In a world where “anti-Zionists” try to obnoxiously recruit more folks to their so-called cause, they are also creating a group just as, if not more, powerful: “anti-Palestinians.”
I need to be able to carry you around in my pocket and put you on my shoulder to whisper in my ear all your insights when I'm 'discussing' these topics with the usual antisemites..
You are absolutely correct, but the time has passed even for what you say because the Palestinians and their supporters have passed the line of no return. The only proper action going forward is to dismantle the Palestinian Authority, annex Gaza, Judea and Samaria, and put the Palestinians under lockdown for city years while allowing those who wish to leave to leave. That is the answer to all the antisemites, including the leaders of the western world. The "pro-Palestinian" excuses of intellectuals who continue to glamor on the behalf of Palestinians can continue to teach the naqba curriculum of their wet dreams in their schools which hopefully Jews will no longer attend. And as someone who knew something about the evil that lies in the human heart used to say, make my day.
If people A wants the apple and people B wants the same apple, who do you root for? When it comes down to it, I think tribally. I root for whichever people is closer to me for whatever reason is the most important to me. Sympathies and self-interest are at play. I don’t think that I could think about who to root for without sympathies and self-interest being at play.
In this case, people A and people B were sharing the apple. People A were willing to share. People B weren't and tried to get rid of people A with the help of people C, D, E, and so on. If people C, D, E, and so on weren't so intolerant of people A, they would enable and encourage people B to build a good life instead of nursing a multi-generational blood grudge. So, for this and many other reasons, I'm on the side of people A.
Very good. In addition, you mention tolerance/intolerance. It really is a question of siding with Western Enlightenment values versus radical Islamist values, most or many of which none of us want to live with. They are NOT tolerant, they do not prize individual rights and personal freedom, they feel superior and entitled and are willing to torture, rape and kill to make their point. I call this barbarism. So, it's easy to pick a side.
Can anyone explain to me, without making a subjective value judgement (that I would likely agree with but is irrelevant) what the difference between a European Jew’s desire to return to a land his ancestors left approximately 2000 years ago and a Palestinian Arab’s desire to return to a land his ancestors left less than 100 years ago? Because I can’t quite understand the difference.
If the difference is that the Palestinian left because they lost a war, I would point out that a great many Jews became diaspora because they lost one of the many Jewish revolts against the Roman Empire.
If the difference is, as this article says, that no group of refugees has the right to return to their place of origin, I would point to the same Jewish refugees whose descendants practically to a man claim the right to return to their ancestral homeland.
If the difference is that Jews are really properly indigenous to the land and Palestinian Arabs aren’t, I refer them to the Biblical narrative that a great many Israelis affirm, which openly describes the Israelites as initially foreign to the land which they then ethnically cleansed of other occupants. If you don’t subscribe to this religious argument, we can discuss how the majority of Palestinians derive their ancestry from indigenous groups of converted Jews, Samaritans, Christians and Semitic peoples.
These arguments are not pro-Palestinian or anti-Israeli. I believe there are excellent practical reasons why Israel is good and should be preserved and that the Palestinians should not be allowed to form a state. My argument is against the ludicrous special pleading and self interested moralising that you hear from these kinds of authors.
It is simple: There is no "right of return" for either the Jews or Palestinians. The Jews began immigrating to Ottoman-era Palestine in the 1800s and bought land there from the Ottoman landlords. More context: https://www.futureofjewish.com/p/this-secret-loophole-sparked-the
Additionally, leading up the UN Partition Plan of 1947 (which recommended two states for two peoples in British-era Palestine), the Zionists agreed to work with the commission responsible for this plan, while the Arabs outright refused and would not negotiate whatsoever, even as Jews owned increasingly more of the land that they purchased from Arab landowners going back to the 1800s and continuing throughout the 1900s.
AND, the UN granted both groups a state; the Palestinians declined theirs. There are lots of Arab nations in which they can live; there is only one "Jewish" state in which Jews can live and that's important because . . . as the Holocaust taught us we need our own state which means our own army as we cannot rely on ANY ONE ELSE TO PROTECT US. The answer is, "where will you have us go? Name one place where we would be safe." It sucks to have to move, but there re plenty of places where the so-called Palestinians could move, if they behave themselves.
No doubt mine is a simplistic value judgement but the way I see it the State of Israel is payment of reparations by the West to the Jewish people. Although persecution of the Jewish people predates Christianity, it became entrenched with the rise of Christianity and empires in the Christian tradition. Mohammed and his followers reinforced this ‘right’ to persecute the Jews. We in the west, in the so-called Judeo-Christian tradition must accept responsibility.
But the land is not the West’s to bestow. I understand why the Arabs living there in the early days of Zionist immigration objected. I think this would have happened no matter where the Jews went.
Fact is though, the early Zionists saw the writing on the wall and knew they had to get out of Europe, and at least they had some connection to Palestine. I ask anti-Zionists “where would you have had them go?” I haven’t gotten an answer yet.
There are two major differences between Palestinian right of return and Jewish right of return. Firstly, when Jews are persecuted, they literally have no other place to go. It is the only Jewish state. There are not 22 other nations to accept them. The 750,000 to 1,000,000 Jews, who were ethnically that cleansed from the Middle East at the same time as Arabs left Israel, would have almost certainly been killed had they remained in their Arab countries.
It is not Israel’s fault that Jordan is the only country that has given them citizenship in large numbers.
Secondly, with the exception of the far right national Zionist parties, no Israelis are talking about returning to their biblical lands. They are returning to the area that was a result of British partition and the following Arab wars. The land of Judea will remain in Arab hands despite its biblical importance.
Less important to me, but I imagine to some others is the issue of indigeneity. If you were here first it seems to count for much more. The Babylonians, Assyrian, Romans and Philistines have all faded into history. That leaves the Jews.
The problem with your arguments is that they simply do not hold water. Many religious and ethnic groups have been persecuted without having a specifically designated state just for them. There is no Jain state, no Yazadi state, no Druze state, no Taoist state (all of these mentioned religions have strong location attachments by the way.) Nobody has any inherent right to a state. As for the expulsion of the Jews, that was objectively a result of the hostilities emerging from the creation of Israel. These communities had existed for hundreds of years in most cases. Why hadn’t they been destroyed before?
You mention that no Israelis are talking about returning to their biblical lands. I mean the very fact that they are living in Israel puts the lie to that but many settlements in the West Bank today and in Gaza previously just make it less convincing. A great many Israelis would like to take the whole land back
As for the last point, names change but people remain. An Italian is a descendant of a Roman (as are a great many other Europeans). Iraqis are descendants of Babylon. You may not know this but there are still millions Assyrians living today. As for the Philistines, they diffused widely, so they remain in the generic legacy of many of the region’s people including the Jews. Not that these things give anyone an exclusive claim to the land their ancestors lived on.
There is no need to reach for all these tortured arguments to defend Israel. It’s a democratic, liberal state surrounded by terrible neighbours. Be proud of the strength of your ancestors who won the land. You can love Israel without seeking to excuse everything about the foundation of the state, just an American can love the US without needing to defend Manifest Destiny.
Note that no Arab country, not Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, has offered citizenship to the Palestinians. Their reputation as low level, runaways precedes them.
I think that you have swallowed antisemitic propaganda, that blames Israel for the genocidal intent towards Jews. The Farhut preceded the founding of Israel by years.
When British Palestine was partitioned, the Muslim Arabs had Transjordan. Palestinians were free to live there as well as in the Gaza. There were no Jews living in Gaza on October 7. Why do you consider Palestinians living under self rule in Gaza and the West Bank to be refugees? What other country is told that they have no choice in whom they accept as citizens unless it is the result of conquest? Palestinians have Gazza and the West Bank. The right of return, to take over Israel entirely, would result in the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the region. There is not a single Arab state where Jews can live freely.
I think you need to re-read what he wrote. Especially the last part. And read what Moshe Dayan said at the funeral for Roí Rotburg in 1956.
He acknowledged the cruelty and injustice that was required to create and maintain a Jewish state. The fact that the existing population was unwilling to share the land should not come as a surprise. I hope that one day they will do so, and I wish that Israel would simply hold it for them until that day comes instead of building settlements or annexing any more land.
I actually believe the main reason why there is an acceptable right of return for Jews to Israel and there is no such right for Arabs to Israel is because the Jews are allowed by the sovereign nation, simply. While the Arabs are trying to go back to something that has bow deeply changed, and thet they/their leaders try lied to destroy since the beginning.
This is a fair question. To me, the Jewish people are not owed a homeland by divine mandate or by a right to return to the land of their ancestors. I don't believe in anyone's ancestral right to any patch of land. But, given the persecution of the Jewish people across continents and millennia, and given the severity of that persecution even recently (the Holocaust alone wiped out one-third of the Jewish population), I do believe in the necessity of the Jewish people having a homeland somewhere. Indeed, given our unpopularity everywhere in the world, this would seem an ideal solution to most if not all nations. Would I have chosen the most hotly contested piece of real estate on Earth? No, but that's what we have, and much of it was swampland and desert before the Jewish people made it habitable. Given that, prior to 1948, the land inhabited by the Jewish people in the region was bought by those people from the Ottomans and not taken as a result of war, I don't have a problem with the creation of a geopolitical entity for those particular people. I'm happy to entertain arguments to the contrary, and, not being a historian, I'm sure there are facts I'm overlooking. As to the point about other minority peoples not having a homeland, I don't have any problem at all with the creation of one; many nations have partitioned into two to accommodate different ethnic groups and interests. Sometimes it goes well and sometimes it doesn't.
I do appreciate the question and the opportunity to see how my argument lands.
Thinking about this further, as of course I'll do throughout the day (anything to keep my mind off the election), one other difference I see between the Jews and Palestinians specifically is that the Jews are a distinct, though diverse, ethnic group whereas the Palestinians seem to have an identity based solely on the region in which they live and their lack of attachment to a given geopolitical power. I am sympathetic to the desire for a homeland, but I believe a good faith effort by the other Islamic nations and the UN, and the use of international funds for nation-building rather than the destruction of Israel, would have gone a long way toward creating a sense of home rather than continuous displacement and restiveness. I welcome anyone else's input on this!
Five Arab armies attacked Jewish settlers. Their local Arabs, now called Palestinians, joined the Arab armies, leaving the settlers to fight alone, prevail, and form the State of Israel. Then these so-called Palestinians, come back wanting what? Israel pays for their water and electricity and employs more than 1/3 ! Want more real and true information, READ the truth as if you were in Israel, not a ….enough!
Regardless of how this ends up going forward, I think Israel should stop paying for water and electricity and employing Palestinians, and bringing them to Israeli hospitals and . . . what's the story these days with the shekel? Let's stop treating them as if they are mentally disabled children who can't do anything. The Palestinians might then wake up and hold their own leaders accountable.
That isn’t entirely true. Arab nationalism was developing around the same time as the Zionist movement. King Hussein of what was then Trans Jordan, (now Jordan), wanted all of the British Mandate for Palestine to become a part of Jordan. After the war of 1948 he ended up with the area on the West Bank of the Jordan River , (which is how it got its name), until he lost if in the ‘67 war.
The Palestinian National identity was just beginning to come into being around the time of the ‘48 war. They didn’t want to be a part of Jordan, but their leadership was very divided and weak.
Please correct me if I'm wrong: wasn't giving them Gaza basically giving them a Palestinian state? Seems so to me. We even left the buildings, AND it's prime Mediterranean real estate!! Just my two cents.
Josh, I agree completely. Anyone screaming anti-Israel or anti-Palestine slogans is only making things worse for everyone. The only folks truly working for peace are the (very small) number of people acknowledging that there is justice on both sides, that neither side can be eliminated, and that there must be mutual understanding and compromise.
You cannot be "Anti-Palestinian", as this would include you are "against everyone" living there, including the Jews who have always ever been living there.
The term "Palestine", used for people/inhabitants, is a ridiculous and self-contradictious fantasy.
"Palestine" has always been a *mere geographic* marking invented by invaders (='colonialists´) such as Romans, Greek, Osmanians etc. - For Arabians it is an indication of Islamic set "Pan-Arabism" = total control by Arabians/Muslims on the whole "Middle East" / West Asian region, though inhabitants there have always been multi-ethnic, multi-religious etc., Iranians, Egypts, Turkish a.o. are not "Arabian" etc.
"The World" (not only the "Western") COMPLETELY FAILS in describing and naming all of this correctly and precisely, and Arabians/ Muslims as what they are: a dangerous war-liking troop, incapable of and unwilling to accept any kind of "peace" or any kind of "tolerance"; they are capable of, and know, only submission or victory.
This is why, among other things, they always look for their "enemies" outside themselves - because they are too cowardly to talk back to their muftis, imams, sheikhs, etc. But towards others they act big and open their mouths wide (similar to "typical" German state of mind, that´s why a.o. Hitler is so popular in the "Muslim World“) . -
They simply cannot cope with all those "cheeky" jews who from their childhood are/get accustomed to think themselves.
This includes that Arabians/Islamist "Believers" are and were fighting not `only´ against the jews who have been living there for ages, but also against all other ethnics who aren´t "Arabian" and not "Islamic". THE Islam in itself CANNOT be "peaceful", NEVER,NOWHERE. "Islam" = "Conquering“.
The Jews get fought and attacked especially only because they´re the only ones who won´t "assimilate", who won´t bow down and surrender, won't let themselves get subjugated as they have a culture and religion of their own which for centuries has proved as superior, independent and self-confident .
That is the "reason why“ Islamists/ „right-believers“ hate Jews so much as getting shown a.o. on October 07: "they" must be punished for everything they allow themselves to do, their constant contradictions, their independent thinking, their freedom, and all that a 'good Muslim' would never do. - Of course there are Muslims that are different - but not 'because' of Islam, rather despite it.
That „brazen“ attitude is something which Arabians/ Islamists just can´t stand, they only know obeyance, only master/servant, Jewish Religion is the complete contrast to Arabian and Muslim "Culture". - As long as "the West"/ "the World" continues to have illusions about the "Islam", Israel will not be understood and only be at most half-heartedly "supported".
The warfare of Arabians/ Islamists against Jews and all other "heretic" has nothing to do with the State of Israel, never did Arabs live "peacefully together" with anyone else, or "even" with jews, anyone who claims such, provides fairytales.
Before the State of Israel got founded, the Jews were told when they were unwanted (as in most places): "Better go to Palestine !" Now they ARE in Palestine (as said, a mere geographic name, NO and NEVER a name for a "nation" or a populace, and a clearly COLONIALISTIC term ...!! - used exuberantly by self-named "Anti-Colonialists"... !) - and they now get told: "Just leave Palestine"... : such showing the imbecility of "the World", as well represented a.o. in "the UN".
As long as such false terminology and blatant distortions of history are allowed and wantingly are continued to be used, there will be no "solution".
I need to be able to carry you around in my pocket and put you on my shoulder to whisper in my ear all your insights when I'm 'discussing' these topics with the usual antisemites..
Same!!!
Excellent.
You are absolutely correct, but the time has passed even for what you say because the Palestinians and their supporters have passed the line of no return. The only proper action going forward is to dismantle the Palestinian Authority, annex Gaza, Judea and Samaria, and put the Palestinians under lockdown for city years while allowing those who wish to leave to leave. That is the answer to all the antisemites, including the leaders of the western world. The "pro-Palestinian" excuses of intellectuals who continue to glamor on the behalf of Palestinians can continue to teach the naqba curriculum of their wet dreams in their schools which hopefully Jews will no longer attend. And as someone who knew something about the evil that lies in the human heart used to say, make my day.
fifty years, not city years
Very true , brilliant article.
HelenaMatilda Motaleff
I hearted this as soon as I read the caption. I don't need to read anything else (though of course I will) to know you're right.
If people A wants the apple and people B wants the same apple, who do you root for? When it comes down to it, I think tribally. I root for whichever people is closer to me for whatever reason is the most important to me. Sympathies and self-interest are at play. I don’t think that I could think about who to root for without sympathies and self-interest being at play.
In this case, people A and people B were sharing the apple. People A were willing to share. People B weren't and tried to get rid of people A with the help of people C, D, E, and so on. If people C, D, E, and so on weren't so intolerant of people A, they would enable and encourage people B to build a good life instead of nursing a multi-generational blood grudge. So, for this and many other reasons, I'm on the side of people A.
Very good. In addition, you mention tolerance/intolerance. It really is a question of siding with Western Enlightenment values versus radical Islamist values, most or many of which none of us want to live with. They are NOT tolerant, they do not prize individual rights and personal freedom, they feel superior and entitled and are willing to torture, rape and kill to make their point. I call this barbarism. So, it's easy to pick a side.
Not being g a member of either tribe, I root for the people who are willing to share the apple.
Me too! Defund Palestine, then, maybe, I might re-consider!
Can anyone explain to me, without making a subjective value judgement (that I would likely agree with but is irrelevant) what the difference between a European Jew’s desire to return to a land his ancestors left approximately 2000 years ago and a Palestinian Arab’s desire to return to a land his ancestors left less than 100 years ago? Because I can’t quite understand the difference.
If the difference is that the Palestinian left because they lost a war, I would point out that a great many Jews became diaspora because they lost one of the many Jewish revolts against the Roman Empire.
If the difference is, as this article says, that no group of refugees has the right to return to their place of origin, I would point to the same Jewish refugees whose descendants practically to a man claim the right to return to their ancestral homeland.
If the difference is that Jews are really properly indigenous to the land and Palestinian Arabs aren’t, I refer them to the Biblical narrative that a great many Israelis affirm, which openly describes the Israelites as initially foreign to the land which they then ethnically cleansed of other occupants. If you don’t subscribe to this religious argument, we can discuss how the majority of Palestinians derive their ancestry from indigenous groups of converted Jews, Samaritans, Christians and Semitic peoples.
These arguments are not pro-Palestinian or anti-Israeli. I believe there are excellent practical reasons why Israel is good and should be preserved and that the Palestinians should not be allowed to form a state. My argument is against the ludicrous special pleading and self interested moralising that you hear from these kinds of authors.
It is simple: There is no "right of return" for either the Jews or Palestinians. The Jews began immigrating to Ottoman-era Palestine in the 1800s and bought land there from the Ottoman landlords. More context: https://www.futureofjewish.com/p/this-secret-loophole-sparked-the
Additionally, leading up the UN Partition Plan of 1947 (which recommended two states for two peoples in British-era Palestine), the Zionists agreed to work with the commission responsible for this plan, while the Arabs outright refused and would not negotiate whatsoever, even as Jews owned increasingly more of the land that they purchased from Arab landowners going back to the 1800s and continuing throughout the 1900s.
True.
AND, the UN granted both groups a state; the Palestinians declined theirs. There are lots of Arab nations in which they can live; there is only one "Jewish" state in which Jews can live and that's important because . . . as the Holocaust taught us we need our own state which means our own army as we cannot rely on ANY ONE ELSE TO PROTECT US. The answer is, "where will you have us go? Name one place where we would be safe." It sucks to have to move, but there re plenty of places where the so-called Palestinians could move, if they behave themselves.
No doubt mine is a simplistic value judgement but the way I see it the State of Israel is payment of reparations by the West to the Jewish people. Although persecution of the Jewish people predates Christianity, it became entrenched with the rise of Christianity and empires in the Christian tradition. Mohammed and his followers reinforced this ‘right’ to persecute the Jews. We in the west, in the so-called Judeo-Christian tradition must accept responsibility.
But the land is not the West’s to bestow. I understand why the Arabs living there in the early days of Zionist immigration objected. I think this would have happened no matter where the Jews went.
Fact is though, the early Zionists saw the writing on the wall and knew they had to get out of Europe, and at least they had some connection to Palestine. I ask anti-Zionists “where would you have had them go?” I haven’t gotten an answer yet.
There are two major differences between Palestinian right of return and Jewish right of return. Firstly, when Jews are persecuted, they literally have no other place to go. It is the only Jewish state. There are not 22 other nations to accept them. The 750,000 to 1,000,000 Jews, who were ethnically that cleansed from the Middle East at the same time as Arabs left Israel, would have almost certainly been killed had they remained in their Arab countries.
It is not Israel’s fault that Jordan is the only country that has given them citizenship in large numbers.
Secondly, with the exception of the far right national Zionist parties, no Israelis are talking about returning to their biblical lands. They are returning to the area that was a result of British partition and the following Arab wars. The land of Judea will remain in Arab hands despite its biblical importance.
Less important to me, but I imagine to some others is the issue of indigeneity. If you were here first it seems to count for much more. The Babylonians, Assyrian, Romans and Philistines have all faded into history. That leaves the Jews.
The problem with your arguments is that they simply do not hold water. Many religious and ethnic groups have been persecuted without having a specifically designated state just for them. There is no Jain state, no Yazadi state, no Druze state, no Taoist state (all of these mentioned religions have strong location attachments by the way.) Nobody has any inherent right to a state. As for the expulsion of the Jews, that was objectively a result of the hostilities emerging from the creation of Israel. These communities had existed for hundreds of years in most cases. Why hadn’t they been destroyed before?
You mention that no Israelis are talking about returning to their biblical lands. I mean the very fact that they are living in Israel puts the lie to that but many settlements in the West Bank today and in Gaza previously just make it less convincing. A great many Israelis would like to take the whole land back
As for the last point, names change but people remain. An Italian is a descendant of a Roman (as are a great many other Europeans). Iraqis are descendants of Babylon. You may not know this but there are still millions Assyrians living today. As for the Philistines, they diffused widely, so they remain in the generic legacy of many of the region’s people including the Jews. Not that these things give anyone an exclusive claim to the land their ancestors lived on.
There is no need to reach for all these tortured arguments to defend Israel. It’s a democratic, liberal state surrounded by terrible neighbours. Be proud of the strength of your ancestors who won the land. You can love Israel without seeking to excuse everything about the foundation of the state, just an American can love the US without needing to defend Manifest Destiny.
Note that no Arab country, not Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, has offered citizenship to the Palestinians. Their reputation as low level, runaways precedes them.
I think that you have swallowed antisemitic propaganda, that blames Israel for the genocidal intent towards Jews. The Farhut preceded the founding of Israel by years.
When British Palestine was partitioned, the Muslim Arabs had Transjordan. Palestinians were free to live there as well as in the Gaza. There were no Jews living in Gaza on October 7. Why do you consider Palestinians living under self rule in Gaza and the West Bank to be refugees? What other country is told that they have no choice in whom they accept as citizens unless it is the result of conquest? Palestinians have Gazza and the West Bank. The right of return, to take over Israel entirely, would result in the ethnic cleansing of Jews from the region. There is not a single Arab state where Jews can live freely.
Palestinians elected Hamas who continues to take the money they earn and kill Israelis with it.
I'll take any and all arguments in favor of Israel.
I think you need to re-read what he wrote. Especially the last part. And read what Moshe Dayan said at the funeral for Roí Rotburg in 1956.
He acknowledged the cruelty and injustice that was required to create and maintain a Jewish state. The fact that the existing population was unwilling to share the land should not come as a surprise. I hope that one day they will do so, and I wish that Israel would simply hold it for them until that day comes instead of building settlements or annexing any more land.
I actually believe the main reason why there is an acceptable right of return for Jews to Israel and there is no such right for Arabs to Israel is because the Jews are allowed by the sovereign nation, simply. While the Arabs are trying to go back to something that has bow deeply changed, and thet they/their leaders try lied to destroy since the beginning.
This is a fair question. To me, the Jewish people are not owed a homeland by divine mandate or by a right to return to the land of their ancestors. I don't believe in anyone's ancestral right to any patch of land. But, given the persecution of the Jewish people across continents and millennia, and given the severity of that persecution even recently (the Holocaust alone wiped out one-third of the Jewish population), I do believe in the necessity of the Jewish people having a homeland somewhere. Indeed, given our unpopularity everywhere in the world, this would seem an ideal solution to most if not all nations. Would I have chosen the most hotly contested piece of real estate on Earth? No, but that's what we have, and much of it was swampland and desert before the Jewish people made it habitable. Given that, prior to 1948, the land inhabited by the Jewish people in the region was bought by those people from the Ottomans and not taken as a result of war, I don't have a problem with the creation of a geopolitical entity for those particular people. I'm happy to entertain arguments to the contrary, and, not being a historian, I'm sure there are facts I'm overlooking. As to the point about other minority peoples not having a homeland, I don't have any problem at all with the creation of one; many nations have partitioned into two to accommodate different ethnic groups and interests. Sometimes it goes well and sometimes it doesn't.
I do appreciate the question and the opportunity to see how my argument lands.
Thinking about this further, as of course I'll do throughout the day (anything to keep my mind off the election), one other difference I see between the Jews and Palestinians specifically is that the Jews are a distinct, though diverse, ethnic group whereas the Palestinians seem to have an identity based solely on the region in which they live and their lack of attachment to a given geopolitical power. I am sympathetic to the desire for a homeland, but I believe a good faith effort by the other Islamic nations and the UN, and the use of international funds for nation-building rather than the destruction of Israel, would have gone a long way toward creating a sense of home rather than continuous displacement and restiveness. I welcome anyone else's input on this!
Five Arab armies attacked Jewish settlers. Their local Arabs, now called Palestinians, joined the Arab armies, leaving the settlers to fight alone, prevail, and form the State of Israel. Then these so-called Palestinians, come back wanting what? Israel pays for their water and electricity and employs more than 1/3 ! Want more real and true information, READ the truth as if you were in Israel, not a ….enough!
Regardless of how this ends up going forward, I think Israel should stop paying for water and electricity and employing Palestinians, and bringing them to Israeli hospitals and . . . what's the story these days with the shekel? Let's stop treating them as if they are mentally disabled children who can't do anything. The Palestinians might then wake up and hold their own leaders accountable.
Great read. Smart, empathetic, yet clear-eyed.
“Palestinian” is just a counter-identity anyway. It was created for no other reason than to undermine the Jewish state.
That isn’t entirely true. Arab nationalism was developing around the same time as the Zionist movement. King Hussein of what was then Trans Jordan, (now Jordan), wanted all of the British Mandate for Palestine to become a part of Jordan. After the war of 1948 he ended up with the area on the West Bank of the Jordan River , (which is how it got its name), until he lost if in the ‘67 war.
The Palestinian National identity was just beginning to come into being around the time of the ‘48 war. They didn’t want to be a part of Jordan, but their leadership was very divided and weak.
Why is Israel supporting the so-called Palestinians with free water and electricity and jobs?
Please correct me if I'm wrong: wasn't giving them Gaza basically giving them a Palestinian state? Seems so to me. We even left the buildings, AND it's prime Mediterranean real estate!! Just my two cents.
I’m am anti-Palestinian because they are Hamas.
Josh, I agree completely. Anyone screaming anti-Israel or anti-Palestine slogans is only making things worse for everyone. The only folks truly working for peace are the (very small) number of people acknowledging that there is justice on both sides, that neither side can be eliminated, and that there must be mutual understanding and compromise.
And it’s so ironic that those are the very people Hamas attacked on October 7th.
The fact that there are Israeli Arabs but no palestinian Jews tells you everything you need to know.
My wife had a fibromyalgia doctor who was Palestinian Christian. A very rare oddity indeed.
He practiced in Brunswick, GA.
You cannot be "Anti-Palestinian", as this would include you are "against everyone" living there, including the Jews who have always ever been living there.
The term "Palestine", used for people/inhabitants, is a ridiculous and self-contradictious fantasy.
"Palestine" has always been a *mere geographic* marking invented by invaders (='colonialists´) such as Romans, Greek, Osmanians etc. - For Arabians it is an indication of Islamic set "Pan-Arabism" = total control by Arabians/Muslims on the whole "Middle East" / West Asian region, though inhabitants there have always been multi-ethnic, multi-religious etc., Iranians, Egypts, Turkish a.o. are not "Arabian" etc.
"The World" (not only the "Western") COMPLETELY FAILS in describing and naming all of this correctly and precisely, and Arabians/ Muslims as what they are: a dangerous war-liking troop, incapable of and unwilling to accept any kind of "peace" or any kind of "tolerance"; they are capable of, and know, only submission or victory.
This is why, among other things, they always look for their "enemies" outside themselves - because they are too cowardly to talk back to their muftis, imams, sheikhs, etc. But towards others they act big and open their mouths wide (similar to "typical" German state of mind, that´s why a.o. Hitler is so popular in the "Muslim World“) . -
They simply cannot cope with all those "cheeky" jews who from their childhood are/get accustomed to think themselves.
This includes that Arabians/Islamist "Believers" are and were fighting not `only´ against the jews who have been living there for ages, but also against all other ethnics who aren´t "Arabian" and not "Islamic". THE Islam in itself CANNOT be "peaceful", NEVER,NOWHERE. "Islam" = "Conquering“.
The Jews get fought and attacked especially only because they´re the only ones who won´t "assimilate", who won´t bow down and surrender, won't let themselves get subjugated as they have a culture and religion of their own which for centuries has proved as superior, independent and self-confident .
That is the "reason why“ Islamists/ „right-believers“ hate Jews so much as getting shown a.o. on October 07: "they" must be punished for everything they allow themselves to do, their constant contradictions, their independent thinking, their freedom, and all that a 'good Muslim' would never do. - Of course there are Muslims that are different - but not 'because' of Islam, rather despite it.
That „brazen“ attitude is something which Arabians/ Islamists just can´t stand, they only know obeyance, only master/servant, Jewish Religion is the complete contrast to Arabian and Muslim "Culture". - As long as "the West"/ "the World" continues to have illusions about the "Islam", Israel will not be understood and only be at most half-heartedly "supported".
The warfare of Arabians/ Islamists against Jews and all other "heretic" has nothing to do with the State of Israel, never did Arabs live "peacefully together" with anyone else, or "even" with jews, anyone who claims such, provides fairytales.
Before the State of Israel got founded, the Jews were told when they were unwanted (as in most places): "Better go to Palestine !" Now they ARE in Palestine (as said, a mere geographic name, NO and NEVER a name for a "nation" or a populace, and a clearly COLONIALISTIC term ...!! - used exuberantly by self-named "Anti-Colonialists"... !) - and they now get told: "Just leave Palestine"... : such showing the imbecility of "the World", as well represented a.o. in "the UN".
As long as such false terminology and blatant distortions of history are allowed and wantingly are continued to be used, there will be no "solution".