Here's the problem with the "homeland" argument. Few people live in their current "homeland". Many people are descended from immigrants and quite far removed from their historical homeland. I've never lived in Argentina, but that is my ancestral homeland. Would it be right for me, if things got dangerous in the U.S., to go there and say "okay, I'm entitled to this land, and I might kill a few people and destroy their homes in the process, but this is where I'm from"? No one would take that seriously. Why should it be any different for Israel?
I fully understand why European Jews left Europe. That does not justify destroying homes, displacing populations, and ethnic cleansing. Saying "Jews should've stayed in Europe" is not a useful argument, but neither is saying that Jews have a right to live in Palestine. The reality is Jews live in Palestine now, and the Israeli state is ethnically cleansing Palestinians. No one is going back to Europe, I don't care what happened decades ago--it explains why the situation is the way it is now, but it doesn't justify any Israeli action. I'm concerned with what is happening now, and Israelis want the Palestinians to disappear so they can have the entirety of the land. And there is no justifying that. no matter what happened historically. In fact, the history should be a lesson to not perpetrate what was done to them on another people.
@WestonTexan No, you can't just move to Argentina and start killing people, but that's not what the first Zionists did. They moved to what was the Ottoman Empire at the time and purchased land from its owners. So if you went to Argentina to escape conditions in Texas, bought a house, and your German or Italian neighbors started throwing rocks at you because they didn't want you to be there, would you defend yourself? How would you react if your attackers then accused you of "stealing their land" when you paid for it, and told you to "go back to Texas" when you had legitimate reasons for leaving? And after starting a fight with you, you end up taking a few of their houses and decide to keep them because your neighbors are still calling for your death and it wouldn't be safe for you to reward them for trying to kill you.
And yes, Jews live in Israel now and Palestinians live in Palestine. Israelis are entitled to defend themselves against people whose stated goal is their exile or death. Hamas is not fighting for an autonomous Gaza, they want everything "from the river to the sea" with no Jews living there.
Really we should've just turned a chunk of Belarus into Israel and did the ethnic cleansing there. No reason the Palestinians should suffer for Europe's crimes.
@BlueVeins It's a little late for that. However, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was an ally of Hitler and offered to carry out his own Holocaust in Palestine, so it's not like they weren't involved at all. And what makes you think the people of Belarus wouldn't have resisted? They hated Jews even more than the Arabs did, at least going by how Jews were treated in the Arab world compared to Eastern Europe.
A better question is why there wasn't a call for Palestinian independence when Jordan annexed the West Bank and Egypt had Gaza. Makes you wonder if the conflict isn't just about land.
@LeopoldBloom I'm mostly being tongue-in-cheek. Obviously, ethnic cleansing is bad no matter who you do it to, and it sucks that the same European powers committing genocide 80 years ago get to export the violence elsewhere and act like the good guys instead of actually fixing their prejudicial mindsets.
A better question is why there wasn't a call for Palestinian independence when Jordan annexed the West Bank and Egypt had Gaza.
What a strange thing to say. Jordan was condemned by other Arab nations for its annexation even though it Palestinians citizenship and let them stay where they were, and a Palestinian still assassinated their head of state. Egypt, for its part, wrenched Gaza off of Israel, and only hung onto it relatively well by turning it into a quasi-self governed state. They painted themselves as liberators, and next to their old captors, it worked. The fact that both sides of the whole Israel/Palestine conflict are kinda racist is easily provable, which really makes the use of these examples all the more baffling.
But for some reason, emigration to Israel should have been off the table, even though that is the historic homeland of the Jewish people.
And many did. Even the Nazis tried to encourage it and I'm sure if the US allowed it, many more would have come to the US.
[media=https://youtu.be/Tf0VOOoChrU]
There is, however, a problem when the house you emigrate to, already belongs to someone else. Which is what currently is the case in the West Bank settlements.
Trying to deflect from the current situation, by going back to European pogroms makes no less ignorant than those who try to reduce the situation through the distorted lens of so called "Israeli Colonialism" .
If he lived in Gaza right now, Hamas would have killed him before the IDF had a chance.
Oh wait, he would be dead anyway. I'm confused though, which situation is better?
But you're welcome to reframe your post as a historic discussion, otherwise you "may" appear as if you're white washing what's going on. Is Ehud Olmert an Iranian shill? he calls it a genocide.
Zohran Mamdani, who as far as I know has never been to Israel or Palestine and has no relatives there, is a hero because he refuses to participate in Holocaust commemorations and won't condemn idiotic slogans like "globalize the intifada."
A hero to whom? He doesn't mean anything to me, unless I move to New York city, and he's elected Mayor. He got 20% of the Jewish vote, despite AIPAC and its allies spending millions trying to prevent Mamdani from winning.
Globalizing the Intifada, is a very alarming term, given that it's been subverted by the likes of Arafat, Hamas and Iran and its proxies, and the Islamist collective, as opposed to the original idea, which was a move by the Christian Mayors of the West Bank that meant "no representation no taxation".
Mandani has been meeting with Jewish leaders and business leaders this week, and I believe be may be making a lengthy public statement to clarify his position.
Your parents or grandparents went to Scandinavia.
They ended up in San Mateo, helping birth the organization that eventually sponsored Khatib to come to the US, as a 15-year old.
If you refuse to make any effort to understand Israeli history and how they arrived at where they are today
Newsflash: don't try to mansplain Israeli to me. You will embarrass yourself, and don't distract from what's happening by revisiting the pogroms to the guy whose existence is their end result. Perhaps you should live in Israel for a while, and just like Khatib, try to understand that there are other viewpoints, not just your pogrom-bounded history. Try, for instance, follow the example set by Khatib.
@Northwest I actually agree with Alkhatib on most of his points. He holds both sides accountable, the only constructive position as this won't be solved by just Israel and the Palestinians. I would only add that any lasting peace will require the buy-in of the surrounding countries, most of which aside from Iran have moved on from "we will push the Jews into the sea." The Oct. 7 attack may have been timed to derail the increasing rapprochement between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which it did. Meanwhile, the Iranian leadership has made hatred of Israel and the Jewish people one of its main positions. And before you tell me "but Jews live in Iran," synagogues and Jewish schools must be supervised by Muslims, and the Hebrew language is illegal. Of course, they're automatically the good guys because Israel and the US just attacked them.
I am also against the West Bank settlements as they are one of the obstacles to a Palestinian state. As far as accusing me of not seeing both sides, that's hilarious. Your posts are far more one-sided; I don't recall anything from you on this issue beyond "look at the horrible thing the IDF did." Here's my summary of the main obstacles to a Palestinian state.
Mamdani is in a difficult position, as his support comes as much from antizionists as it does from people who like his ideas for reforming the police, housing, and transportation. If he moderates his views on Israel, he runs the risk of a significant portion of his supporters concluding that he "sold out."
I can't comment on Ehud Ohmert's position, but calling this war a "genocide" is cheapening the term for its emotional effect, same as when pro-lifers call abortion "baby murder." That being said, I don't live in Israel and am not qualified to opine on the internal discussion there which is very different from what it is in the rest of the world.
I can't comment on Ehud Ohmert's position, but calling this war a "genocide" is cheapening the term for its emotional effect
Consider that he was Israel's Prime Minister. If you like Alkhatib's position, then you may be interested in knowing that Mandani's position is pretty similar.
I don't know who you're referring to when you say that they award a good guy label only if Israel attacks them. As in, I don't know who "they" are. But dying in a war does not make one a good guy. Did they cheat on their taxes? Do they cut lines? Do they kick their dog?
There are plenty of things that make someone a good person, but dying in a war is not one of them. However, despite of how good they are, a family of 13, dying needlessly, are "victims".
The October 7th attack may have been timed to derail the Saudi-Israeli talks, but I really doubt it. Hamas has no end game. They do it for the sake of waging war, and the more Palestinians die, the better Hamas thinks it looks. Their ONLY end game, is a total domination of Jerusalem, and this dove tails into Iran's Ayatollah's end game.
I do, however, and for obvious reasons, expect Israel to behave differently. If you read Haaertz, I can try to link to one of their OpEds, where they refer to the Netanyahu plan for Gaza as a "Concentration Camp".
I continue to shake my head at some of the Jewish USA diaspora's complicity and willingness to look the other way, just because they don't want to look in the mirror.
So who do you think made Hamas powerful?
Netanyahu had his trial suspended, again, because he said he needs to deal with the crisis in Syria, where government forces are duking it out with the Druze.
