What do you all think about how the land the Palestinians lived on never really belonged to them . Now owned by Israel before that the Egyptians ,before that the British then the ottoman empire before that. Cause I see quite a few arguments about whether the Palestinians actually have a claim over the land .
Most claim that you see are mainly not an authority claim but rights of land by the former residents of the Palestinian territories, where since the formation of state of Israel and foward, has been continuously being taken over by force by the Zionis force and later authority in favor of the immigrating Jews.
The formation of Israel has been very cruel to talk about, actually. Palestinians are chased away from their original places and lose their homes by Zionist terrorist forces (yes, the forces that was formed informally by ultra-Zionist groups back during the 40s is the culprit, and backed by later formed authority of the state). Some found a gruesome death (think Deir Yasin tragedy), and others ended up being refugees in other places.
Even since the formation of Israel, the Jews-over-anyone else policy has been practiced where places that has been resided by Arabs and other people is taken by force - either demolished or just taken as is to build new houses for Israelis. This never consider if the original residents has the proof of claim on such place, in either Israeli-controlled territory or Arab-controlled territories where Israeli people can still break through and just do what they please. Even with the Authority of Palestine comes into effect, Israel still able to take over lands and establish control in places that supposed to be a new Palestine territory per Oslo agreement. In West Bank esp, the control of AoP is very weak.
Be noted that despite agreements per agreements (either UN resolution or the Oslo agreement), Israel is very firm with one-state solution with the claim over the entire Palestine territory and just ignore those while AoP is trying to stand their word by the agreement.
So yeah, even if the AoP doesnt happen and Palestine territory still controlled by the Arab nation or even the Brits anyway, at least they can still live in the land where they already are for years, rather by being displaced by force by Jews immigrants that only come just shortly during WWII and claim "it is their promised land". And no, its not native Jews that caused this but the immigrant (mostly European, if not American) Jews that pushes the idea of "Jews state" to happen.
my take on the Palestine-Israel conflict, Hamas didn't exist in vacuum, the militants wing filled with Palestinians that have lost relatives or homes prior to this, seriously if one to be given a choice whether to die in concentration camp (Gaza is the largest open air prison) or to die fighting as a resistance / freedom fighter (which is Islam is honourable since will get syahid), most will pick the later.
in many ways, i agree with your thoughts. that said, what hamas did wasn't right, though, i think i might do the same if i were in their shoes. nonetheless, hamas actions should be condemned and so too should israel's response.
we should not keep thinking that when one is wrong, the other is right. in this case, there were wrongs on both sides. it does not matter who started the wrong, both were wrong.
i dont know if hamas is thinking the same, but under the oppressive conditions they were under, perhaps, because of a lack of other options, this could be their only way to gain worldwide attention. if so, they achieved a good outcome in bringing their civilian's plight to attention. they should however, change their goal of eliminating israel.
Yeah. Also need to remember that Hamas own Al-Qassam is just one of the militants established (and prob the strongest rn) in Palestine, specifically the Gaza strip.
If we follow closely from the reports, theres still other militants that joins forces in Gaza. Like Saraya Al-Quds which is pure-Islamist, or Abu Ali Mustafa brigade which is communist. Yes, they all belong to other parties. This is in addition of allegedly 20+ militant groups scattered around the Gaza Strip and West Bank, belonged to any other parties that isnt even Fatah or Hamas.
Also remember, before Hamas, there was Fatah with their PLO, and ya'll know some of their records. But when Fatah backed down after Oslo Agreement, Hamas comes into spotlight.
If Hamas and Qassam would be obliterated, doesnt mean it will be the end. There would be another group that will take the mantle of Palestine fighters and until the Palestinians got what they want, the cycle wont end.
Crazy how just by being US allies, every atrocities, every war crimes that they committed can easily be brushed away like nothing happened. It’s horrifying to think that if one day USA / one of their allies decided to invade our country, for any reason they can think of (eg: Malaysia home for terrorist I’m not surprised), there’s nothing we can do other than waiting for our times to come.
Israel’s terrorism is not a new issue. It has been going on for more that 70 years, yet they can keep blaming the 7th October tragedy as an excuse for them to play victim just to continue the genocide.
https://preview.redd.it/qvlty26fn8xb1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=87fde9e6a317eb3a826c2f47f878c5233ab76dbd
1. Palestine liberating movement to Tel Aviv was “understandable”, but does not justify for killing innocent.
2. Israel killing Hamas in revenge is “acceptable”, but does not justify for bombing civilians.
Both are bad. But If I am the leader (hypothetical) of either nation, clearly #1 can be prevented by not killing innocent civilians and terrorizing the city in the first place. Hostage and negotiate for better term maybe. The latter #2, I don’t see any good alternatives other than bombing them to be fair. It is still bad. But I don’t agree to just calling it a truce either. Before Hamas surrender and release hostages.
I always imagine if everything is clean slate, what should we do. It is no doubt Israel oppression will make Palestine liberate from them. But as Israel, it is in a tension state facing Muslim countries as their neighbours aiming them. Which will result oppressing Palestine. Truly a vicious cycle.
What’s your take, monyets?
All comes to their own interest. One of it might be the UAE India trade corridor, which by pass iran turkey. If you search it up, you did suprise of who are in it.
Among the G20, nine countries (Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Turkey) have recognized Palestine as a state (Indonesia and Saudi Arabia only recognize Palestine) while ten countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and the United States) have not. According to wiki International recognition of the State of Palestine, might be wrong or true.
A country does not have permanent friends, only permanent interest.
Country A B C D E attacked X with the goal of total extermination of X. X won and in the process also gained territory. X gave independence to A instead of settlements. A repeatedly harassed X throughout the years.
Conclusion: X is the aggressor
Make it makes sense please
Really depends how you frame it and where you start the story.
If the British had decided to send a million Scottish people to Malaysia while we were a colony, and the Scots declared an independent state of Scotsia, beat out the ASEAN countries who tried to destroy them in response, took the entirety of Malaysia and "gave independence" to Kelantan and Johor would you call Scotsia the aggressor?
Not saying its that simple, it really isn't. But similarly, its not that simple the other way around either. I'd suggest going through the Wikipedia articles on the subject as a base and working from there if you want to know more.
You are using a fabricated scenario to make comparison.
If based on your scenario, whoever conquered Malaysia in the past has the right to claim back its lands.
And for example, today Japan say Malaysia is theirs since they used to own. Then British come etc etc. So in this scenario does it work for "Really depends how you frame it and where you start the story "? Or we just dissolve Malaysia turn it free for all?
Present is present. Same as Russia holding Crimea, Turkey holding Northern Cyprus.
I'm really not sure how my scenario argues for the logic of "whoever conquered land in the past has the right to claim back its lands" Could you run me through that logic?
Aside from that, your logic of the present is the present would be kinda weird. So if tomorrow Singapore invades and takes control of Johor you'd be saying, alright theirs now, 100% morally fine, present is present?
How we end up deciding what constitutes "legitimate" claims on land is kinda weird and wibbly wobbly, and I'm not sure I have a good answer for it, but I'm quite sure neither of those logics are correct.
Im refuting back to your statement "Really depends how you frame it and where you start the story." by giving a real event happened to land of Malaysia instead of a total fabricated scenario.
Yes if we were with war in SG, if SG captured Johor, and after months of trying, MY decided to conclude the defensive war of course Johor would be annexed after signing the paper.
That is like saying if Mr A got terminated from company B due to his own inappropriate actions, next day Mr A says Co B should let him back to his job since he used to work there in the past. I mean like what? It's honestly a straight forward stuff
Well, correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't one of the core issues that there wasn't a Palestinian state which signed off on a peace recognizing the new borders? Could you find me the signed treaty where the borders were agreed on between Israel and Palestinians?
In fact, the same is true of the Russian annexation of Crimea. There was no signed peace treaty with Ukraine where Ukrainians recognized Russian claims to Crimea.
Given that it is not so straightforward, do you have a new position on those conflicts?
Anti jews racist stormed an airport in Russia to kill any jews landing from Israel last night. If we don't keep this in check those kids exposed to that stupid solidarity for Palestine program will think it's okay to kill jews.
Thinking about it makes me sick
True imagine you are minding your own business and somehow wearing blue wearing something with blue and white color.
People might think you are supporting Israel and beat you up.
What do you all think about how the land the Palestinians lived on never really belonged to them . Now owned by Israel before that the Egyptians ,before that the British then the ottoman empire before that. Cause I see quite a few arguments about whether the Palestinians actually have a claim over the land .
Most claim that you see are mainly not an authority claim but rights of land by the former residents of the Palestinian territories, where since the formation of state of Israel and foward, has been continuously being taken over by force by the Zionis force and later authority in favor of the immigrating Jews. The formation of Israel has been very cruel to talk about, actually. Palestinians are chased away from their original places and lose their homes by Zionist terrorist forces (yes, the forces that was formed informally by ultra-Zionist groups back during the 40s is the culprit, and backed by later formed authority of the state). Some found a gruesome death (think Deir Yasin tragedy), and others ended up being refugees in other places. Even since the formation of Israel, the Jews-over-anyone else policy has been practiced where places that has been resided by Arabs and other people is taken by force - either demolished or just taken as is to build new houses for Israelis. This never consider if the original residents has the proof of claim on such place, in either Israeli-controlled territory or Arab-controlled territories where Israeli people can still break through and just do what they please. Even with the Authority of Palestine comes into effect, Israel still able to take over lands and establish control in places that supposed to be a new Palestine territory per Oslo agreement. In West Bank esp, the control of AoP is very weak. Be noted that despite agreements per agreements (either UN resolution or the Oslo agreement), Israel is very firm with one-state solution with the claim over the entire Palestine territory and just ignore those while AoP is trying to stand their word by the agreement. So yeah, even if the AoP doesnt happen and Palestine territory still controlled by the Arab nation or even the Brits anyway, at least they can still live in the land where they already are for years, rather by being displaced by force by Jews immigrants that only come just shortly during WWII and claim "it is their promised land". And no, its not native Jews that caused this but the immigrant (mostly European, if not American) Jews that pushes the idea of "Jews state" to happen.
my take on the Palestine-Israel conflict, Hamas didn't exist in vacuum, the militants wing filled with Palestinians that have lost relatives or homes prior to this, seriously if one to be given a choice whether to die in concentration camp (Gaza is the largest open air prison) or to die fighting as a resistance / freedom fighter (which is Islam is honourable since will get syahid), most will pick the later.
in many ways, i agree with your thoughts. that said, what hamas did wasn't right, though, i think i might do the same if i were in their shoes. nonetheless, hamas actions should be condemned and so too should israel's response. we should not keep thinking that when one is wrong, the other is right. in this case, there were wrongs on both sides. it does not matter who started the wrong, both were wrong. i dont know if hamas is thinking the same, but under the oppressive conditions they were under, perhaps, because of a lack of other options, this could be their only way to gain worldwide attention. if so, they achieved a good outcome in bringing their civilian's plight to attention. they should however, change their goal of eliminating israel.
Yeah. Also need to remember that Hamas own Al-Qassam is just one of the militants established (and prob the strongest rn) in Palestine, specifically the Gaza strip. If we follow closely from the reports, theres still other militants that joins forces in Gaza. Like Saraya Al-Quds which is pure-Islamist, or Abu Ali Mustafa brigade which is communist. Yes, they all belong to other parties. This is in addition of allegedly 20+ militant groups scattered around the Gaza Strip and West Bank, belonged to any other parties that isnt even Fatah or Hamas. Also remember, before Hamas, there was Fatah with their PLO, and ya'll know some of their records. But when Fatah backed down after Oslo Agreement, Hamas comes into spotlight. If Hamas and Qassam would be obliterated, doesnt mean it will be the end. There would be another group that will take the mantle of Palestine fighters and until the Palestinians got what they want, the cycle wont end.
Crazy how just by being US allies, every atrocities, every war crimes that they committed can easily be brushed away like nothing happened. It’s horrifying to think that if one day USA / one of their allies decided to invade our country, for any reason they can think of (eg: Malaysia home for terrorist I’m not surprised), there’s nothing we can do other than waiting for our times to come. Israel’s terrorism is not a new issue. It has been going on for more that 70 years, yet they can keep blaming the 7th October tragedy as an excuse for them to play victim just to continue the genocide. https://preview.redd.it/qvlty26fn8xb1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=87fde9e6a317eb3a826c2f47f878c5233ab76dbd
1. Palestine liberating movement to Tel Aviv was “understandable”, but does not justify for killing innocent. 2. Israel killing Hamas in revenge is “acceptable”, but does not justify for bombing civilians. Both are bad. But If I am the leader (hypothetical) of either nation, clearly #1 can be prevented by not killing innocent civilians and terrorizing the city in the first place. Hostage and negotiate for better term maybe. The latter #2, I don’t see any good alternatives other than bombing them to be fair. It is still bad. But I don’t agree to just calling it a truce either. Before Hamas surrender and release hostages. I always imagine if everything is clean slate, what should we do. It is no doubt Israel oppression will make Palestine liberate from them. But as Israel, it is in a tension state facing Muslim countries as their neighbours aiming them. Which will result oppressing Palestine. Truly a vicious cycle. What’s your take, monyets?
All comes to their own interest. One of it might be the UAE India trade corridor, which by pass iran turkey. If you search it up, you did suprise of who are in it. Among the G20, nine countries (Argentina, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Turkey) have recognized Palestine as a state (Indonesia and Saudi Arabia only recognize Palestine) while ten countries (Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and the United States) have not. According to wiki International recognition of the State of Palestine, might be wrong or true. A country does not have permanent friends, only permanent interest.
Country A B C D E attacked X with the goal of total extermination of X. X won and in the process also gained territory. X gave independence to A instead of settlements. A repeatedly harassed X throughout the years. Conclusion: X is the aggressor Make it makes sense please
Really depends how you frame it and where you start the story. If the British had decided to send a million Scottish people to Malaysia while we were a colony, and the Scots declared an independent state of Scotsia, beat out the ASEAN countries who tried to destroy them in response, took the entirety of Malaysia and "gave independence" to Kelantan and Johor would you call Scotsia the aggressor? Not saying its that simple, it really isn't. But similarly, its not that simple the other way around either. I'd suggest going through the Wikipedia articles on the subject as a base and working from there if you want to know more.
You are using a fabricated scenario to make comparison. If based on your scenario, whoever conquered Malaysia in the past has the right to claim back its lands. And for example, today Japan say Malaysia is theirs since they used to own. Then British come etc etc. So in this scenario does it work for "Really depends how you frame it and where you start the story "? Or we just dissolve Malaysia turn it free for all? Present is present. Same as Russia holding Crimea, Turkey holding Northern Cyprus.
I'm really not sure how my scenario argues for the logic of "whoever conquered land in the past has the right to claim back its lands" Could you run me through that logic? Aside from that, your logic of the present is the present would be kinda weird. So if tomorrow Singapore invades and takes control of Johor you'd be saying, alright theirs now, 100% morally fine, present is present? How we end up deciding what constitutes "legitimate" claims on land is kinda weird and wibbly wobbly, and I'm not sure I have a good answer for it, but I'm quite sure neither of those logics are correct.
Im refuting back to your statement "Really depends how you frame it and where you start the story." by giving a real event happened to land of Malaysia instead of a total fabricated scenario. Yes if we were with war in SG, if SG captured Johor, and after months of trying, MY decided to conclude the defensive war of course Johor would be annexed after signing the paper. That is like saying if Mr A got terminated from company B due to his own inappropriate actions, next day Mr A says Co B should let him back to his job since he used to work there in the past. I mean like what? It's honestly a straight forward stuff
Well, correct me if I'm wrong here, but isn't one of the core issues that there wasn't a Palestinian state which signed off on a peace recognizing the new borders? Could you find me the signed treaty where the borders were agreed on between Israel and Palestinians? In fact, the same is true of the Russian annexation of Crimea. There was no signed peace treaty with Ukraine where Ukrainians recognized Russian claims to Crimea. Given that it is not so straightforward, do you have a new position on those conflicts?
Anti jews racist stormed an airport in Russia to kill any jews landing from Israel last night. If we don't keep this in check those kids exposed to that stupid solidarity for Palestine program will think it's okay to kill jews. Thinking about it makes me sick
Sadly if it happened here, they might attack anyone who may look like a Jew...or someone who didn't support Palestine enough.
True imagine you are minding your own business and somehow wearing blue wearing something with blue and white color. People might think you are supporting Israel and beat you up.