No, but it ended for the Palestinians as a political entity with their own agency that day. Future historians will cite this event as the one that sealed the fate of the Palestinians as the losers of this conflict forever. October 7 showed Israel that Palestinians can not be trusted to govern themselves, that the only way the Israeli state can ensure its safety is by having a tight grip over Palestinian affairs, like in the West Bank.
I’m stating this as an observation, not as an expression of support of how Israel is conducting itself in the West Bank. However, I do believe that nothing Israel has ever done justifies the atrocities of October 7 and I sure hope that you were not trying to justify those either.
I’m not sure if you are aware of this, but the persecution of Jews didn’t start with WW2 and neither was it limited to areas controlled by Nazi Germany. There are very good reasons why Jews wanted to return to their home country.
Yes, from the Ottomans and also from local landowners, especially after the British took over. They preferred purchasing land with few Arab tenants in order to evict as few people as possible. This meant that much of the land was of poor quality for agricultural use, which they solved, after the founding of Israel, by coming up with innovative irrigation methods.
yeah and im sure all us in the americas would be completely fine with a similar thing going on here and that was years that only come into the hundreds.
Not to mention, even if he or any other of the leading figures of his time had been fundamentalists, how would this be a good reason for denying Israel the right to exist right now? Why should that be a criteria? The Palestinian leader at the time, Amin al-Husseini, was most definitely a fundamentalist by modern stadnards, so does this mean that a Palestinian state should not exist either?
Can you describe who these supposed fundamentalists are supposed to be, how large this group and their influence was? Because it can’t be the Haredi, who were far too small and insignificant a group in 1948.
You seem to think im just talking about jewish settler types whereas why that is a small portion of folks responsible for israels existence im talking about european and american financial and political supporters both jewish and christian. Its the christians in particular who wanted to artificially verify their prophecy.
The reason why I read your comment that way is because America wasn’t exactly an ardent supporter of Israel in its early days beyond recognizing it first, even going so far as to enforce an arms embargo against it. The UK also enforced this embargo. The most significant support out of Europe came from France, which had very strong ties with Israel, including in particular in regards to both nations’ atomic weapons programs. West Germany became a supporter of the young state starting in the early 1950s, when its Holocaust reparations became a major source of funding (and free imports of vital goods) for the government in Tel Aviv.
American Evangelical support of Israel really only started to take off and become a force in American politics in the wake of the Six-Days war, when America, in order to counter Soviet influence in the region, began to back Israel directly. This was also when economic ties started to intensify. Evangelicals, while having voiced support of Zionism earlier (just like more moderate American Christians), more or less rode the coattails of this development.
I would call recognizing it pretty ardent support given that situation. Again how would the US view countries that supported a country that recognized a first nation country west of the mississippi. Would they be not exactly ardent supporters. Im pretty sure for me your moderate american christians would be to me fundamentalist and in the early days support can be counted in one way. Money. Its the same with terrorist groups today. All of them rely on funding from ultimately more legitimate sources. It may get washed in various way but they need the cash flow. Don’t get me wrong it had much more legitamacy given the whole start with the league of nations idea wise, but right off the bat the way the borders were unclear and changed from one interpretation to another it was a cesspool to start with and both europe and america should have just stopped in that region. I mean this crazy stuff goes back to the crusades and it was never a good idea to be there.
neither. israel should not even be there but the whole thing started with a hamas attack (well not the whole thing thus point one)
History didn’t start on Oct 7.
No, but it ended for the Palestinians as a political entity with their own agency that day. Future historians will cite this event as the one that sealed the fate of the Palestinians as the losers of this conflict forever. October 7 showed Israel that Palestinians can not be trusted to govern themselves, that the only way the Israeli state can ensure its safety is by having a tight grip over Palestinian affairs, like in the West Bank.
I’m stating this as an observation, not as an expression of support of how Israel is conducting itself in the West Bank. However, I do believe that nothing Israel has ever done justifies the atrocities of October 7 and I sure hope that you were not trying to justify those either.
agreed.
What do you mean by “be there”? Exist as a nation or be in Gaza?
exist as a nation. Put in place by fundamentalist religious types who want to show how the bible predicted this thing they caused to happen.
Don’t forget the mass migrations prior to WW2.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_and_Judaism_in_the_Land_of_Israel#British_Mandate_(1917–1948)
I’m not sure if you are aware of this, but the persecution of Jews didn’t start with WW2 and neither was it limited to areas controlled by Nazi Germany. There are very good reasons why Jews wanted to return to their home country.
Stealing land has always been popular.
These Jews legally bought the land. The expulsion of Arab Palestinians didn’t start until the Arab League declared war on Israel.
From whom did they buy it? The Ottomans?? I don’t think so.
Yes, from the Ottomans and also from local landowners, especially after the British took over. They preferred purchasing land with few Arab tenants in order to evict as few people as possible. This meant that much of the land was of poor quality for agricultural use, which they solved, after the founding of Israel, by coming up with innovative irrigation methods.
That land belonged to the Jews a thousand years before Islam took over
Land doesn’t belong to anyone you fucking loser.
https://imgchest.com/p/qe4gdbvvr4j
This you?
yeah and im sure all us in the americas would be completely fine with a similar thing going on here and that was years that only come into the hundreds.
I don’t even know where to start with a comment this absurd. The founder of the modern state of Israel was anything but a fundamentalist:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Ben-Gurion#Religious_belief
Not to mention, even if he or any other of the leading figures of his time had been fundamentalists, how would this be a good reason for denying Israel the right to exist right now? Why should that be a criteria? The Palestinian leader at the time, Amin al-Husseini, was most definitely a fundamentalist by modern stadnards, so does this mean that a Palestinian state should not exist either?
one person is not the reason israel came into being. it would never have made it without the fundamentalists pushing support for it.
Can you describe who these supposed fundamentalists are supposed to be, how large this group and their influence was? Because it can’t be the Haredi, who were far too small and insignificant a group in 1948.
You seem to think im just talking about jewish settler types whereas why that is a small portion of folks responsible for israels existence im talking about european and american financial and political supporters both jewish and christian. Its the christians in particular who wanted to artificially verify their prophecy.
The reason why I read your comment that way is because America wasn’t exactly an ardent supporter of Israel in its early days beyond recognizing it first, even going so far as to enforce an arms embargo against it. The UK also enforced this embargo. The most significant support out of Europe came from France, which had very strong ties with Israel, including in particular in regards to both nations’ atomic weapons programs. West Germany became a supporter of the young state starting in the early 1950s, when its Holocaust reparations became a major source of funding (and free imports of vital goods) for the government in Tel Aviv.
American Evangelical support of Israel really only started to take off and become a force in American politics in the wake of the Six-Days war, when America, in order to counter Soviet influence in the region, began to back Israel directly. This was also when economic ties started to intensify. Evangelicals, while having voiced support of Zionism earlier (just like more moderate American Christians), more or less rode the coattails of this development.
I would call recognizing it pretty ardent support given that situation. Again how would the US view countries that supported a country that recognized a first nation country west of the mississippi. Would they be not exactly ardent supporters. Im pretty sure for me your moderate american christians would be to me fundamentalist and in the early days support can be counted in one way. Money. Its the same with terrorist groups today. All of them rely on funding from ultimately more legitimate sources. It may get washed in various way but they need the cash flow. Don’t get me wrong it had much more legitamacy given the whole start with the league of nations idea wise, but right off the bat the way the borders were unclear and changed from one interpretation to another it was a cesspool to start with and both europe and america should have just stopped in that region. I mean this crazy stuff goes back to the crusades and it was never a good idea to be there.