• Maggoty@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    And it had to be in Palestine? And it had to be an unregulated mess of Terrorism? It couldn’t have been in Germany where occupation forces were on hand to do an orderly transition, and from the country that actually committed the sin?

    Everything about the forming of Israel screams, an excuse for one last colonial project. Because none of what you said makes what they did acceptable. The Palestinians didn’t hurt them. They just wanted to keep their land.

    • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      The establishment of Israel was an act of de-colonialization. There is no other place in the world where Jews have lived continuously for 3,000 years. There’s no other place to which the Jewish people have a tribal connection to the land.

    • random@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      21 hours ago

      you see, every country would be fighting israel rn, if it’s land was taken by it, so does it really matter?

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        21 hours ago

        After world war 2 we absolutely adjusted the borders of countries and there was no issue. We could have easily given them a chunk of Northwestern German coastline. By 1955, when occupation forces left, it would be a done deal.

        • random@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 hours ago

          but the way they split it was at least culturally coherent, they only took the ethnically different parts from germany for example, the only exception I can think of is southern tirol, where ethnic austrians where put into italy

          also no one had to resettle, because they ended up in countries where people would share their culture and speak their language mostly, now if you took a big chunk of land where people lived, they wouldn’t really want to give it up

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Huh. You don’t say. They wouldn’t want to give up their land. It’s almost like dropping a bunch of settlers somewhere isn’t going to result in flowers and unity…

        • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          I’m not really sure they’d have been down with being Germany’s weaker neighbors, even if that was probably the only “fair” place to carve a nation from.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Nobody forced them to move to Israel after World War 2. Nobody would force them in a more ethical project either. “Carving” a nation out of people who didn’t fuck around and had already been there 4,000 years certainly wasn’t the answer.

            • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 hours ago

              Modern day Palestinians are not the coastal Philistines of the middle bronze age. They’re the descendants of the Arab colonizers of the 7th and 12th centuries.

              Which, for clarity’s sake, does not deny them of a right to their land.