Israel, Palestine and the Arab/Israel Conflict

Status
Not open for further replies.
The purpose of Zionism was self-determination for the Jews in a Democratic system. That would be gone in one state, the Arabs would becomes the most populous, and the Jews would be fucked. Again. No one thinks that is an acceptable outcome except people that hate Jews.
A well maybe now they'd be fucked but that is no where near as certain as you make it out have been.
B if a single state for all palestinians was created when it should have been they would have.
C its such an evil thing where palestinian arabs end up being the majoity in an area they should be the majority.
D no anyone who wants that wants justice. Sorry but just because people think the jews should be held to the same standards and same rules as the rest of humanity doesn't mean we hate them.

ah yes the self determination ploy except the jews had no specific right to self determination in palestine. No matter how much you want it to be other wise self determination is the PEOPLE of a TERRITORY choosing their own political staus. making a country for jews from out side of the territory of palestine is literally the opposite of self determination.
 
Ethnic cleansing is wrong. How hard is that to understand?
Then you acknowledge that it is wrong for any party to expel Jewish "settlers" from the West Bank territory. If you are denying people the right to settle in a region based only on their "race," religion or ethnic identification, then you are engaging in ethnic cleansing. The "Palestinians" have been doing this for years, but very few have ever decried them for it.

So I take it that you will now be supporting the defense of Jewish settlements in West Bank?
 
Then you acknowledge that it is wrong for any party to expel Jewish "settlers" from the West Bank territory. If you are denying people the right to settle in a region based only on their "race," religion or ethnic identification, then you are engaging in ethnic cleansing. The "Palestinians" have been doing this for years, but very few have ever decried them for it.

So I take it that you will now be supporting the defense of Jewish settlements in West Bank?

This is the kind of intellectual dishonesty you would not support in your own country. If Jews built a Jewish settlement in your neighborhood in which non-Jews were not permitted to live and after forcibly evicting the non-Jews with/without compensation, would you accept it? Or to put it in another way, if white people wanted gated communities from which Jews, blacks and hispanics were kept out, is that acceptable to you?

When the establishment of racist colonies in multicultural societies itself should be both illegal and unacceptable how is it "ethnic cleansing" to remove such settlements or make them accessible to all people in the society?
 
Last edited:
Then you acknowledge that it is wrong for any party to expel Jewish "settlers" from the West Bank territory. If you are denying people the right to settle in a region based only on their "race," religion or ethnic identification, then you are engaging in ethnic cleansing. The "Palestinians" have been doing this for years, but very few have ever decried them for it.

So I take it that you will now be supporting the defense of Jewish settlements in West Bank?

that is a rather twisted and dishonest take on it.
 
And when this black majority scenario played out in a true democratic process in South Africa, were the people calling for an end to race based discrimination "white haters"?

Israel and Palestine is not the same issue as South Africa, South Africa was almost pure racial divided, Israel and Palestine is divided mostly by religion, the result is a much more hateful atmosphere, heck the two groups were killing each other even before the formation of Israel when they were one subjugated state, I do believe a sudden fusion at present would results in a horrific blood bath, like the Ramallah lynching times a hundred thousand.
 
This is the kind of intellectual dishonesty you would not support in your own country. If Jews built a Jewish settlement in your neighborhood in which non-Jews were not permitted to live and after forcibly evicting the non-Jews with/without compensation, would you accept it? Or to put it in another way, if white people wanted gated communities from which Jews, blacks and hispanics were kept out, is that acceptable to you?

Well, actually, this seemed to be acceptable to you when it was Jews being forced into tiny ghettos. You even opined that they preferred it that way. It doesn't excuse what happening now, but it isn't irrelevant either.
 
I don't think Jews have ever been "forced" into ghettos. Their laws on kashruth mandate segregation. As you can see in Israel, even in schools. I have no doubt that if a population census was taken by religious inclination you would find similar "ghettos" wherever there are religious Jews in every modern society today. In and of itself there is nothing evil about wanting to live in a religious community or parish or mohalla. Its when you forcibly evict the people already staying there or harass them into leaving by throwing garbage or bags of urine on them that it becomes a problem.
 
I don't think Jews have ever been "forced" into ghettos. Their laws on kashruth mandate segregation.

Sure, Sam: every kind, every sect. And the intimidation and pogroms were their fault, as well. No?

/sarc off
 
When you have the same problem for 5000 years in every society you inhabit, across times, ethnicities and religions, its time for some introspection.
 
Ah. So you think it is their fault.

A mellah (Arabic ملاح, probably from the word ملح, Arabic for "salt") is a walled Jewish quarter of a city in Morocco, an analogue of the European ghetto. Jewish populations were confined to mellahs in Morocco beginning from the 15th century and especially since the early 19th century. In cities, a mellah was surrounded by a wall with a fortified gateway. Usually, the Jewish quarter was situated near the royal palace or the residence of the governor, in order to protect its inhabitants from recurring riots. In contrast, rural mellahs were separate villages inhabited solely by the Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghetto
 
Actually a mohalla is not a walled Jewish quarter. I recommend you extend your reading list beyond wikipedia. Or get a pair of glasses

Mohalla or Mahalla (Persian: محله ) is a term to describe a neighborhood or locality in the cities and towns of Middle East, Central Asia and South Asia. Often it describes a Muslim area

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohalla

Its a rough equivalent of a parish, although its not usually exclusively Muslim. ie there is no prohibition from non-Muslims living, working or worshipping there.
 
Actually a mohalla is not a walled Jewish quarter.

Actually, a mellah is a walled-in Jewish quarter.

A mellah (Arabic ملاح, probably from the word ملح, Arabic for "salt") is a walled Jewish quarter of a city in Morocco, an analogue of the European ghetto. Jewish population were confined to mellahs in Morocco beginning from the 15th century and especially since the early 19th century.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mellah

So I recommend you extend your reading list beyond wikipedia. Or get a pair of glasses. ;)

Edit: mellah, not mallah.
 
Last edited:
I don't think Jews have ever been "forced" into ghettos. Their laws on kashruth mandate segregation. As you can see in Israel, even in schools.

Self mandated segregation?, is that why more then 50% of Jews marry outside the faith in America? Let alone the vast majority live in open communities? I'm guess the nazis did not force the Jews into ghettos either?
 
Since I live in a mohalla I think I am better qualified to define one.

Perhaps; but we're referring to mellahs, not mohallas. So I'll take Lewis' word over yours. ;) Not to mention that you're some little way from Morocco, and that you haven't the slightest idea how the meaning of the word changes over distance.

So why are you doing this, then? This deliberate disconnect, I mean.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top