I believe yes, because we basically kicked out people that had been living there for generations. So what if the Jewish needed a home. This is why we should already have space colonies. Space is not what this discussion is about though, so if you want to talk about that, make a spin off topic.
Except one flaw in the arguments above: The Jews were a nation without a homeland. What were we supposed to do, tell them "Sorry, you're just gonna have to stop being Jewish. Go be American or something, your old land belongs to the Muslims now..." Whereas all the above mentioned countries have a homeland. It's not a matter greed and conquest, it's having a common place for a race to live. The logical choice was the place of their ancestry.
Except one flaw in the arguments above: The Jews were a nation without a homeland. What were we supposed to do, tell them "Sorry, you're just gonna have to stop being Jewish. Go be American or something, your old land belongs to the Muslims now..." Whereas all the above mentioned countries have a homeland. It's not a matter greed and conquest, it's having a common place for a race to live. The logical choice was the place of their ancestry.
The Jewish are not a race. They are a religion, that is a common misconception. And religions do not get nations. Then again neither do races.
The Jewish are not a race. They are a religion, that is a common misconception.
The Hebrew people are not a race, but they are a distinct ethnic group with their own culture, background and history. Since "races" (as defined by the U.S. Census) also share these unique distinguishing characteristics, I don't see the problem with identifying Jews as a distinct group. An analogy here would be Arabic people. They are also not a race, but a distinct ethnic group. They also have a prominent religious - Islam. Just like the fact that not all Hebrews or Jewish and not all Jewish are Hebrews, the same can be said for Arabic people and Islamic people. This does not mean they are not a distinct class of people.
And religions do not get nations. Then again neither do races.
This is actually your own misconception with identifying Jewish people as those seeking a nation. While Israel is a Jewish nation, it is ideologically a Hebrew nation - Judaism is just their national religion. The Hebrew people also maintain that the area of Israel is their promised land - promised to them by God after they fled Egypt. I think this is a pretty good reason for them to strive to maintain an independent state. On the point of religions not getting nations I have one prominent counterexample: Vatican City. Vatican City is, if nothing else, a Catholic state. It is independent of Italy and is recognized as such by the United Nations (although it is too small to get voting rights).
Now the part of the argument you quoted:
Sorry, you're just gonna have to stop being Jewish. Go be American or something...
you are absolutely right to note this as a fallacious argument. A person can be Jewish and still be American. The religion does not preclude habitation anywhere. However, my point still stands that Israel is deemed to be the traditional homeland of the Hebrew people - and these are the people we are talking about when we talk about who belong in Israel. Not necessarily Jewish people.
The Jewish are not a race. They are a religion, that is a common misconception. And religions do not get nations. Then again neither do races.
Absolutely wrong. The Jews are an ethnic group, just like Arabs, English, Egyptians, or Chinese. They have their own culture, beliefs, and customs. There are Jews who are atheist, Christian, Buddhist, Muslim, etc. Being Jewish is not always referring to religion.
Hell yeah it's a mistake. Maybe they lived in Palestine long time ago, but they moved from it, and Arabs took there place, then Christians and Muslims fought for it, then Arabs won, then It got colonised but still the population was Arab, this is why the Jews can't just claim a land they left thousands of years ago as their own!!
I think it was a very bad mistake on the part of U.N. I mean, the Jews and Muslims are constantly bombing each other now, and lots more people are dying than if the U.N. had just left the Israelis to find their own home. They were kicked out, then the Muslims moved in. Then, hundreds of years later, they come back and say the land is still theirs. Dumb in so many ways, and totally unfair to the Palestinians.
@GAGAMEN/Kirby998 Hey, both of you are being pretty childish right now.
Now, there's something I left out earlier. There are still Mulsims living in Israel. Someone already pointed that one out, but failed to mention that there were Jews in that area when it was still under Muslim control, and those Jews had lived side by side with the Muslims peacefully for several centuries. Furthermore, some of these peaceful Jews had been kicked out of their land by the Zionists, which tends to be a more extreme branch of Judaism, because they weren't 'Jewish' enough. I thought you might want to know that.
Wow, so you are saying that calling Christianity a mistake without any proof at all is not childish. Also, you're right, I'm new to this site, at least as a member of it, but that doesn't mean you're automatically right. To tell the truth, it's pretty petty.
So why don't we give it to the descendants of the Canaan. Why don't we go back even FURTHER?
The Cananites were a semitic people, but they predated the advent of Judaism. Technically the Jews would still have a claim ove said land, at least in racial/cultural terms.
I do believe that the Jews have a legitimate claim to the land. I just believe that the way in which the UN and the British handled it was atrocious. The subsequent behaviour of the Jews in their treatment of the Palestinians has undermined their legitimate claim in my eyes, however I stand by the fact the Jews, after WW2, had the right to a homeland.
I thought it was not right for America to force people off land that they accupied for years, and the Jewish peolple get it baceause no one wanted them. That is quite unfare.
I thought it was not right for America to force people off land that they accupied for years,
could you specify which forcing people out of somewhere by americans you mean and which historical events you talk about. it is impossible to discuss something if you have to guess what the person above means
I thought it was not right for America to force people off land that they accupied for years, and the Jewish peolple get it baceause no one wanted them. That is quite unfare.
In the beginning, no one forced anyone off anyone else's land. Most of the Jews emigrated to Palestine, then a British mandate, and saught asylum. Up until the first civil war between the Jews and the Palestinians, most of the land acquired by the Jews was through them buying it off the Palestinians, most of whom were very happy to sell, as the money the Jews offered helped lift them out of poverty. The first problems arose when poorer Jews from Eastern Europe arrived and had no capital to speak of and so took the land by force.
