Rendh @ Rendh @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

3

Joined

2 yr. ago

They felt safer moving into a territory where they would have to kick the people already living there through violence, than in countries where the fascists who had used brutality against them had been defeated?

The Jewish migration to the area begann in the 1880s after pogroms in Russia and Eastern Europe. Not sure who you think was defeated at the time. The migration sped up after WW1 and before and during WW2.

By "relatives" do you mean they had one kind of distant cousin, or that their family trees shared a few roots from centuries earlier?

After the 1880s? Both.

So, rather than imposing rule of law and punish criminal through the guarantees of civil rights, and allow people who had never lived in the land to immigrate, build their own homes and buy land if possible, you kick people who already lived there to make room for an incoming population group? This did get (rightfully) universally condemned when the Soviet Union did it, does this not deserve a clear condemnation because the victims were Arab Muslims, or because the beneficiaries were mostly Western Jews?

Nobody kicked Arabs out before the Arab countries around the newly founded Israel declared war. You seem to be really off on your timeline. Yes there was a few hardliners in what was to become Israel that were arguing for a displacement of Arabs but generally there's zero proof these people would've gained any serious power without the war declared on Israel.

I > just remembered a completely unrelated fun fact for no reason. Did you know that the United States threatened or bribed several completely unrelated countries to get the UN vote to pass?

Which UN vote? There's at this point in time probably been hundreds.

Don't know why, but I have a tendency to distrust anyone claiming to want to portray nuance and a gray reality when they consistently omit key facts.

Pot calling the kettle...

Did you know that the situation in Ukraine is very complicated, that Russia feels very threatened in their tiny country with hundreds of nuclear weapons, that their poor paramilitaries that occupied Ukrainian regions weren't allowed to go everything they wanted with no repercussions? Let's obfuscate the discussion about the Russian invasion of Ukraine with endless over-complicated arguments that ultimately do not change the fact that the invasion should be opposed, perhaps that will buy time for Israel Russia to commit their war crimes without third parties getting involved.

I don't even know what to say to this. Of course it should be opposed? Have you forgotten what side the tankies are on? Slava Ukraini

It's more like one country took over parts of a falling apart country, people moved into these parts because it felt safer than were they were originally from and their relatives lived there already. So now when the time came to hand over the taken over parts to their residents now you can't just hand it over because the bigger part of the population wants to suppress the smaller part of the population. So the country in charge tries to split the land according to population majority and trying to do everybody right. Majority isn't happy with that, declines every deal, every attempt at a two state solution that would let the minority have a country of their own where they wouldn't be suppressed. Date of handing over passes with no deal, minority declares new country, according to last proposed deal. Neighboring countries and former majority instantly declare war against new country, are should they win prepared to kill and suppress every single member of minority and are already carving up region. They lose, and now everything is "really complex"

Let's hope it's true.