Argentina, Brazil recognize Palestine; Israel miffed

Discussion in 'World Events' started by Tiassa, Dec 7, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    I still don't see the point. Were the Palestinians in the guise of occupied peoples under the Egyptians/Persians/Greeks/Romans/Ottomans etc in any way connected to the slave trade? Or are we talking about the Jewish slave traders who were the conduit between Africa and Europe after various Christian Emperors, Popes etc banned Jews from keeping Christian slaves but hired them to bring non-Christian slaves to Europe and the Americas? What is the connection? Are we saying that Israelis are justified in occupying Palestine because in Judaism slaves are a "necessity" to the household? Or are we saying that Europeans are justified in occupying Palestine because they did not get a turn at buying slaves and selling them?

    I mean what is the fricking connection between Palestinian occupation by European Jews and the slave trade in Africa or the Atlantic?


    You're behind the times, Foley. Jews are already a minority in Palestine. They simply don't count all the Palestinians, so its a Big Secret. :runaway:


    Seriously

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Don't worry though, they are fighting the Wars of the Wombs:

    See? Nothing like a bit of antisemitism to make you feel safe in your supremacist society.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2011
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    It's the fault of Muslims.. Muslims apparently sold the Europeans all of their slaves and the Palestinians are occupied because they are Muslims ... Naughty Muslims for daring to fight occupation! If the Muslims weren't there, then they wouldn't need to be occupied.

    Apparently, the Palestinians should be grateful that Israel brought so much to their life by occupying them. And then Bork piped up and blame Muslims for everything. So yes, Palestinians are occupied because they are Muslims and just so we know how bad Muslims are, Bork was kind enough to tell us that the Americans and Europeans bought their slaves off Muslims. So at the end of the day, Muslims are to blame for the trans-Atlantic slave trade and for the occupation of the Palestinians (because they Palestinians are Muslims - so they are automatically to blame that they're being occupied).. Geddit now?

    I think they were trying to simply say that Muslims are bad and therefore we should concentrate our ire on them than the peace loving Israel who bring so much improvement to the lives of Palestinians (according to Fed that is).
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Ah, so its a religious debate. Interesting isn't it, how all supremacists find fault with the people they oppress? If they are not backward enough to be displayed in zoos, they are pedophiles or the untermensch. They need to be saved from themselves, preferably by having their homes or children taken away from them. A bit of overenthusiastic delousing or some poison gas among nonviolent demonstrators is not out of the question. Maybe some assertive tasering or a phosphurus shower if they don't see the light. Whatever happens, its always justifiable. Its interesting that Bork should use the class action suit against all Muslims re:slavery and the slave trade to debate Palestinian occupation. He might want to take some pointers from Les auteurs chrétiens latins du Moyen Age sur les juifs et le judaïsme and score some original points by using similar arguments regarding the role of Jewish dominance of the African/Atlantic slave trade
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2011
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    And if anyone dares to protest, well pfft.. tank rolled over the face should put a stop to that! How dare they be recognised as a people and deserving of their own State. How dare they be humanised!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Don't they know the benefits of occupation? Ghetto living, constant assault and abuse, threats of losing even more of their homes.. They should be grateful! Their life is so much better under occupation than it was before. I mean Fed said so... Apparently, their life now is better than it was before...!!!!

    And get with the program woman! Have I taught you nothing? Nothing at all? Non-Muslims are displayed in zoos, are referred to as pedophiles, etc. Muslims are called terrorists and bombed to kingdom come. Lets not get too snappy and mix up the generalisation here Sam.

    Give them time. I am sure they'll find a way to blame the treatment of Indigenous peoples everywhere on Muslims as well. Hell, wait until they start blaming their smelly bodily gas on them as well.. Damn Arabic spice mix! I blame you!
     
  8. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Well at the risk of losing the vast readership engendered by anything regarding les juifs, let us retreat into the topic in question

    Popcorn time, for sure.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    And points to ponder from the Elder of Zion:

    This is a zionist talking about Palestinian recognition within 1967 borders vs an Israel with no borders. Isn't it ironic, don't you think? Its like raiiiin on your wedding day...
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2011
  9. The Marquis Only want the best for Nigel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,562
    In a nutshell, all you're saying is "let's enforce the greatest common denominator on those we don't like"

    Which is pretty much what those you don't like used to do to you. Or those you support, or... whatever.

    Goes around. Comes around, nothing changes. Details are insignificant.
     
  10. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    I'd like a direct quote from my posts where I said Christians didn't have a major share in the slave trade. Quote me where I allegedly said "it's all the Muslims' fault". Otherwise, I feel that you're paraphrasing me to the point of personal attack. Pjdude said Christians destroyed more peoples and cultures in South America, Sub-Saharan Africa, etc. than Muslims could ever dream of. I said "oh, really"?

    Are you attributing this argument to me, or are you attributing it to Fedr? The Arabs initiated the civil war which led to Israel's independence. UN records support this. If you have ever heard a Muslim mention the Palestinians' "greatest mistake", it was that so many of them fled from the fighting while the Jews stayed there and toughed it out. The number of actual casualties in the fighting on both sides was relatively small, a few thousand. Lebanon alone has killed comparable numbers of Palestinians compared to Israel over the last 60 years, indeed the figure in Lebanon might actually be much higher than Israel's, what with the long-term Syrian occupation, and the brutal Lebanese civil wars that accompanied it. We can look into that in more detail if you want.

    Were there extremists amongst the Jewish fighters committing war crimes circa 1948? Yep. And there were British and Jewish forces who fought to hold them back too. On the Arab side you had savoury humanitarians like Hitler's Lieutenant, Hajj al-Amin al-Husseini, uncle of Yasser Arafat and Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, later selected by the Arab League as the first president for the state of Palestine that would be created once the Jews were exterminated. You also have folks like Azzam Pasha, first secretary general of the Arab League (1945-1952), who by UN records refused any compromise to allow the Jews any measure of independence, neither on purchased lands nor on previously unused lands.

    Meanwhile the Arabs kept the Palestinian refugees in squalid refugee camps and allowed their population to grow tenfold while denying them virtually any opportunities to integrate into the surrounding societies, even on a temporary basis. This was far from the case for the nearly million Arab and Iranian Jews who were chased and purged from their home countries and sent packing for Israel after 1948. Why the difference in treatment? Why are the Palestinians an Arabic people when they're fighting Jews and Israelis, but they're an Israelite people of distinctly non-Arabic origin when they're fighting fellow Arabs?

    This continued argument that a bunch of Russians invented Judaism and then stormed the beaches of the Ottoman Levant D-Day style to colonize it, simply does not hold up to established historical fact. The Arabs were every bit as aggressive and supremacist as the people they tried to eliminate. Is the Jewish sentimental attachment to that piece of land based on pseudoscientific rubbish? I'd say probably. And the Muslims have no religious attachments of their own? The whole Muslim world finds Israel to be the greatest problem in their history, but not their occupations of Darfur, Albania, Constantinople, Cyprus, Kurdistan, etc. because?...

    All I personally care about is international law, and its rules on territorial sovereignty. There was no central democratic authority in Palestine prior to 1948, the Jews who immigrated there did not displace any significant number of Palestinians prior to the Arab declaration of war, and the proposed partition of 1947 would have created two states in complete accordance with human rights, self-determination and the division of previously unclaimed territories (Muslims like SAM think they can claim any inch of territory that came under occupation from a Muslim empire at any point in history).

    From the Wikipedia article on our friendly neighbourhood Grand Mufti:
    Ah, I see we have a problem with the Arab side of the story. How should we solve it? Aha! I know! The only fair and just solution is to dump millions of Arabs into Israel, let them take out the long knives, and then we'll all wait and see if they'll refrain from stabbing at the last minute.

    No, it's easier just to ignore history and blame the Jews for everything.

    I know, the Jews are just there to wreck Palestinian dreams and aspirations. Meanwhile throughout the Arabic world, Palestinians are permanently confined to ghettos because it'll strengthen their gene pool and national character.

    Edit: I should elaborate on this last point. I know you're going after Fedr for painting an unrealistic portrait of the status of Arabs in Israel today. But there are too many people portraying the Jews as mass-murderers and ethnic cleansers, the Arabs as passive victims, and using an extraordinarily disproportionate depiction of the treatment of Arabs in Israel as compared to Palestinians in Arab refugee camps. In Gaza under Hamas rule the Palestinian economy is terrible, in the West Bank it's much better and has been growing much faster of late. Neither situation is acceptable, but Israel far from the only party to blame for this situation. As for the economic and political status of the million+ Arab citizens of Israel, or the Arab Jewish refugees who came to Israel and became citizens after 1948, there's simply no comparison to be made with how Palestinian refugees are treated in Arab countries. After 60 years, Palestinians are still not granted any form of even partial citizenship in the countries hosting the refugee camps where 90% of them have been born.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2011
  11. S.A.M. uniquely dreadful Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    72,825
    Does this mean that the Inquisition against Jews were nullified by the welcome accorded to them by the Sultanate of the Ottomans? Is the general reaction to refugees the determinant of how oppressive racism is in the society where the refugees escape from?

    And I'd like a direct quote which shows the relevance of discussing the slave trade wrt Palestinian recognition - and I'm pretty flexible, being of a lateral bent myself, in seeing where the point might lie

    How did they do that? Who were these "Arabs"?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Here is what military records from Israel bear out:

    Which one is more likely to be correct?

    Strange that is exactly what Gandhi said about Jews who fled Europe during the Nazi occupation.

    What do you think? Do you think the Jews should have stayed there and toughed it out?
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2011
  12. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    Sadly, the above is a good take on the actual reality. The Palestinians are victims, with or without citizenship. And if victims resist, they are painted as unreasonable?
    And why do you think that is? How do you conduct business in prison?
    Of course, it always takes two to tango.
    But...the common thread is apartheid no? Tell me WHY a comparison needs to be made in the first instance? Why not equal rights for all Israeli citizens?
    No, roughly 80% of Palestinian refugees in Jordan have citizenship with equal rights. :m:
     
  13. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    I didn't say nations I said cultures there is a difference. a nation is the people a culture is their idenity as a people
     
  14. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    History is not your strong point, is it?

    Actually no, they did not and it does not.

    Oh no, please substantiate this, because this goes against actual reality.

    Is this before or after the British warred with the Jews in the area before they withdrew entirely? Yes, that's right, in the real world, the British and the Jews were actually in conflict and attacks on the British by the Jews was common... Mearsheimer and Walt actually comment that terrorist attacks was first introduced by Jewish terrorist groups at the time since they ran a campaign of bombing buses and other public areas in their war with the British. But here we have you, claiming that the Jews and the British fought alongside to hold back the Muslim horde.

    It is fact that the Arabs were against the European and UN plan to relocate hundreds of thousands of Jews from Europe and into what was to become Israel. Do you know why? Because doing so would mean that hundreds of thousands of Palestinians would become refugees. They were forcibly removed from their homes and shoved into refugee camps. To this day, their land continues to be eroded as the land grab continues.

    So really, it is clear you have a very limited understanding of history. Which is a shame.

    Iranian Jews are Arabs, you dolt.

    Many still reside in Iran to this day. They are protected in the Iranian Constitution.

    Is it your contention that the plight of the Palestinians today is because of Arabs?

    Oh dear lord.. The Muslim world finds Israel to be a problem.. do you know why? Because as Israel continues to commit gross human rights abuses, as Israel continues to arm itself with a stupid amount of arms, its actions against Palestinians are overlooked and in fact supported by the West.

    If you cared anything at all about International Law and its rules on territorial sovereignty, then your support would be behind the Statehood of the Palestinians and stopping the land grab in the West Bank and elsewhere.

    800,000 is not a significant number to you? That number has risen since then, did you know that? And the Terra Nullius rule? The land was claimed and used by Palestinians and other Arabs. The land was taken from them, they were ordered to leave to give over to the millions of Jews who were streaming in from Europe. The land continues to be taken and Palestinians are continually ordered to leave...

    Your bigotry and racism in this thread is noted. The partion was ignored by Israel as the land grab continues. Don't you get it yet?

    What kind of a fucking bigot are you?

    Or you can just have Israel force Palestinians into refugee camps only to have the Israeli army then allow hate groups in to kill them en masse or to kill them themselves. That's the best final solution to the Palestinian problem, isn't it? How about urging genocide? Do you think that's a fair call?

    But then again, it is nothing new, nor is it original.

    Nope. I blame the West for supporting a regime that commits gross human rights abuses and gets money and arms for it.

    Maybe it is time for you to separate the issue. When we criticise Israel, what do you think we're saying? When we correctly accuse Israel of committing human rights abuses, your response is to say that we're portraying Jews of committing mass murder, etc.

    The Palestinians are victims. And they are responding as victims. To call a country armed up the coight who routinely commit human rights abuses, whose Government supports ethnic cleansing with routine expulsion of Israeli Arabs and who supports expanding its territory by force, routinely denies a portion of its population equal rights based solely on religion and race.. I'm sorry, but I don't view such a country as a victim. Supporters of such regimes will often blame the victims.

    Look at the reaction of Israel when countries dare to recognise them as a people and to recognise a State of Palestine?.. I think that should be answer enough..
     
    Last edited: Jan 8, 2011
  15. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    true if he cared about international law he would support Israel. Israel is a violation of international law an abberation of it an abomination of it.





    and CPT. you claim to support territorial sovereignty yet you support the dividing of a territory( palestine) in clear violation of the very rules on how countries should be formed to give a people you support a country. lets say what you really mean you loathe international law in all of its forms until those you support can twist for their own benefit.
    if you cared about international law you'd be with me wanting palestine to be whole and in the control of the palestinians.
     
  16. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    Start with post #35 by Brian Foley, my response in post #36, and pjdude's interjection in post #37. The most relevant portions:

    There he's talking about the growing Latin American recognition of a Palestinian state within pre-1967 borders, which does not include a recognition of the unconditional Palestinian right to immigrate/return into Israel.

    My response:

    Then in jumps pjdude:

    From there I vaguely mentioned historical examples of Islamic ethnic cleansing and exploitation, pjdude decided to lay on the indictments against Europeans and their descendants, and used intervention in regions like sub-Saharan Africa as an example. I know for a fact Muslims have historically meddled a great deal in that region, and you can check my citations if you disagree, so I wasn't going to avoid mentioning that.

    The Arab Higher Committee with Feldmarschall al-Husseini as president, the Arab League, and the citizens/subjects and armies under their authority.

    As just one example of how hostilities began after the UN approved the 1947 partition, I shall quote from a Time Magazine article published December 8, 1947 (UN partition was announced on November 29):

    I can cite other sources too if you want specific incidents which led to the flareup and fighting.

    Hmmm, UN diplomatic records vs. a Wikipedia article consisting of excerpts from a book called the "Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" by Ilan Pappé? Since I don't have access to the same sources as Ilan Pappé, and there are many who do have access and have criticized him quite severely to the point of taking him to court, I'd say the UN records are more likely to be correct. If Pappé has incontrovertible proof that certain government documents clearly outline an official policy of mass genocidal expulsion, he should team up with the Palestinian Authority and take his case to The Hague.

    Well if Gandhi said that, he was wrong in this case, as the majority of European Jews did stay, and the majority of those who stayed died. In the Palestinian case, the majority of those who stayed behind lived and became Israeli citizens, and the vast majority of their descendants are also Israeli citizens. I only mention the "greatest mistake" claim because I've heard it out in the real world from Arabs themselves on many occasions, including at least one Shia Lebanese immigrant who I consider ultra-radical in both religion and politics (I have sympathies for her on personal levels, which is why I still consider her a friend). Israel's declaration of independence enshrines equal rights for all citizens without regard to race, religion or creed, so at least on paper it took the necessary steps to reassure its minorities, whereas I don't see any reassuring words from the other side.
     
    Last edited: Jan 9, 2011
  17. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    Please elaborate.

    SAM likes to cite Benny Morris in support of her arguments, so I'll use one of his Wikipedia citations as just one example:
    Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947%E2%80%931948_Civil_War_in_Mandatory_Palestine

    As for UN records, one needs only look at who accepted and who rejected the 1947 partition. The Arabs could have pushed a compromising counterproposal claiming more of the land, but they didn't.

    You clearly haven't done much research into what the commonly-accepted reality is. Start here. Note that the casualty figures are not well-documented in Jordan and Lebanon- I suspect they are in fact likely to be much higher than the tallies listed, especially in the case of the latter.

    If you read about the history of Mandate Palestine, you will find that the British supported certain Jewish and Arab factions while opposing and combatting others. The British military also took sides in their respective internal conflicts and power struggles. That's all I was referring to when discussing those who fought alongside the British, I wasn't talking about "holding back the Muslim horde", although Britain did in fact employ thousands of Jews to those ends at various points. As for the allegations that the Jews introduced terrorist attacks in fighting the British for independence, there were actually many terrorist attacks throughout the Mandate era, both from Arabs and Jews, and I think it would be pretty difficult to say who was really the first to "introduce" terrorism to the region.

    So why did the Arabs dump nearly a million Jewish refugees from their lands into Israel after 1948, if they didn't want to displace Palestinians? The 1947 UN Partition Plan would have created two states of roughly equal size, one with an overwhelming Palestinian majority and one with a slim Jewish majority of 55% Jews and 45% Palestinians. Relatively few Palestinians were ever displaced by Jewish immigration up to that point, although changing economics and urbanization did contribute to population migrations. In terms of actual farming and land usage, according to the Wikipedia article on the 1936-1939 Arab Revolt:
    Note, \(1000\mathrm{dunums}\approx 1\mathrm{km}^2\). By 1931 the Jews were already using almost half of the land being actively farmed throughout Mandate Palestine, let alone the area set aside for them in the 1947 partition.

    I don't think there's any reliable documentation on how many Arabs were expelled by force as opposed to leaving in panic or in organized evacuations from conflict zones. I do agree their land continues to be eroded, and the settlements must be stopped.

    Are you really so sure of this assertion?

    Not a smart claim to make after what you just wrote about me. I thought Strawdog would inform you about the absurdity of confusing Persians with Arabs, but I guess the task is left up to me. Are you still sure I'm the dolt? BTW, for clarity, my references to 1 000 000+ Arab-Israeli citizens don't include Jews of Arabic descent.

    Yeah, they can even campaign to be the Ayatollah if they want.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    And Iranian Muslims are legally entitled to convert to Judaism... oh wait, they aren't. The Jewish communities of the middle east outside Israel are going the way of the dinosaur, this is a very well-known fact.

    My contention is the Arabs played too large of a role to ignore, they should be expected to constructively assist in the solution of the Palestinian refugee problem.

    I very much am in favour of a Palestinian state and the end of the West Bank land grabs. That's why I praised the South American states pushing this new initiative, it doesn't say Israel has to take in millions of refugees on top of a two-state solution.

    Terra Nullius is precisely the reason Israel exists in its present form today. I know the Arabs claimed rights to all of Mandate Palestine, that doesn't mean in practice they're automatically entitled to the whole pie.

    After the Holocaust, there weren't millions of Jews from Europe left to stream in. That's one reason the majority of Israeli Jews are of Arabic descent.

    This is an unnecessary ad-hominem attack.

    Definitely not this kind:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    No, not at all. My understanding is the Palestinian refugee population is growing faster than any other population on the planet, and it's a serious problem for them and their host countries, but starving them is not the answer, nor do I believe this growth rate is any threat to Israel, as long as the two-state solution is accepted.

    It's tough to say, because Israel's opponents fall into different camps. Pro-settlement Israelis seem to think I'm just as opposed to them as SAM. All I am arguing against in your case is the usage of one-sided rhetoric (Mandate Palestine in peacetime vs. Gaza in the middle of a war). If Fedr thinks Palestinians are better off than they would have been without Israel (assuming the Arabs settled their substantial internal differences peacefully), then he's full of rubbish, but if he's talking about the Arab citizens of Israel, I think there are numerical arguments that can support the assertion.

    My issue is with folks like SAM and pjdude. Maybe sometimes they reconsider in private, but here all I've seen them do is advocate for the elimination of any Jewish majority state within the internationally-recognized lands of Israel.

    It's a very serious concern, and I have advocated quite a few times on this forum that the international pressure on them should be ramped up substantially. Sometimes the only way to teach a child, is to show them that there are stern consequences for their actions, words aren't always enough. Or as I recall you personally putting it some time ago, "friends don't let friends drive drunk."
     
    Last edited: Jan 10, 2011
  18. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    37,875
    This and That

    True, details are insignificant as long as one is satisfied with the mundane bloody-go-round.

    But, hey, you know ... if that's what you're into.

    • • •​

    Please demonstrate the validity of that assertion.

    And then perhaps we can move onto the problem of ethnic and religious purity zones and why a Jewish or Catholic state is okay while a Muslim state is wrong.
     
  19. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    What would that have to do with anything?

    "We" do not go by such. There are two distinct terms for a reason.

    That sentence doesn't even add up - you're comparing states to a religion, and calling the result nationality.

    We don't do that, either. A nation is a thing of its own, not interchangeable with religion, or state, or country, or ethnicity. You should figure out what is, and is not, nationality, if you want to participate in discussions of such.

    So what? There isn't a "Hindu" nationality even today, and so when its scriptures date to is irrelevant to the issue.

    Indian nationality, meanwhile, is a fairly new thing. Like most nationalities operant today, it's a 20th century phenomenon.

    Now you're getting closer - a nation is an identity group. If a bunch of people all agree that they comprise a nation, and act accordingly, then they are a nation.

    Why the scare quotes?

    But, no, a nation isn't just any identity group. It's a specific kind of identity group, having to do with both ethnic and cultural affinities and an insistence on political self-determination. Multiple of those examples you give there do not qualify as nationalities (neither Syrian Christians nor Romani). And none of the ones that are nationalities gives Jewish nationality much of a run for its money in age terms.

    It being important to distinguish between the actual arisal of the nationalities in question, and their mythological foundations, here. It's standard practice for nations to claim historical origins that predate their actual origin as an identity group by centuries. This is typically pretty obvious, since there are only a handfull of nationalities that can credibly claim to be much more than 200 years old (Jewish nationality being one of them).

    Shared narrative is indeed an important component of national identity.

    You could say the same of much of the history of any nation, and be just as correct. It's standard practice for nations to invent mythological origins, in order to justify their claims of political self-determination in the present day. The difference is that the Jews have actually been at the business of nation-hood for a very, very long time.

    What you describe there is exactly myth, no?

    This all misses the point. That the mythological narrative of an ethnic nation extending back into pre-history is not correct doesn't matter. Essentially all nations engage in that sort of revisionism. The question is how long the group of people in question has been identifying as a nation (on whatever basis, factual or otherwise) and acting as such. And I contend that the Jews have been at that business for quite some time. Sure, the identity got re-tooled when it encountered European nationalism (and so copied their approach of inventing a historical ethnicity, with lineage into the present), but that's a distraction. If you're going to go around disqualifying nationalities based on faulty historical narrative, then there aren't any nationalities at all. The historical narratives that purportedly justify them are all basically false - which suggests that the truth of such is not actually key to their endurance or power.
     
  20. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    The state of Israel is about 52 years old. You might be surprised to learn how many present-day states are newer than that.

    Aren't we?

    And so, same national mythology. The fact remains that none of those polities conceived of themselves as a "nation" until modern times - more recently than Israel (let alone, Jewish nationality) in many cases.

    And until a group actively conceives of itself as a nation, and behaves accordingly, there is no nation to speak of. No matter how far back the national mythology may extend. If you're going to accept that Iranian nationality goes all the way back through ancient Persia, then you're also going to have to accept that Israeli nationality goes all the way back through ancient Israel.

    But what you should be doing is getting a handle on what nationalism is all about, and how it actually relates to the political concerns that you care about, and speaking from such a context. Instead of, effectively, going along with the lie that national mythologies are actually true, and as such definitively justify modern political claims - which is exactly what you are doing via the attacks on Israel's historical narrative, and the blase acceptance of other historical narratives. This will never work, for two reasons: everyone is, on some level, ultimately aware that their own national narrative is largely bullshit and the narratives do not actually constitute the external justification for political claims anyway. They only work on an internal level - the ultimate divvying up of land between compating nations is done on the basis of power.
     
  21. CptBork Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,460
    If I were a Kosovar, I'd definitely be praying for Israel to survive. The whole "Israel's new so they can't be allowed" argument really has no merit in the modern age.
     
  22. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    The Jews as a geographically centralized people in Israel, have just over half a century under their belt in context of the last couple of thousand years. That is brand new, any way you dress it.
    Ancient Persians and modern Iranians tread the same soil and share a common localized history. No convoluted narrative required for substantiation.
    Do you not think nationality incorporates an important geographic element? Where were the land and people (nation-ality) of Israel physically located, for the 2000 years prior to the 20th century? I know the Arabs & Palestinians were in Palestine and surrounds. I know the Persians were living in present day Iran. The Ottomans were living in present day Turkey. The Chinese, Japanese, Indians, etc.
    So that makes it acceptable, and negates any loftier moral ideals?
     
  23. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    and the cat in the hat

    It's implicit in Sam's arguments, Tiassa, besides having been advocated several times directly by her. You cannot really be ignorant of this point. Did you even read Bork's actual comment?

    Er...maybe you could demonstrate the relevance of this argument vis-a-vis Bork's comment. Is he making this point? And if he were making this point, have you considered - for even a second - the humanitarian issues your latter case invokes? Have you found a comparable religious state in the present century? And who is supporting such a model?

    I mean, straw men are one thing, but for fuck's sake.

    Seriously.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page