That’s brilliant. Let’s convert all Palestinians to Judaism, and thus the problem will end. Q. E. D.
They are both equally ethnocultural nations. What’s “race” got to do with that?
Or Jews to Islam. That’d work, too!
Er, the Jews currently are controlling Israel. Isn’t that vastly more recent than something that happened in the late 1800s.
Moreover, the Lakota didn’t originate there, never claimed they did, and only held it for about twenty years.
That’s hardly comparable to the Jews who had a continuous presence in the area for thousands of years, came from their, and ruled it for centuries.
That doesn’t mean that I support the establishment of Israel or even the idea that anyone is entitled to a “homeland”, just that your claim that the Lakota have a “much stronger claim” to the Black Hills as their ancestral homeland is bullshit.
You’d be better off making the argument that the Afrikanners have at least as strong a claim to part of South Africa being their homeland but no one except a few racist assholes supports the creation of a Boerstat.
It was never ruled by “the Turks”.
I’m confused. When you first brought up the idea of a “one state solution” I asked if you favored “the Lebanese model”(I.E. a bi-national state) or “the American model” you said you’d go with neither, but instead said you’d use “the Israeli model” and repeatedly insisted on that when questioned.
As you must know, under the Israeli model, the government and the State would be explicitly Jewish, and political parties which promote “racism” or refuse to recognize Israel as “the sovereign state of the Jewish people” are banned as are groups or MKs with links to “terrorism”.
Obviously this would mean every meaningful Palestinian political group in both the West Bank and Gaza would not be eligible to be elected to the Israeli Knesset.
Didn’t you realize what you were proposing when you stated that your proposed “one state solution” would follow “the Israeli model”?
That’s why I was stunned when you explicitly rejected both the Lebanese and American models for the Israeli model which no self-respecting Palestinians would ever support.
Sure, but that happened all the time. Maybe once we try the opposite.
On the other hand your proposal is much better for Europe. They could have their feelings uncannily familiar.
Except that Islam isn’t tied to Palestinian nationalism the way Judaism is tied to Zionism.
In fact, Hamas is explicitly not a Palestinian nationalist group.
Remember some of the most prominent Palestinian nationalists, such as Ashrawi have been Christians.
Umm, Whoosh???
I’m afraid you’r the one who was whooshed.
On rereading, I see you are correct. I assumed the new guy was proposing it seriously. He wasn’t. I need to recalibrate my whoosh-meter.
That’s, true, but primarily because the concept of “nationality” comes easier to Christians than to Muslims, who subscribe to the concept of “Umma” which is a kind of political unity for all Muslims.
Also, you will find most Christian Palestinians outside Palestine today. They are much better educated and basically unaccepted and driven out by the Moslem majority. A few years ago Israel had to intervene forcefully to allow Christians in Bethlehem to build a church on their own land.
There is a certain amount of truth in what you’re saying. Yes, more Palestinian Christian live outside of Israel/Palestine than within it. In fact more Palestinian Christians live in Chile than in Palestine. Also, hostility from Muslim Palestinians is part of the reason.
However, claiming that its because of “the Moslems” is ridiculous since many are descendants of refugees from the Naqba there are plenty of Muslim Palestinians living outside “Palestine”, possibly even a majority.
Beyond that, Palestinian Christians have been flooding out of Israel for decades because they’re tired of being treated like second class citizens in their own country and would rather go to Latin America where so many have flourished.
Moreover, I don’t think the Israelis want to get into discussions regarding restrictions on the building of churches or the access to them.
You refer to a minor point which is whether there are more Christian or Moslem Palestinians refugees.
What I mentioned is that if you believe that Christian Arabs will thrive in a purely non-Jewish Palestine, than you only have to look at the level of tolerance to minorities in the nearby countries.
And finally, let me tell you that if Palestinians would have really wanted a national state alongside a Jewish state at any point in the past 100 years, amazingly up to this very moment, they would have got one.
Christian Palestinians haven’t been thriving in a Zionist Israel either. I also never said anything about Palestinian Christians thriving in a non-Jewish Palestine.
I’m also not sure why you’re bringing up “the past 100 years” since in 1913 there weren’t remotely enough Jews to make a functioning Jewish state. As for the Palestinian rejecting the idea of a Jewish state in 1937 and 1948, sure they rejected the idea if splitting their land with people the quite reasonably saw as alien interlopers.
Similarly, it’s understandable why Americans wouldn’t like the of setting up a “Mexican state” in California or Texas.
Who says they would no longer be protected by the IDF? If the Palestinians started committing crimes against Israeli/Jewish settlements, the IDF would roll right in to stop them. Very much the equivalent of the U.S. sending in the Marines to protect U.S. citizens abroad, in such cases as the local authorities can’t or won’t.
Ajman, (the smallest state in the UAE) is 260 sq km, and tied to its neighbours in a collaboration and a port on a trade route
Gaza is 360 sq km and has no realistic hope of joining with its neighbours peacefully and could be a port city.
Just following up on your suggestion with a nearby similar (arabic) example/analogue.
Benzion Netanyahu was never a terrorist. He was a journalist and political organizer. He never did anything terroristic.
Hmm… you’re correct. I misremembered.
I thought he was a formal member of the Irgun but while he might as well have been, he wasn’t.
Nevertheless, he was a bigoted piece of shit who called for ethnic cleansing, displayed Nazi-like tendencies and was the personal secretary of Jabotinsky the founder of Revisionist Zionism, the most vulgar and bigoted version of Zionism.
I’m sure he wasn’t fond of you either.But I don’t know that I’d call Revisionist Zionism “vulgar and bigoted”, and Jabotinksy wasn’t either, personally.
He never knew me so I don’t see how he would have an opinion of me. As to Jabotinksy and Revisionist Zionism, yes it is and yes he was.
I should add that Ben Gurion and most the founders of Israel would certainly agree.
Beyond that, Jabotinsky himself would be grossly offended by your suggestion that he didn’t view the Arabs as inferiors who needed to be cleansed from his beloved Eretz Israel.
He was a bigot and his ideology was a stain on both Judaism and Zionism.
No, the claim is that they bought land from landlords pre '48 and agreed to Partition based on ethnic majority lines. We claim an historical connection to the region because we have an historical connection to the region. But good try.