Skip to main content

View Diary: The Jewish Question questioned in the NYT (80 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  If you were the Palestinians at the time, (4+ / 0-)

    when they were 95% of the population, would you have agreed to a third party giving away more than 50% of your territory? Don't act like that was some crazy reaction on the part of the Palestinians. Get real.

    The best way to prevent abortions is to arm fetuses.

    by Flyswatterbanjo on Mon Mar 11, 2013 at 10:57:57 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Whose territory? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hey338Too, JNEREBEL

      There never was a country or state named "Palestine". That area of the Middle East was controlled by the Ottoman Turks for over 400 years and was called Southern Syria. The Ottoman Turks lost control over their territory after losing WWI. With the end of the Ottoman empire, the League of Nations gave control of that part of the Middle East to the British. The British relinquished  their control of that territory to the United Nations, who, in a vote in the Security Council, changed the territorial status of that area into Jewish and Arab states.

      Try to let facts influence your comments

      •  The term Palestine has been in use for (0+ / 0-)

        at least 25 centuries. It was officially adopted by the Romans in the 2nd Century. Under the British Mandate, the region was referred to as Palestine and its inhabitants as Palestinians, whether Jewish, Muslim or Christian. The Palestinian Arabs, however, were the overwhelming majority.
        So Flyswatter's question is pertinent. The Arab's refusal to accept the partition was a result of the perceived disenfranchisement it would, and did, create.

        Does this have something to do with Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state?

        I never liked you and I always will.

        by Ray Blake on Mon Mar 11, 2013 at 02:50:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The existence of Israel has been a fact (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Nospinicus

          de jure under recognized international law since the UN resolution creating it and the initial round of recognitions by other governments, and de facto during the first Arab-Israel War, once it became clear that Israelis were capable of turning back the existing threats. It has been reestablished de facto during several successive wars, culminating in the Occupation, which some would say has failed to help, and in fact made matters much worse.

          Arabs in Israel are not disenfranchised. They elect some quite fiery members to the Knesset, and control some local governments.

          It was not the original plan to displace and dispossess Arabs from within Israel, but it became policy during the war. The war was declared before that, against the very idea of a Jewish state being created by the old Crusader powers. Some of those behind the war were collaborators with Nazi Germany earlier on. Old Russian and German anti-Semitic propaganda is still alive in some of the countries that waged that war. There are still Jews for whom Turkishers (a term that included the Palestinians during Turkish rule) are simply goyim of the worst kind.

          After that it gets tangled and messy, with terrorism, war crimes, accusations of Apartheid and anti-Semitism and self-loathing Jews and Christian Crusader Muslim bashing and the rest of the baggage.

          None of which bears on the political questions that are often asked: Does Israel have a recognized right or an inherent right to exist at all, and to exist as a Jewish state or Jewish homeland?

          The question is asked so often because there are large numbers of people who claim that the answer is no, and who support their claim with violence. And some who say yes, a G-d-given right, and support their claim with violence.

          We, as Kossacks, are attempting to find a way between or around these views that can lead to peace and observation of human rights and even to cooperation and prosperity and all that. In short, more and better Peacenik Jews, Muslims, Christians, and anybody else we can get.

          Ceterem censeo, gerrymandra delenda est

          by Mokurai on Mon Mar 11, 2013 at 04:14:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The creation of the state of Israel (0+ / 0-)

            necessitated the displacement and dispossession of the Palestinians. It was definitely part of the plan. The Nakba just put it into high gear. But again, this has nothing to do with a right to exist. France has no inherent right to exist, nor does the US for that matter. The US exists by virtue of revolution and conquest. If Iceland invades next week and takes over, it would become the United States of Iceland or whatever. All rights to exist become null and void.

            Israel exists, that we know. It's ridiculous to ask the Palestinians to kiss the ring and accept some absolute right of Israel's existence. There is none. And given the Occupation and all the Palestinians have endured, it's obscene to expect them to do so.

            I never liked you and I always will.

            by Ray Blake on Mon Mar 11, 2013 at 08:37:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site