It's 1947. The UN tells America that it will be taking a portion of its land to create the nation of Israel, regardless of whether or not Americans agree with their mandate. Would you support this decision?
Terrible and ignorant question
You're a terrible and ignorant question.
Good try grandma.
It is sad to see how so many youths have no idea about the formation of Israel, and what a Palestinian really is, and how NO Arab country would absorb them, instead used them as pawns.
The ignorance is amazing.
A sincere good try.
What is a Palestinian, then? Enlighten me.
Jews only said yes lol
You are not a power user, so I'm not sure if you see the religious stats. In any case, your comment is incorrect. 29% of Jews said no. I said no, because it is a badly flawed analogy. This is not what happened in 1947. See below.
There is more to it than that.
Yes, a lot more. Look down a few posts. I wrote an analogy that is a lot more accurate and fair.
Israel and it's establishment during this time takes up the post WWII section of the history book, but nobody talks about Africa. We cut that continent up like a pie in the name of $ and they are still suffering from it.
No, but if in the 1700's the British were going to give back the land and they decided to give a small area to the Native Americans I wouldn't have a problem.
Strictly speaking, they did. Many colonials wanted to be able to settle the land instead, and a decent amount did not approve of the Proclamation of 1763 in general.
Although, in all fairness, it wasn't fully autonomous or anything close
Imagine that they had become fully autonomous. And USA and Canada decided that it was an unfair occupation of the land by Native Americans. They persecute NA in their countries and attack them.
That I think could be used as a parallelism.
I agree that would be closer, I was just going off by what you had said, not necessity in full conjunction with the analogy
No, because Israel isn't here.
NO, UN doesn't do anything in USA. F_***
Only if it was a portion of America that was not an American state.
Blue helmets make great targets.
Sure. They can have Massachusetts or California.
The analogy does not hold up at all. The land had been controlled by various foreign governments for hundreds of years. In 1947, it was controlled by Great Britain, who wanted the partition. I will post a more accurate analogy in my next comment.
It's 1947. Ohio was never absorbed into the United States, for some reason. The territory has been governed, for the last few hundred years by various outside governments, most recently Canada. At the same time, there has been a lot of ...
... immigration into Ohio by Jewish refugees.
Canada wants to get out of Ohio. They ask the United Nations to form two new countries out of the Ohio territory. One would be governed by native Ohioans - for the first time in hundreds of years.
The other would be governed by the Jews. Both new countries would cooperate with each other. Nobody would be forced to move.
As a native Ohioan, how do you feel?
Very well done.
"Nobody would be forced to move."
That could not be further from the truth.
Jenna, breakdowns in civil order leading to people moving (whether out of mass hysteria, personal fear, force by state actors, or a combination thereof) does not equal the original partition plan requiring people to move
There are two sides to every story, but the fact that Palestinian families who chose to stay and become israeli citizens are alive and thriving in Israel makes me lean toward the notion that those who left would have been better off staying.
Exactly what Jenna said. You're sorely misled if you believe no one was forced to leave their home.
Jenna, I came here to say what Matt said, but he said it better than I could have.
Regardless, Alice, the boundaries set by the UN are A LOT different than the boundaries now. So while initially they might have been fair, there have been many years and many different boundary changes since.
And I hadn't seen Milk's second post yet. (I was only thanking him for the "well done.")
Exactly! People did leave. That can't be disputed. But the how and why is less clear.
Jenna- just out of curiosity, if you were a Palestinian living inside the new borders of Israel when all this began, and you were offered the choice of staying and living as an israeli citizen, would you have stayed or left?
I'm just looking for your opinion. I'm not interested in challenging you on whatever you say.
I might be ok with going back to 1947 borders, but only with strong assurances of Israel's safety. That's the sticking point. Remember, the surrounding Arab countries attacked immediately. That's the war that first changed the original boundaries.
To be clear, that was to drooski.
I'm not sure what id do in that situation. On one hand, I don't want to leave my home. On the other hand, I don't want to get screwed over by the Israeli govt and be treated as a second-class citizen.
It's hard to know what it's really like for them because I don't believe anyone has told that story in an unbiased way. I've only met one Arab family from Israel, and they seemed very happy with their lives there.
I'm not saying they'd be unhappy, because I wouldn't know. But it'd always be like being a colony of an imperial power.
As usual, thanks GA and Milk.
I lived in Israel for a while. Arabs are not second class citizens and they are actually happy. My boss was actually a Muslim Arab.
Jenna, as a woman, the only place in the Middle East that you wouldn't be treated as second class citizens is Israel.
Or Jordan. They're pretty cool over there too.
You are kidding, right?
Chinito, so what's the truth behind the claim that they're second class citizens? Are there specific laws or sanctions that apply only to non-jews?
Were you talking to me, because all other countries considered in the Middle East, I would pick Jordan. It's not as Westernized as Israel, but it's also pretty modern in it's own right and at the moment is safer than being in Israel.
Arabs are not obligated to go to the army. I can't think of anything else.
Israel even has two official languages: Hebrew and Arab.
But the Jews must serve?
Getupbaby, Jordan is really trying to change and I applaud it. But there are still many laws and social rules against women. Try to read about Honor Killings, divorce in Jordan or property ownership for women in Jordan.
Yes. Men serve 3 years and women 2.
They have issues with free speech too, but they do some good things diplomatically speaking.
The Queen has been very vocal on trying to change the status for women. Jordan is good place for women compared to Saudi Arabia or other Middle East countries. But you cannot put them in the same league as Western countries including Israel.
Plus let's not forget that the Arab Joint list is now the third largest Israeli Party. Also let's not forget why the original Palestinian state was destroyed, it was due to war provoked by Jordan, Syria, and Egypt in 1948. Egypt took the Gaza Strip
Jordan took the historic jewish city of Jerusalem and Judah and Samaria (a large portion of which was supposed to be Palestine). Rather than attacking Israel for controlling it now, criticize Jordan and Egypt for eradicating the land to begin with.
If there is going to be a responsible peace plan than it shouldn't just entail land for peace. But include Egypt, Jordan, Israel, and the Palestinians. And it should have Israeli security as a top priority. Also the Palestinians need to have a
Honest government, they elected Hamas in 2006, and Yasser Arafat had many corruption problems. Abbas has been the best they got and even he has had problems with corruption charges by his own people. We need real partners in peace.
Also* Just IMO, I believe the current two state solution plan is a joke. How can two states operate as jigsaws. Honestly, how can we have a Palestinian State in which is separated into two regions. That doesn't seem efficient.
Drop ski and Jenna: you are sorely misinformed. Try reading "a peace to end all peace" for a truthful representation of facts on this topic.
According to one review online, the author of your book calls the Arab "the mysterious, rapacious greedy animals, and predatory savages". Fuck THAT book.
Getup- you went to Amazon.com, looked at the 129 ratings, ignored that 111 are 3, 4, and 5 star ratings, skipped straight to one of the 3 single star ratings, found the one claiming to have a quote, and without verifying that quote decided the...
...book was so unworthy of further consideration that you came here and typed that nonsense.
To be crystal clear: You literally ignored over 100 positive reviews and clung to the single, unverified review that fits your agenda.
I can find reviews on Amazon of Dr Seuss books calling him a misogynistic racist child hater.
That's why I don't base my entire opinion of an author or a book off of one anonymous review from an online forum.
That's Internet 101.
Go read the book and figure out for yourself what you think. That's what I'm going to do.
MrMilk, I literally did the same. I went to Amazon to check the book and found great reviews and a couple of bad ones. I'm also going to read the book.
Getup, if you have a book you recommend I will also read it.
Considering most conservatives I've spoken to openly hate Muslims and Arabs, and think they're all bloodthirsty terrorists who'd decapitate them at the first chance, I wouldn't be surprised if that's an actual quote.
ozzy, let me guess. Your book goes on a rant about how Ishmael's descendants would all be barbaric Muslim terrorists and how the Antichrist will be a Muslim and how we should support Israel because of Armageddon. I wouldn't doubt it.
Drooski, I'm going to need some numbers on that claim. As a conservative who tends to run in conservative circles, I've never once heard a single conservative I personally know say anything remotely close to what you're claiming.
And it's amazing that now two people have come forward claiming to have enough information to judge this book without even having seen an actual copy of it.
I expect that from getupbaby, because that's pretty much how liberals handle books and information they think might possibly not be in lockstep with their views.
But Drooski, you claim not to be a liberal, so what's your excuse?
I never said that's what the book says, but I said I wouldn't be surprised if it did. And if you haven't seen conservatives say those things, especially on SOH, I advise you to look harder.
I don't personally know any of the conservatives on SOH.
the internet isn't representative of real life, it's tends attract the extremists.
I'm a liberal, but I read all kinds of terrible crap. I pulled Savage Nation out of a dumpster, read it, threw back in the trash. I'll put it on my reading list, but don't hold out for a five star rating for a book that refers to Arabs as savages.
I'd be up for donating Ferguson, MO.
I'd be in favor of giving them the State of Nevada. They are the finest people on earth and we cannot possibly do too much to preserve and protect the Jewish people.
That's a much better idea than what actually happened. Then again, if there were too many Muslims in the part of America around Israel, they might start bombing us too.
Nope, they have their own land that is theirs. Israel.
And why don't you tell us your amazing plan to rectify the situation oh droosk lord
Matt, please scroll up to see what I posted.
I agree with the general basis of your analogy, and it's definitely a much better and more accurate one. This was just sarcasm combined with being fed up
A two-state solution. I think historically both the Israeli and Palestinian people have been screwed over. This isn't so black-and-white. I'm sorry you're offended by my analogy. How long until you and Alice call me an anti-Semite?
Your poll and past statements certainly seem to add up to the view that you find the process of how Israel was founded to be immoral, but your solution (while admittedly one that I think is the one that needs to be done) does seem to be almost...
Counter intuitive of you find the whole founding process to be so wrong. Certainly better than, well, getting rid of Israel, but it does seem at odds with your position
If we were trying to be fair, we'd deny them their own nation as we denied the Mormons their own nation.
No, because we were a nation then.
Your analogy can't bridge the fundamental inequality.
Southern Florida sounds right.
Hey! The keys are Gorgeous.
But it's the promise land. The Jew searched for 40 year and finally found Boca!
Actually, that's a great idea! America is a big country with so much land, and we love Jewish people. We should create a 51st state of Isreal. Creating a Jewish state in the middle-east was a bad idea.
That's the jews' home though, heck they built most of it in historical times and from 1840-2015. They wouldn't want america.
What I want is to see photos of Rot enjoying life amongst the Arabs.
God bless this poll question.
Jenna, please scroll up to see what I posted. I think my analogy is more fair than drooski's.
Give 'em Florida, half of them are there already.
Or Jew York, I mean New York.
Better them then the Palestinians. Blue light specials from 430-6. Majoh, pool exercise. Life is good.
See the 1917 Balfour Declaration then check the 1948 Balfour Treaty. Where are they supposed to go? They aren't welcome to this day in Europe. On the other hand The UK is being over run with immigrants from many Arabic countries. So for millions
I guess Palestine holds little value. Some people gotta hate!
You're sitting on the front porch of your Missouri swamp home, polishing your rifle. A bunch of UN officials come up to you, and order you to leave your home to make way for the incoming Israeli state. What do you do?
Drooski, they're foreigners... What do you think a conservative would do to foreigners in their front lawn?
Well Drooskis your setting in your trailer park cause you can't afford a regular house wondering how you are going to pay your state taxes to help all the illegals when a Chinese immigrant takes your car how will you get your medical marijuana?
Rotevelle; right invite them in at gun point, tie them up and call ice! What else?
The Jews wandered for 40 years day and night before they found Boca!
Drooski, I posted a much more accurate analogy above. Yours is not what really happened.
This user is currently being ignored