#Zionism, however, is not all that easy and uncontested, even among #Jews themselves:
"Advocates of the #Zionist movement see it as an important effort to offer refuge to persecuted minorities and reestablish settlements in #Israel. 👉Critics, however, say it’s an extreme ideology that discriminates against non-Jews...👈
In fact, I have heard several first-hand reports of how the #Jewish...
...government discriminates against non-#Jews and gives way more rights and economic benefits to #Settlers (I don't want to introduce the "A-word," however a lot of historic parallels could be drawn to pre-Mandela Africa and the #Boers...)
Furthermore, I learned about the repercussions that even "mixed" couples are experiencing from this policy.
I'd say, finding a place of refuge, a homestead for the Jews who seem to have been persecuted...
...throughout history (the Bible and Torah are no unbiased sources,) are perfectly reasonable goals. Taking the #Shoah (the #Holocaust) into consideration and, in particular, the role governments around the globe had in preventing that catastrophe by allowing more immigration, the world has a special obligation towards the Jews. (#TheUSAndTheHolocaust by #KenBurns*)
This, however, does not entail allowing the ult-right government...
...of Israel to discriminate against the non-#Jewish population or even allow new #JewishSettlements. The #Palestinians did not play any relevant part in the Shoah, so they must not bear the brunt if any kind of "damages."
👉Many international Jews also disapprove of the movement👈 because they don’t believe a national homeland is essential to their religion."
A crash course on history of the PALESTINIAN STATE:
Before Israel, there was a British mandate, not a Palestinian state
Before the British Mandate, there was the Ottoman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Ottoman Empire, there was the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, there was the Ayubid Arab-Kurdish Empire, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Ayubid Empire, there was the Frankish and Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Kingdom of Jerusalem, there was the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, there was the Byzantine empire, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Byzantine Empire, there were the Sassanids, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Sassanid Empire, there was the Byzantine Empire, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Byzantine Empire, there was the Roman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Roman Empire, there was the Hasmonean state, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Hasmonean state, there was the Seleucid, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Seleucid empire, there was the empire of Alexander the Great, not a Palestinian state.
Before the empire of Alexander the Great, there was the Persian empire, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Persian Empire, there was the Babylonian Empire, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Babylonian Empire, there were the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, not a Palestinian state.
Before the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, there was the Kingdom of Israel, not a Palestinian state.
Before the kingdom of Israel, there was the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, not a Palestinian state.
Before the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, there was an agglomeration of independent Canaanite city-kingdoms, not a Palestinian state.
Actually, in this piece of land there has been everything, EXCEPT A PALESTINIAN STATE. A little more history for those wanting to 'restore Palestine'. In 132 AD the Emperor Hadrian resolved to stamp the Jews and their religion out of existence. He sold all Jewish prisoners into slavery after the revolt of Bar Kikhba, forbade the teaching of the Torah, renamed the province Syria Palaestina, and changed Jerusalem’s name to Aelia Capitolina. He renamed Israel to wipe out the national identity of Israel and the Jews. So if you are looking to 'restore Palestine to the Palestinians', you need to give it back to the Jews.
@AlliFlowers@Oeneus@HistoPol They come to me, brimming with enthusiasm but lacking in education. They're what some might call 'useful idiots.' It's baffling to think that with access to Western education, they would choose to align themselves with terrorists.
Not(!) to defend that ignorance, but the history of that region is particularly complicated and when we think of history, how much do we know about the same time span about Indonesia, China, Peru, or even Russia?
It depends on the area that you gave lived in, generally speaking.
What is more, if you did not grow up in the cultural sphere of influence of the #Abrahamaic religions, #Palestine is not one of the most important regions on the globe 🌎 .
@HistoPol@AlliFlowers@Oeneus The difference is that I don't wade into the politics or history of those other countries. Even if I did, my positions wouldn't be grounded in my emotional reaction.
@specked
It is funny that your source should not travel further back in time, to at least include the time of the #Hittites and #Ramesses II, as the indicisive #BattleOfKadesh led to the first known peace treaty in 1274 BCE.
That would have been a fitting ending.
BTW, I went even further back in time until the beginning of humanity.
If you ignore the fact that early humans crossed from #Africa (and probably the...
...#Arabian peninsula into the #Asian continent and came through the region of #Palestine, then you will quickly see that that region has since times immemorial been like a train station that belongs to nobody and everyone: peoples and armies coming through over millennia.
How do we resolve the dispute then if the "older rights principle" won't work either?
Maybe not that difficult: few people will dispute that the #UN were legally founded.
For some ...
If you are directing this to me, yes, but that is another discussion.
I have over 40k posts, including many threads and convos, which still cannot be migrated.
Besides, #desecration is an issue. Someone defederation from the "mother instance" is bound to be very isolated very quickly.
For me, a no-go, at this point.
Besides, like Laffy and Cory, you learn to live with it, and you also have more opportunities to feature links 😉
...-one believing in a representative democracy , the did have the right to settle legal issues.
"Despite strong #Arab opposition, the #UnitedNations votes for the partition of #Palestine and the creation of an independent #Jewish state on this day in 1947."
@HistoPol@marcelliotnet@Oeneus Okay, but the Palestinians have expressed a desire beyond just a Palestinian state. Their rejection of treaties and their own words indicate they seek control over the entire land, with aspirations for it to reunite with Jordan. Additionally, Palestinians reside in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, expanding beyond geographical boundaries. These territories already offer homes to Palestinian communities.
Yes, and that makes things more complicated.
In the end, if not one of the 2 peoples is rather completely anihilated, an unthinkable outcome, the 1947 solution of the #UN, developed by great thinkers, is IMO the only way to a lasting solution that will not necessarily entail terrorist attacks on a daily basis.
For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind: it hath no stalk: the bud shall yield no meal: if so be it yield, the strangers shall swallow it up."
@HistoPol@marcelliotnet@Oeneus The West Bank was seized from Jordan after Jordan decided to attack Israel. Jordan is the Arab state carved out of Palestine. Israel is the Jewish state carved out of Palestine.
That was a new spin to the (hi)story of Palestine I had not heard of. Possible, in principle, however, if this @wikipedia entry holds true, the #Kingdom of #Jordancannot possibly be that #Arab nation to be carved out from Palestine:
"...In 👉1946, #Jordan gained independence👈 and became officially known as the #Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The country...
The West Bank was not seized from Jordan after Jordan attacked Israel. Rather, it was captured by Israel during the Six-Day War in 1967, when Israel launched a preemptive strike against Egypt, Jordan, and Syria after tensions escalated in the region. Jordan had controlled the West Bank since the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.
Jordan is not carved out of Palestine. Jordan was originally part of the British Mandate of Palestine, but it became an independent kingdom in 1946, two years before Israel was established in 1948.
Israel was established in 1948, following the United Nations partition plan for Palestine, which proposed dividing the land into separate Jewish and Arab states. The establishment of Israel led to the Arab-Israeli War of 1948, during which neighboring Arab states, including Jordan, invaded the newly declared state of Israel.
I did read your long summary and, from my recollection, don't find any fault.
So you also agree that the 2nd #UN resolution calling for the founding of an #Arab state (which still is a very controversial subject) has not been carried out, correct?
@HistoPol@wikipedia@marcelliotnet@Oeneus No, I don't agree. The second United Nations resolution related to the founding of an Arab state in Palestine is United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181, also known as the UN Partition Plan for Palestine. This resolution, passed on November 29, 1947, proposed the partition of Mandatory Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, with Jerusalem as a separate entity under international control. While the Jewish leadership accepted the plan, Arab leaders rejected it, leading to the Arab-Israeli War of 1948.
At some point the Palestinians have to accept responsibility for their choices. History is just a series of cause and effect.
I don't really see a disagreement, and thank you for the reminder that #Arab nations originally rejected the partitioning, including resolution 181. It was not realized.
If the resolution passed by majority, I think it has passed. #Arab nations have no veto powers, as the former Allied Powers. The resolution still stands, I'd say, though I'm not an expert on international law. I seem to remember that #UN General Assembly..
...resolutions are non-binding , but would appreciate a correction by someone from the legal profession with a specialization.
From what I've read so far, however, both resolutions were passed the same way, so if either one were invalid, non-binding, etc., this would immediately backfire, as it would, IMO, then also negate #Israel's legal claim to statehood. (Unless Resolution 181 has been repealed, superceded, etc., of which I'm not aware.)
While it's true that Arab nations initially rejected the UN Partition Plan for Palestine (Resolution 181), it's incorrect to suggest that the resolution was not realized solely because of their rejection. The plan was not fully implemented due to various factors, including the Arab-Israeli War of 1948 and subsequent territorial disputes.
UN General Assembly resolutions, including Resolution 181, are indeed non-binding. However, they still carry significant political and moral weight, even if they lack enforceability under international law.
The comparison between Resolution 181 and Israel's legal claim to statehood is not entirely accurate. Israel's declaration of statehood in 1948 was based on a combination of factors, including the UN Partition Plan, but also on the ground realities at the time, such as the Jewish population's presence and the outcome of the Arab-Israeli War of 1948.
UN resolutions can be repealed, modified, or superseded over time by subsequent resolutions or developments in international law and politics.
"...but also on the ground realities at the time, such as the #Jewish population's presence and the outcome of the #Arab-#Israeli War of 1948."
I can agree with all the facts that you state here (with the whole post, in fact) as they coincide with my recollection of things I have read and heard in the past. Thank you, too, for the recap.
...including the 2014 coup in #Crimea) *must never be a basis for any future legal claim. The same holds true for state-sponsered land-grabs of territory that is not internationally recognized.
I can agree with your analysis with regard to the causes, and I, personally, even think resettlement of all ethnicities in the #MiddleEast will be necessary to create viable states and a longer lasting peace for all peoples involved, but...
...simply not because a state had the better military and created these facts.
The erroneous "might makes right" concept, still espoused by the #Bush Admistration, as well as autocrats like #Putin and #Xi, would have desastrous consequences for the world order (e.g. #Ukraine, #SouthChinaSea, #Taiwan, etc.).
@HistoPol@Oeneus History is written by the victors. While I also think that's terrible, that's the way it is. Every war Israel has fought has been defensive. Every country that has wanted peace with Israel has received peace.
Yes, and this is why the international community must form alliances that protect the vast majority of nations: they are not mighty.
In fact, it is an old concept derived from #Aesop / #Aísōpos n the 7th-6th century BC: His fable of the Bundle of Sticks, also known as the Old Man and His Sons.
...religion nor race, or family ties must be the (sole) unifying factor for the #BundleOfSticks, but the joint belief in a better world with a rules-based order, where the may punish the aggressor, if possible by peaceful means (#LastResort theory.)
...PS:
Is the fable only part of the bible* or also the Torah, I wonder?
"#Ecclesiastes picked up the moral in his proverbs, 4:12 (King James Version)
"And if one prevail against him, two shall withstand him; and a threefold cord is not quickly broken."
...captured and annexed the West Bank during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War until it was occupied by Israel in 1967. "
The kingdom's independence predates the #UN resolution in question by a year. The resolution about the carve-out of an #Arab nation would not have made any sense anymore in 1947 if #Jordan really were that nation.
Add comment