Alessan, do you believe that too?
A buffer zone, perhaps.
With the exception of the Kurds in Iraq, who traditionally take it from everybody, I cannot think of a single non-Arab minority in an Arab-majority country that has historically been mistreated (I’m talking ethnic as distinct from religious persecution, since you speak of “Arab,” not “Muslim”). Certainly not the Jews, who for much of history were far better off in any Arab or Muslim country than in any Christian country.
It’s not a question of “belief”. It’s facing facts. If there are 10% of Jews in Israel that don’t “believe” that, I’d be very surprised.
That’s because the IDF can do practically anything it wants to the Gaza Strip, but political considerations require it to carefully weigh all uses of force and their upsides and downsides and international reactions, etc.; but if the relative strengths were reversed and the IDF were a resistance underground, it would stick at nothing, not even 9/11-level shit, and don’t no rabbi try to tell me different.
Not all Arabs are Muslim and not all Muslims are Arab.
Anyway, I was referring to both ethnic and religious minorities.
So your position is that generally speaking, Jewish people have not been persecuted in Arab countries in the last 100 years?
Pretty much, yeah.
AFAIK, they weren’t persecuted at all, or even disliked, before Arabs/Muslims started hearing about this whole Zionism thing that made them so angry (which was more or less contemporaneously with the Arabs’/Muslims’ exposure to European antisemitic ideology, BTW). Anti-Jewish pogroms are a European thing mainly.
Lol, what do you suppose happened to the Jewish community in Khaybar?
Not that it really matters.
-
You seem to concede that Jews have indeed been regularly persecuted by Arabs.
-
You attribute this to Arabs having heard of Zionism. I disagree, but let’s assume for the sake of argument this is true.
-
In a hypothetical one-state arrangement, the Arabs will have heard of Zionism.
Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that the Arabs in a hypothetical one-state arrangement will persecute the Jews, just like they have done with all religious minorities in most, perhaps all majority-Arab countries.
You don’t see any way a one-state solution doesn’t drive the Jews out of the land sooner or later? What about you, newcomer?
Well, as was noted earlier, it might simply result in a civil war. Ironic if that’s how the two-state solution comes about.
Respectfully, your claim that Jews in the Muslim World, even if we ignore the 20th Century, were “treated well” that they weren’t “mistreated” and that they were “nearly equal” to Muslims is really odd coming from someone who’s been spending much of this thread making it very clear he hates Apartheid.
I don’t think that the treatment of Dhimmis was as bad as the way blacks were treated in Apartheid South Africa, but such comparisons aren’t completely unfair and are at least as warranted as trying to compare life for Palestinians in the occupied territories to Apartheid in South Africa.
For myself, I think that objectively speaking, Jews in the Muslim Middle East prior to the collapse of the Ottoman Empire were treated very much like blacks in the Jim Crow South, though slightly better IMHO, and I think it’s safe to say that you’d object to claiming that blacks in the Jim Crow South were treated as “near equals”, “lived in harmony with whites” and “weren’t mistreated.”
Let me add that some may justifiably object to the above argument because, as I’ll show, one could make a really strong argument that Jews were treated worse by Muslim Middle Easterners in the 18th and 19th Century than blacks in the American South of the 1940s and 1950s.
Now you claim that Jews weren’t “historically mistreated”.
Most people would certainly consider it “mistreatment” that they were required to pay special taxes because they were Jews, that they were forbidden from having “arms” while Muslims weren’t, that they were required to wear specific types of clothing to identify themselves as Jews, that they were not allowed to ride horses, but were instead required to ride donkey and were forbidden from using saddles(this was to demonstrate their inferior status), that they were forbidden from building any new synagogues and had to receive special permission to even make repairs on their’s, that they were restricted in the occupations they could take, and were also quite often confined to impoverish ghettos by law(Morocco comes to mind),.
Additionally, it should be noted that Muslim men were allowed to marry Jewish women while Jewish men most certainly were not allowed to marry Muslim women and would face very, very severe penalties if they did.
Moreover, because Jews were not allowed to testify against or give evidence against Muslims in court, that often allowed Muslims to commit all sorts of crimes against Jews without fear of penalty. I.E. if the only people who see a Muslim beat up or murder a Jewish merchant who displeased him are other Jews then little can be done.
Now, obviously, some could argue that I should say that Jews in the Muslim Middle East were treated worse than blacks in 1940s Alabama because American blacks didn’t have to pay special taxes, didn’t have all sorts of restriction on the building of churches or practicing their religion, and were allowed to carry guns.
As to your claim that they weren’t “disliked”, well that really depends on how you think of it.
The Muslims of a few Centuries would be quite offended by what you’ve been suggesting because the idea that they treated “as near equals” people who willfully rejected the teachings of God’s last Prophet would not be seen as something to admire.
Yes, they were accorded a certain amount of respect and generally speaking weren’t persecuted, but they were very much seen as inferiors and the Dhimmi laws were designed to repeatedly drive home the idea that they were inferior and any Jew who chose to disregard them and insist on being treated as an equal could expect to be treated very much like a black man who dared to be “uppity”.
Also, in Persia, they were considered “unclean” and in addition to having restriction on any business ventures(I.E. being forbidden from selling food to Muslims) they weren’t even allowed to come into physical contact with Muslims, though I’d caution anyone from comparing them to the Eta of Japan or the untouchables of India.
There were not as many anti-Jewish pogroms in the Muslim Middle East as there were in Europe, but there were still quite a few even if we ignore any that occurred in response to Zionism.
I’m guessing then that you were unaware of all the Jews getting kicked out under Nasser and weren’t aware of the former government having government sponsored clerics declaring Jews to be “the descendants of apes and pigs” and also putting on Egyptian TV a 50 hour mini-series in which evil Jews try to prevent some brave Muslims from getting ahold of and exposing to the world a set of documents called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion?
Edit: the above wasn’t meant to be as snarky as it came across.
Yet the “Golden Age” of the Diaspora in Moorish Spain is compared to present Jewish life in the United States for the well being of Jews.
Well, the Druze would certainly disagree with such sentiments as would the Berbers.
Moreover, when the word “Persian” or “Aja” is used as an insult in both Lebanon and Iraq one could question that even if one ignores the treatment of Iranians in some of the Gulf States.
Moreover, Pakistanis and Filipinos in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere are treated vastly worse than Palestinians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.
Not by knowledgeable scholars it’s not.
Bernard Lewis, who is probably the greatest current living scholar on the subject of the medieval Middle East has pointed out that this was a myth promoted by late 19th Century Jewish historians in England trying to shame their gentile countrymen trying to treat Jews better and is currently promoted by Muslims trying to shame Israelis into treating Muslims better.
The Jews were certainly vastly better off in “Moorish Spain”(a term that Muslims would raise their eyebrows at) but they certainly weren’t remotely treated as equals and it’s worth noting that it hardly ended well as anyone familiar with Cordoba or Maimonides can testify to.
For anyone interested I’d recommend reading Under Crescent and Cross by Mark Cohen, a professor of Near East History at Princeton, which is fantastic.
Wait, then, maybe they could skip a step or two in this process . . .
Rabbi Telushkin author of *Jewish Literacy *and my Rabbi, (who is no scholar) differ.
I’ll try and find your reference.
Perhaps it is comparative, as Iran is considered to be the safest place for Jews in the Middle East after Israel. 
Yes, your Rabbi is believing a common myth that collapses under the slightest trace of scrutiny.
The Jews of that time period were better off than the Jews of medieval Poland but to compare a country in which Jews who were seen riding horses risked being executed for insolence to the treatment of Jews in modern America is asinine.
Hey!
Be polite and nice.
I thought we were getting along.