@kyanite111 said in #55:
> Actually I got the history wrong haha. It turns out, with the Sykes-Picot agreement, Britain and France betrayed the Arabs, and did not respect the legitimacy of their land after their uprising against the Ottoman Empire. So technically the Arabs had a right to be a little pissed.
A little ?
> But regardless, to be honest I think some of what Noflaps is saying is correct. You give the analogy of stealing a car, or people being displaced and having the right to self-determination. But after a certain period of time passes, you basically lose those claims of ownership. If that stolen car gets passed down by like 10 generations, it makes little sense to attempt to reconcile the issue in the modern day. You're basically punishing innocent civilians and now taking THEIR property, in order to address a grievance that no longer exists because the aggrieved party has been dead for hundreds of years. People eventually have to move on.
The car argument was about the Arab Israel war, aka not much after they declared independence, it isn't 10 generations after.
But that to aside, even at this moment the Palestinians have the right to stoll fight back for their land, because it isn't only about land but it is about also rights, an apartheid state where Arabs are lesser then jews in terms of rights (those who hold the Israel nationality) and where the others in the west bank and gaza are treated like animals and get 0 rights on land that Israel has no right in according to the un split is enough of a justification to fight back
Saying x race is superior to y race is called racism and reminds me of the same people they fought before ...
And back to the car I still think after 10 generations that you have the right to claim back the car, but that's a question of morals
> I mean what about the Native American tribes who formerly occupied the United States and Canada? They now live in small reservations that are a fraction of the size. Do they have a right to kick Canadians out and take back Canada, for example? I sort of doubt it. At some point, even if your land was taken via conquest, you kind of just have to accept that its no longer your land especially if there are millions of innocent families living there now.
What is happening to Palestinians now is what was happening to native Americans in **the past**
If native Americans could go back in time and prevent what happened to them via fighting don't you think they will?
We aren't at the point where native Americans are a minority after being genocided
The genocide is happening right now
> Otherwise if you really want to play that game, you could claim that the great-great-great-descendants of the Israeli people, going back to biblical times, originally owned those lands before the arabs. It just becomes an absurd game where you determine who lived on a plot of land going back to maybe the dark ages. You'd have to start reading ancient parchments and looking at the archeological record. Are you really willing to do this?
If you want we can indeed but this isn't an argument
An Italian now canot go to a random European country and kick them of their homes... the same argument can be made for jews claiming it is a promised land
But still
www.aljazeera.net/blogs/2017/3/6/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%AD%D9%82%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%AE%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%B7%D9%8A%D9%86-1
> I think Israel legitimately belongs to the people by this point. But whether Israel has a right to treat Gazans the way it does is a totally separate question.
The people... exactly, that's why I say the right of self determination, unless uou don't consider Palestinians people...
> Actually I got the history wrong haha. It turns out, with the Sykes-Picot agreement, Britain and France betrayed the Arabs, and did not respect the legitimacy of their land after their uprising against the Ottoman Empire. So technically the Arabs had a right to be a little pissed.
A little ?
> But regardless, to be honest I think some of what Noflaps is saying is correct. You give the analogy of stealing a car, or people being displaced and having the right to self-determination. But after a certain period of time passes, you basically lose those claims of ownership. If that stolen car gets passed down by like 10 generations, it makes little sense to attempt to reconcile the issue in the modern day. You're basically punishing innocent civilians and now taking THEIR property, in order to address a grievance that no longer exists because the aggrieved party has been dead for hundreds of years. People eventually have to move on.
The car argument was about the Arab Israel war, aka not much after they declared independence, it isn't 10 generations after.
But that to aside, even at this moment the Palestinians have the right to stoll fight back for their land, because it isn't only about land but it is about also rights, an apartheid state where Arabs are lesser then jews in terms of rights (those who hold the Israel nationality) and where the others in the west bank and gaza are treated like animals and get 0 rights on land that Israel has no right in according to the un split is enough of a justification to fight back
Saying x race is superior to y race is called racism and reminds me of the same people they fought before ...
And back to the car I still think after 10 generations that you have the right to claim back the car, but that's a question of morals
> I mean what about the Native American tribes who formerly occupied the United States and Canada? They now live in small reservations that are a fraction of the size. Do they have a right to kick Canadians out and take back Canada, for example? I sort of doubt it. At some point, even if your land was taken via conquest, you kind of just have to accept that its no longer your land especially if there are millions of innocent families living there now.
What is happening to Palestinians now is what was happening to native Americans in **the past**
If native Americans could go back in time and prevent what happened to them via fighting don't you think they will?
We aren't at the point where native Americans are a minority after being genocided
The genocide is happening right now
> Otherwise if you really want to play that game, you could claim that the great-great-great-descendants of the Israeli people, going back to biblical times, originally owned those lands before the arabs. It just becomes an absurd game where you determine who lived on a plot of land going back to maybe the dark ages. You'd have to start reading ancient parchments and looking at the archeological record. Are you really willing to do this?
If you want we can indeed but this isn't an argument
An Italian now canot go to a random European country and kick them of their homes... the same argument can be made for jews claiming it is a promised land
But still
www.aljazeera.net/blogs/2017/3/6/%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D8%AD%D9%82%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%8A%D8%AE%D9%8A%D8%A9-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D9%81%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%B7%D9%8A%D9%86-1
> I think Israel legitimately belongs to the people by this point. But whether Israel has a right to treat Gazans the way it does is a totally separate question.
The people... exactly, that's why I say the right of self determination, unless uou don't consider Palestinians people...
