Indeed. But what is a country? Is it a place where people live and have their identity, or does it need to be "ratified" by the UN? Before 1945 were there no "countries"?
Does it legitimise the invasion of someone's land? I don't think so
If it's not a different country from Israel, then give them Israeli citizenship.
There's a very simple reason Israel doesn't give the Palestinians citizenship: Israel wants to make sure the large majority of voters are Jewish. It wants the land, but not the people who live there.
> If it's not a different country from Israel, then give them Israeli citizenship.
The period we are talking about had no Israel either, so I am not sure what was supposed to happen there in your view.
> There's a very simple reason Israel doesn't give the Palestinians citizenship: Israel wants to make sure the large majority of voters are Jewish.
Of course. We all (1) see what happens to non-muslims in other middle eastern countries, and (2) saw what happened to the middle eastern jewry after 1948. I doubt that Iraqi jews living in Israel want to live under Islamic rule again.
> It wants the land, but not the people who live there.
This is false. Israel multiple times traded land for peace. The latest one was leaving Gaza in 2005.
Why are you keeping twisting the facts to suit your narrative?
And you think that's legitimate? Keeping millions of people under permanent rule of a state with no rights whatsoever?
I'm not going to get into your historical claims, except to note that the reason why the situation for Middle Eastern Jews changed so drastically after 1948 was because a bunch of people claiming to represent all Jews conquered a strip of land in the Middle East and expelled the native population. That did not go down well elsewhere in the Middle East, and the fact that the new state was proclaimed "the Jewish state" painted a target on the back of Jews throughout the region, who had had nothing to do with the founding of Israel.
> Israel multiple times traded land for peace. The latest one was leaving Gaza in 2005.
Israel left Gaza in 2005 so that it could concentrate on the settlement of the West Bank. It was a strategic move to conserve their forces.
The only "land for peace" deal that Israel has made is with Egypt. Israel did that because it did not want to risk another war like 1973 with a serious military opponent.
Indeed. But what is a country? Is it a place where people live and have their identity, or does it need to be "ratified" by the UN? Before 1945 were there no "countries"?
Does it legitimise the invasion of someone's land? I don't think so
> Before 1945 were there no "countries"?
There were. They had their own government, and were able to have relationships with other countries.
At what point in time Palestinians had their own government and country? I’ll remind you that during the mandate there was no Jordan as well.
> Does it legitimise the invasion of someone's land? I don't think so
Jews also owned land there during the mandate, the ottomans, and even before. Is it okay to take their land?
> Is it okay to take their land?
Of course not! It's not OK to take anyone's anything.
Edit: removing further comments. It would be ideal if everyone could just live in peace
11 replies →
I'll reply here
> And that is the basis of all this fighting, why doesn't Israel stick to the initial borders they agreed to?
You mean the ones that Palestinians do not want to stick to?
Phrase it "occupy their land", then it will certainly be correct.
What about the Jewish people of the land? Do they have a say?
In the most extreme case, you get a village-by-village, street-by-street or house-by-house subdivision of the resulting countries.
Of course this doesn't really work very well, see Bosnia.
1 reply →
If it's not a different country from Israel, then give them Israeli citizenship.
There's a very simple reason Israel doesn't give the Palestinians citizenship: Israel wants to make sure the large majority of voters are Jewish. It wants the land, but not the people who live there.
> If it's not a different country from Israel, then give them Israeli citizenship.
The period we are talking about had no Israel either, so I am not sure what was supposed to happen there in your view.
> There's a very simple reason Israel doesn't give the Palestinians citizenship: Israel wants to make sure the large majority of voters are Jewish.
Of course. We all (1) see what happens to non-muslims in other middle eastern countries, and (2) saw what happened to the middle eastern jewry after 1948. I doubt that Iraqi jews living in Israel want to live under Islamic rule again.
> It wants the land, but not the people who live there.
This is false. Israel multiple times traded land for peace. The latest one was leaving Gaza in 2005.
Why are you keeping twisting the facts to suit your narrative?
＞ Of course.
And you think that's legitimate? Keeping millions of people under permanent rule of a state with no rights whatsoever?
I'm not going to get into your historical claims, except to note that the reason why the situation for Middle Eastern Jews changed so drastically after 1948 was because a bunch of people claiming to represent all Jews conquered a strip of land in the Middle East and expelled the native population. That did not go down well elsewhere in the Middle East, and the fact that the new state was proclaimed "the Jewish state" painted a target on the back of Jews throughout the region, who had had nothing to do with the founding of Israel.
> Israel multiple times traded land for peace. The latest one was leaving Gaza in 2005.
Israel left Gaza in 2005 so that it could concentrate on the settlement of the West Bank. It was a strategic move to conserve their forces.
The only "land for peace" deal that Israel has made is with Egypt. Israel did that because it did not want to risk another war like 1973 with a serious military opponent.