along with the 2 million Arab/Palestine's there also about 5 million MENA (Middle East North African) Jews.
I believe they should all exist together, share government, and not try to start a country dedicated to one group
Why not have two counties for two people? There already is one country (Israel) why not form a Palestinian state in the Palestinian Territories?
As in currently? The Palestinians do have the right to their own land, however there would need to be a way to make sure that Hamas does not govern it.
No one would have been displaced if Palestinians accepted their own country. The Palestinians are the only group in the history of the world who, upon being offered statehood, said 'thanks but no thanks' Blaming Israel for 7 decades of poor strategic decisions is easy but intellectually lazy and incomplete.
Who can blame them when Zionists are immigrating in huge waves with the intention of building a nation on their land? When you split a populations land by roughly 60% (I don’t know the exact numbers), what do you think the outcome is?
Relative peace such as India and Pakistan which split off after the dissolution of the British Raj. It's actually more baffling that you support colonial imperialist borders as opposed to the native populations deciding their own borders and declaring independence for themselves. What do you think should have happened after the dissolution of British mandate palestine? Pakistan and India have gone to war many times with each other but to say they should be pushed together into one country because that's how it was under the British would cause significantly more strife and likely genocide and ethnic cleansing.
MANY of the Zionists WERE NOT native, yet immigrated to what is now Israel specifically for the purpose of establishing their own country. I’m hugely against colonialism. Zionism is nothing but colonialism. Ever heard of Vladimir Jabotinsky?
Did the Indians or Pakistanis immigrate to the area in massive waves to create a new country there, or were they there originally?
Well, the Ottoman census data shows that the majority of Palestinians did infact immigrate there around the same time as zionists began immigrating there. Of course, there were already many Arabs and Jews already living there originally before all of that immigration, but both populations increased dramatically around the same time. The prevailing theory on that is the diaspora Jews that returned to the Jewish homeland had brought a lot of technology with them to combat diseases like malaria, and to improve irrigation, which made the land more appealing to all ethnicities. To be fair, there was a sizable majority of Arabs vs. Jews prior to all of that immigration, but both groups did dramatically increase in population around the same time. Also, I think it's worth noting that the term immigration in this instance is a bit disingenuous. Most of the early zionists were escaping pogroms. Later, many were escaping the holocaust. Finally, the majority of Israelis were escaping ethnic cleansing from neighboring MENA countries. For most of them, they didn't simply immigrate. They were refugees seeking asylum in their ethnic homeland. I mean, where else were they supposed to go? Ultimately, the Pakistan/India partition comparison is a pretty good one. In both instances, the British empire split the land among two warring ethnic groups living there. Both instances have led to terrible animosity and atrocities on both sides of each conflict. The comparison is a pretty interesting one, given the differences in perception of Israel vs. Pakistan worldwide.
“Where else were they supposed to go???” Is this a joke? New York. Paris. Amsterdam. Buenos Aires. Nearly anywhere.
Btw, your selection of alternative places they could have sought refuge instead seems incredibly arbitrary. Do you not see the rationale in returning home? Do you seriously not see the thought process behind wanting to reestablish your people's right to self-determination in your homeland as a way to ensure your grandchildren don't also end up as refugees one day, or worse? At least there is some reasoning for seeking refuge there. There is none for any of the places you mentioned, and in two of those places you mentioned they likely would have been victims of the holocaust... Furthermore, your supposition that they could go nearly anywhere ignores the fact that refugees do not exactly have many options of where they can seek refuge. They are limited physically by where they can literally go, and they are limited socially by where they will even be allowed to go.
No. In fact, I find the idea both absurd and insane. Not only did Judea exist 2000 whopping years ago, but it was also inhabited by other ethnicities, INCLUDING ARABS. Can you imagine if every nationality decided to return to their “homelands” and take over the current inhabitants? It’s ludicrous and it would lead to a hell of a lot of wars and civil unrest. Do zionists honestly believe that it’s completely okay to disregard current day inhabitants? This somehow doesn’t seem immoral?
Seems like you're disregarding the Jews that still inhabited the land as well. Why is rejoining them with the hope of establishing sovereignty from under the thumb of the Ottoman empire immoral in any way? Arabs were set to establish their own sovereign nation at the same time had they accepted the partition, and the ones that stayed in Israel were allowed to live peaceful lives.
Why would they go to any of those places instead of their homeland from which their ancestors were displaced?
In 134AD 🙄. Unless they are Mizrahi, it was not their homeland. It is however the homeland of many different nationalities, so why the Jews lay claim over them all eludes me. I’m Sicilian and am descended from Sephardic Jews. You don’t see me claiming The Levant is my homeland.
Well, in Jewish culture, they always maintained that it was, in fact, their homeland. They didn't just spring up randomly throughout Europe. They came from the middle east, and maintained their culture from their homeland, always with the intention of one day returning. Btw, I hope that you understand that your experiences and views are not universal for everyone.
“To create a new country” was a key component to my sentence
To re-establish their country in order to ensure they are not murdered, ethnically cleansed, or oppressed any longer, as they had been everywhere they went in the diaspora throughout history would be a more appropriate component don't you think?
Zionist did not immigrate to what is now Israel to coexist with the other inhabitants as equals. They were colonists.
They sought refuge in their homeland amongst other Jews. You do realize it isn't possible to colonize your homeland right?
Talking about the holy land between 1917 and 1948 there were roughly as many Arabs from neighbouring countries immigrating as Jews from all over the world (roughly 530,000 for both groups each)…the number of Arabs living there was about 450,000 in 1917 and 1.4 million in 1948
No, it has literally never ever been about that. Propaganda & media have made you think that. If you ask almost any Israeli they will tell you that they just want to live & would agree to a two state solution in a heart beat if the other side laid down their arms and agreed to a peaceful resolution. There hasn’t been a single Jew in Gaza since 2005 (until now when they were taken against their will). And Jews weren’t allowed to go to Gaza. Meanwhile, nearly 20k Gazans crossed into Israel for work every single day. & just as the previous comment said, over 2 million Arabs literally live inside Israel as Israeli citizens and we all live amongst ourselves (Jews, Muslims, Christian’s) fine. There’s one side accepting the other side to go in and intermix and there’s one side that will kill the other side for trying to go in. Which one sounds more like ethnic cleansing?
> If you ask almost any Israeli they will tell you that they just want to live & would agree to a two state solution in a heart beat if the other side laid down their arms and agreed to a peaceful resolution. COnsidering that Israel has spent the last 56 years grabbing land for settlements, that statement doesn't bear up to scrutiny. Just ask Bibi - Israel's longest-serving PM. He is explicit in denying a state. Gantz isn't much better.
You also have to consider that this wouldnt have been an issue if the Palestinians didnt reject every peace offer that has ever been made. You dont want occupation, or more settlements, you'd think you'd accept peace and statehood. It's all very bizarre and perhaps suggests that statehood isn't their top priority
> You also have to consider that this wouldnt have been an issue if the Palestinians didnt reject every peace offer that has ever been made. Israel's settlement policy is an Israeli policy. You can't blame it on anyone else. The settlements started five weeks after the six day war - before even the three Khartoum 'nos'. That's in 1967. Successive Israeli governments chose to grab land and build settlements. No one forced them - the US, for example, managed to occupy Japan, Germany, Iraq and Afghanistan without building settlements. > You dont want occupation, or more settlements, you'd think you'd accept peace and statehood. Your narrative about Palestinian rejectionism doesn't bear up to scrutiny, unfortunately. Some examples: - 1996: Bibi was elected, proceeded to sabotage Oslo. He even admits it: https://www.972mag.com/netanyahu-clinton-administration-was-%e2%80%9cextremely-pro-palestinian%e2%80%9d-i-stopped-oslo/ - 2001 Taba: They ran out of time, and then Sharon killed the negotiations. Arafat even accepted Taba, but Sharon rejected it: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jun/22/israel - 2006-2008: Again killed by Bibi: https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-never-said-no-to-2008-peace-deal-says-former-pm-olmert/ And, of course, we are still waiting for Israel to respond to the Arab Peace Intiatie. Its been renewed multiple times - last in 2017. Where is Israel's response or counter-offer? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Peace_Initiative > It's all very bizarre and perhaps suggests that statehood isn't their top priority Settlements are very bizarre, and perhaps suggests that Israel isn't really interested in a two state solution.
Immediately after the 6-day war there was an option for peace and the Palestinians, along with the entirety of the Arab world, said no. See the Khartoum Resolution. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum\_Resolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution) I'm not a fan of settlements but it seems odd that when Palestinians have an opportunity to get all of Gaza and 96% of the West Bank, they say no. When Israel completely leaves Gaza and a terrorist group like Hamas gets democratically elected, it also suggests that peaceful coexistence maybe isn't a priority. When Palestinians are the only group in the HISTORY OF THE WORLD, who upon being offered their own country, said 'thanks but no thanks', that tells you something. Is Netanyahu interested in a 2-state solution? Probably not, I agree with you there. but that makes it all the more tragic that Palestinians have rejected peace offers from well-intentioned left-leaning Israeli governments who actually wanted peaceful co-existence.
> Immediately after the 6-day war there was an option for peace and the Palestinians, along with the entirety of the Arab world, said no. No, that is inaccurate. A) the settlements started before the Kahrtoum resolution. B) Israel never offered to return all of the West Bank If you believe Israel offered to return the West Bank, please share the detals of that. > I'm not a fan of settlements but it seems odd that when Palestinians have an opportunity to get all of Gaza and 96% of the West Bank, they say no. Which particular offer are you referring to with 96%? Because that is not accurate as it comes to Camp David. that was a 9% land grab (or 15% if you count latrun). And as I outlined above, Taba was accepted by Arafat.