I think the only reason Israel should exist today is that people already live there and it would be a mistake to force them out and create more displacement. That being said, Israel, a supremacist ethnostate, should never have had the right to exist… You shouldn’t exist if you have to build your fucking country on the mass graves of the native people, and then you are so deep in this shit you have to develop tech to be able to apartheid them all behind walls and systems and bullets, starving and dying. No, an entity like that should not deserve to exist. I still have hope that some reasonable Israelis will turn this all around, and Israel will stop being a genocidal mission.
You shouldn’t exist if you have to build your fucking country on the mass graves of the native people
So where do you draw the line? Most - if not all - countries were created with bloodshed at some point. People in my country moved into the area around ~1200 years ago and I don’t think the locals welcomed the new inhabitants with open arms. So should we move back then? What about the people who now line in the place we (at least assume) to had come from?
Hmmmm, sounds to me like you ignored my first sentence. Read it again.
I don’t think they should go anywhere. Doesn’t make what they did right though.
For Israeli settlers, there is still a window of time to kick them the fuck out given as to how they go into people’s homes with the blessings of Israeli police and IDF and kick the residents out…
The country Israel was founded by people who are native to the land. Perhaps read up on the history of the area, because what you are writing is factually incorrect.
There was no country before and the area was populated by multiple different groups of people. Those people wanted to found countries in the area. There is war(s) regarding where the borders of these countries should be.
That’s how almost every country in the world came into place. The only difference here is that it is taking place in a time when the whole world is watching in real time and people are much more globally mobile.
I know it’s much easier and comfortable to paint a black and white picture of the situation, but it is just false…
If they are native to the land, why did they have to massacre (Deir Yassin) and ethnically cleanse (the Nakba) the other natives? 🤔
I’m asking because Deir Yassin is the massacre that eventually convinced my grandmother’s family to leave their hometown and become refugees in Jordan, especially after the men in the village tried to fight off these “natives to the land” because they were attacking and killing everyone. Deir Yassin convinced Palestinians that they couldn’t trust these “natives”, since they don’t stick to their treaties, and go around marauding.
Jews were killed and oppressed in the area already thousands of years ago. How is that possible if they are not natives to the land?
For example during the Levant conquest or the regular and ongoing conflicts between Arabs and Jews in the area when it was still Transjordan? These conflicts are so fucking old they are mentioned in the Koran.
It’s nonsensical to try and claim Jews aren’t native there.
Please answer my question first. If they were natives to the land, why did they have to commit massacres and ethnic cleansing against the other natives of the land?
For the same reason why people do that in every country to each other. Religion, incompatible cultural values, ideologies that go against other people, … It’s sadly something people do and have done everywhere in some way or another.
In Transjordan and the greater area between Northern Africa and Asia there were countless shifts and movements, mixing and separation of groups for all kind of reasons. But I think the separation because of different religions is probably the reason that lead to the biggest rifts, at least in that place.
I don’t see how that has anything to do with whether or not a group of people is native to or had ancestry in a land.
I think the only reason Israel should exist today is that people already live there and it would be a mistake to force them out and create more displacement. That being said, Israel, a supremacist ethnostate, should never have had the right to exist… You shouldn’t exist if you have to build your fucking country on the mass graves of the native people, and then you are so deep in this shit you have to develop tech to be able to apartheid them all behind walls and systems and bullets, starving and dying. No, an entity like that should not deserve to exist. I still have hope that some reasonable Israelis will turn this all around, and Israel will stop being a genocidal mission.
So where do you draw the line? Most - if not all - countries were created with bloodshed at some point. People in my country moved into the area around ~1200 years ago and I don’t think the locals welcomed the new inhabitants with open arms. So should we move back then? What about the people who now line in the place we (at least assume) to had come from?
Read the first sentence of the comment you just replied to.
Yeah, but at that point you just rant how all these states should disappear without any idea what to do with the people in them.
Hmmmm, sounds to me like you ignored my first sentence. Read it again. I don’t think they should go anywhere. Doesn’t make what they did right though.
For Israeli settlers, there is still a window of time to kick them the fuck out given as to how they go into people’s homes with the blessings of Israeli police and IDF and kick the residents out…
The country Israel was founded by people who are native to the land. Perhaps read up on the history of the area, because what you are writing is factually incorrect.
There was no country before and the area was populated by multiple different groups of people. Those people wanted to found countries in the area. There is war(s) regarding where the borders of these countries should be.
That’s how almost every country in the world came into place. The only difference here is that it is taking place in a time when the whole world is watching in real time and people are much more globally mobile.
I know it’s much easier and comfortable to paint a black and white picture of the situation, but it is just false…
If they were native to the land, how do you explain Deir Yasdin or the Nakba?
??? What does that have to do with the fact that Israel is a country founded for people who are native to the land?
If they are native to the land, why did they have to massacre (Deir Yassin) and ethnically cleanse (the Nakba) the other natives? 🤔
I’m asking because Deir Yassin is the massacre that eventually convinced my grandmother’s family to leave their hometown and become refugees in Jordan, especially after the men in the village tried to fight off these “natives to the land” because they were attacking and killing everyone. Deir Yassin convinced Palestinians that they couldn’t trust these “natives”, since they don’t stick to their treaties, and go around marauding.
Jews were killed and oppressed in the area already thousands of years ago. How is that possible if they are not natives to the land?
For example during the Levant conquest or the regular and ongoing conflicts between Arabs and Jews in the area when it was still Transjordan? These conflicts are so fucking old they are mentioned in the Koran.
It’s nonsensical to try and claim Jews aren’t native there.
Please answer my question first. If they were natives to the land, why did they have to commit massacres and ethnic cleansing against the other natives of the land?
For the same reason why people do that in every country to each other. Religion, incompatible cultural values, ideologies that go against other people, … It’s sadly something people do and have done everywhere in some way or another.
In Transjordan and the greater area between Northern Africa and Asia there were countless shifts and movements, mixing and separation of groups for all kind of reasons. But I think the separation because of different religions is probably the reason that lead to the biggest rifts, at least in that place.
I don’t see how that has anything to do with whether or not a group of people is native to or had ancestry in a land.
Because people native to a land don’t tend to butcher their neighbors and then establish an apartheid state, even for ideological differences,