They’re not a country, but they’re a nation. There’s a definite shared concept of what a Palestinian is and isn’t. They’re a nation that wants a country.
[/QUOTE]
What? huh? They’re a nation but not a country? WTF does that mean? So are the Kurds a nation but not a country too? Are the Catillians a nation but not a country? Texans?
What kind of fine distinction are you trying to make in order to make Israel’s actions seem more legitimate?
Odds are I can find something that was confiscated from one of my ancestors before I was born. Why should I have any claim to it?
Yeah, Israel is one of those areas where otherwise reasonable people become irrational.
I had a partner who was smart, scary smart. He was rational and logical in everything he did but when it came to israel, he started to froth at the mouth if you even suggested some criticism towards Israel.
The point we were arguing is whether the anti-semitism we see in the middle east today is the result of the creation of the state of Israel. It defies reason to argue that the antisemitism would be the same regardeless of whether or not Israel existed.
Didn’t we have a long-ass thread about that exact issue, and it turned out your position was based on a critical lack of information - i.e., that this was a plea deal in the face of an actual violent rape?
I define “second class citizen” as someone who has, legally, a second-class status. Thus, “jim crow” laws. It isn’t because some group in a country are bigoted.
(How do Malays in Malaysia count, btw?)
The problem is, folks on your ‘side’, lacking any reasonable proof of actual “second class” status, tend to seize on symbolic and/or invented “humiliations” to prove their point - as in the rape case you allege, and as in the example of the signs in Ben Gurion Airport.
I dug into that one a bit, and discovered that not only are the signs in arabic being put up - but also, the airport is installing a Muslim prayer room in the airport and hiring arabic-speaking security:
… which again, somewhat undermines the “OMG second class status” argument.
Not that there are not real and persistant problems - there are. Especially in the treatment of Negev’s Bedouin population, and continuing issues over equal access to education and water rights. But these real issues rarely make the news, or the blogs, because they are not “sexy” - they are exactly the sorts of problems that show up everywhere (my country of Canada for example).
The Kurds are a nation but not a country too. No idea about the Catalans or the Texans. Texas does seem to have a sort of national identity, though.
And if anything, the fact that the Palestinians are a nation makes Israel’s occupation less legitimate.
I see you have no arguments left, other than name-calling. Still sore from upthread? 
No, the point you were arguing was that the Middle East was some paradise for Jews until the Zionists came along and made the Muslims hate the Jews.
I think his point is that the more Jews that you have around the more anti-semitism will result. He may have a point.
If you insist on not getting the point, then you won’t.
If you won’t change your views when presented with uncontested facts contrary to 'em - then you won’t.
Or in other words - how’s that Israeli control over the Dome of the Rock working out for ya? 
This is not limited to the Israeli situation by the way. Quebec insists that the Quebec people are a nation but not a country, hence they call their parliament the National Assembly. There is a subtle difference in meaning between the two terms. As it happens, the nation of the U.S. is the same as the country of the U.S., so Americans are not generally aware of the difference. Basically, a nation is a set of people but a country has sovereignty.
[End of hijack.]
Repeated for emphasis.
I’m sure you’re aware of it, but a nation is more than a “set of people”. It’s a set of people sharing a common culture, or history, or language, or territory, or national values, etc. Some nations may be founded on other bases, but it’s always a concept of a distinct people sharing a sense of belonging together in the world. And the definition is largely subjective, in the sense that a nation exists if the people who are part of it agree it does.
As for “countries”, this is also a term that may cause confusion. England and Scotland, for example, are called countries even though they are not independent states. They have “sovereignty”, as you say, but only partially. But a country is always a defined territory, with a (at least partially) sovereign government, which is usually home to a specific people.
Yes, I was simplifying because I didn’t want to hijack the thread too long.
As one who is synpathetic to the cause of Quebec sovereignty], what is your position on Israeli governmnet policy?
Well, let’s be precise: I may be “sympathetic” to Quebec sovereignty in some ways, but that doesn’t mean I think it’s the best idea. As for the Israeli government policy, keep in mind that I’m not the most knowledgeable about it, but I would summarize my opinion by saying that I understand it, but that in the interest of lasting peace Israel should loosen the restrictions faced by Palestinians even if in the short term it may increase the security risk. The settlements in the West Bank in particular strike me as an especially bad idea. At this point evacuating the Israeli settlers will be very difficult, but it will probably have to happen anyway, so I’m wondering why they were established in the first place. Other than that, what do you want to know?
If you can provide some evidence that the government took your grandfather’s IBM stock for no reason, let me know, I can get you a lot of money, any lawyer could.
I believe paradise is a word you used, not me. You said that the treatment of Jews was only slightly better in the middle east than in europe and I argued that the difference was more than slight. This doesn’t even begin to imply that the middle east was paradise for Jews considering how they were treated in Europe.
If you go back a little further you will see that I was in fact making (or at least beginning to make) the argument that there wasn’t all the current antisemitism you see in the middle east until Israel became an issue.
We are where we are and we have to make do from here but its more than dishonest to pretend that the arabs have always hated the Jews like this, they weren’t provoked in any way and then one day they just attacked Israel.
So what youa re saying is the Palestinians are a “people” (I guess this is the term I would use everywhere you would use the term nation, when I think of nation, I think of United Nations) but Palestine is not a country? I guess I can go with that.