Why can’t we relocate Isreal to a more European location. I mean give them a safe corridor to travel through. They can even transport the buildings/land underneath that they hold sacred.
I have seen houses moved and I would think that the oil rich nations with a large muslim population like to see them leave that area.
Given, let’s say, 10 years, do you think they could do it?
Do you think that the arab nations would still want Isreal abolished if it was not where it currently was?
What reasons would the Isreal population have not to move if guaranteed safety while moving?
Extra credit:
If I invented a time machine and was able to go back to before the choose the location for Isreal, and assuming that I can convince them to pick somewhere else, how different would the world be?
Never, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever, ever going to happen. Nor should it.
Because the people who live there would not want to leave. Despite the many difficulties posed by the existence of Israel, its people shouldn’t be asked to move out.
The location is sacred to them. They believe the land (not the dirt) was promised to them by their god. So there’s that.
They surely would, but then again, some of them would go further. Is there any reason this should be done?
Doubtful.
Probably, but it would be a much lower priority issue. Many of them would continue to blame Israel for many of their problems and they would probably keep trying to use the plight of the Palestinians as an inflammatory issue while doing little to help the actual people.
Are you serious? They wouldn’t want to move because they already live there, and because the land is important to them. Why would they want to move? Because some people they don’t like don’t like them back? (I’m speaking from their perspective here.)
Way back when, some of the early Zionists didn’t think Israel should be where it currently is, and others didn’t expect they would really be able to get the location. I think some of them pushed for a location in South America.
I’ve actually heard the OP’s suggestion many times. Always about Israel. Never about anywhere else. You know, Iran and Iraq never really got along - why don’t “we” move one of them? Russia doesn’t seem to get along with Chechnya - why don’t “we” just move Chechnya to…I don’t know, somewhere in France. Hell, Spain and the Basque country never got along well - let’s move the Basques to Northern Ireland! And the Irish just can’t seem to get along with the goddamn British…let’s move the Irish to Germany. Or move the English to Italy. And, you know, there always seems to be trouble in the Sudan…why don’t we move the people in Darfur to Sweden?
But I never hear anyone suggest that. I DO, however, often hear people suggest that Israel be uprooted and moved to somewhere else in the world.
There are two reasons, I think. One’s historical: Israel was created as a Jewish homeland and many people who live there are recent immigrants or descended from them. And the other reason is that there’s a belief the Jews can be reasoned with and the Arabs can’t, so the Jews have to accommodate them.
Well, assuming the world got together and asked, and Israel said “sure, we’re game!” then yes, it could be done. The world’s airlines fly about 1 billion passengers/year, so flying 5 1/2 million Israelis someplace would be child’s play. Also, I’m sure moving companies move at least five million households/year, although I’m just guessing that. Let’s give them Montana.
I think it’s a great idea. You move all the buildings, land, everything and you put it somewhere in Europe! Maybe you annex some land in Russia…they have lots of land and I’m sure they’d be willing to give it up. Or, here’s a thought, you could put it in Germany! That would work equally well, to be sure!
Certainly. As you say, if you can move a house you can move a whole country with all the people and stuff too.
If you abolished Israel I’m fairly sure they would no longer want it abolished, so it’s a win/win. I’m sure, if given this great opportunity, the Palestinian’s would make the most of it and turn the region into a paradise on earth, instead of the barren and smoking crater it is today. They just need a chance. It’s like in that book (I don’t recall the name) where the guy says (to paraphrase) ‘I’d do great if only someone would give me a company’. Same concept, but on a bigger scale.
I can’t think of any reason they wouldn’t move if only they were promised safety. I mean, if I threatened you with a gun and told you that you had to move, but that I wouldn’t shoot you while you moved (and I crossed my heart), then you wouldn’t have any problem moving, right? In fact, where do you live? We could try this out in the real world and see how it plays out…
You could tell them that it would be in their best interest to just stay right where they were and live there. There was no good reason for them to have moved to Palestine when they had perfectly good homes where they were. After all, they were living happy and productive lives in Europe, well loved and respected by their neighbors, with white picket fences and everything. And instead of just being happy they had to go over and steal the land from the poor Palestinian’s who never did nuffin to nobody, and who just wanted to live and let live.
I think their main objection would be that they’ve already had to relocate countless times throughout history, before finally having a home of their own. Perhaps it’s time for the Arabs to move. I hear there’s water on the moon.
Wherever you moved Israel to, the people who already live there would become the new Palestinians, fighting tooth and nail to get their homeland back. Don’t you have any clue how this problem started in the first place? :rolleyes:
Really? I’ve heard it more than once about Palestine. There seem to be quite a few people who feel that a Palestinian homeland should just be carved out of some other Arab state somewhere, leaving the so-called “Greater Israel” to become part of Israel proper.
Right, and as other posters have noted, there actually was serious debate for quite a while about what the geographical location of the Jewish homeland should be. So it makes sense that Israel might seem more potentially “relocatable” in terms of geography than other countries.
But that doesn’t mean that it would be a good idea or a practicable idea for Israel, now that it’s formally established in its current location, simply to pull up stakes and move somewhere else.
Personally, as an atheist whose own Jewish heritage has roots in Hasidic anti-Zionism (that is, Jewish sects who opposed the return of Jews to biblical Israel on doctrinal grounds), I’m mostly indifferent to arguments about modern Jews having any divinely ordained or historically privileged claim to any particular piece of biblical real estate. However, as a pro-human-rights pragmatist, I think that established and recognized countries in general should be accepted where they are, and their populations should not be ethnically cleansed just because other people might prefer their room to their company. (In fact, that latter principle applies to populations in general, irrespective of whether they constitute an established and recognized country.)
I am not sure what you mean. They would not be fighting actual Palestinians any more. The actual Palestinians would be quite content. They would have got their homeland back. But if you moved Israel to Bulgaria, say, the Bulgarians that you kicked out of their homes to make way for them would be fighting to get their homeland back.
You are aware, are you, that the reason Palestinians hate Israel is that they used to live there, and were kicked out of their homeland in 1948 to make way for this new country? There was no particular bad blood between Arabs and Jews before that.
It would be a lot easier to do it the other way around. They could dig up a foot of topsoil over all of Israel, put it in little vials, and give one to every muslim.
I don’t see anything about a permanent Jewish homeland in any of that. In fact, your cite seems to contradict your assertion that there was any ‘debate’ at all (‘While Herzl made it clear that this program would not affect the ultimate aim of Zionism, a Jewish entity in the Land of Israel, the proposal aroused a storm at the Congress and nearly led to a split in the Zionist movement.’) There is also the thing about there being a distinct dearth of Jews in Uganda, while there was already a large Jewish population in the Palestine…
