Who Are The Palestinians? Part 2

[Coyote]

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?


And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Coyote, with all due respect:

"The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity."


You are confusing the people.

The Jews have been in, if one prefers to call it, Palestine.
They are the Palestinians the Romans changed the name into Syria Palestinia.

The Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the same ethnicity of Arabs who invaded the area in the 7th century, while Jews were still living there, and continued to live there. The Arabs did not call the Jews or any other people of the area "Palestinians".

The idea of calling Jews and Arabs, Druze, etc Palestinians, came from the British Mandate for Palestine (it should have been called after Israel, but it was not)

Not being able to stop the descendants of the ancient Jews from recreating their ancient nation, or destroy it after 1948, the Arabs leaders - Arafat - decided to adopt the identity of Palestinians, in 1964.

That was not because they wanted to create a State called Palestine because they identified as such. It was to continue to try to destroy Israel.

And these facts seem to be something you cannot absorb and think about.

Since the first Arab riot in 1920, the Jewish leaders have been able to share the land. 78 % was taken without asking the Jews and given to the Hashemites.
In 1937 the Jewish leaders agreed to a partition for Jews and Arabs.
What were they in the middle of? Did the Arab leaders accept?

The same thing for 1947 and the UN proposed partition.

Q: If the Arab leaders so identify with a Palestinian identity, and I am not speaking about the rest of the population, why are they so intent in destroying Israel in order to have their State on top of it?

I'm not confusing anyone Sixties...but you are mixing issues. Let's stick to one argument at the time.

Are the Palestinian a "people" - at this point in time? Yes.

Do they have a heritage and roots in those lands they inhabit? Yes.

You say they are nothing more than Arab invaders. Think on this a moment. The Arab culture and Muslim religion spread widely - by conquest and also by benign conversion as with most religions. The people who lived there - what of them? Did they automatically disappear? No. They converted, intermarried, whatever - but they are the same people who's ancestors were Christians, Jews and pagans and who farmed those same lands and grazed their herds. Those - plus immigrants from other Arab countries are who the Palestinians are today. Genetic studies support that. Palestinians are very close to Jews - infact closer than some Jewish groups are to each other. So saying they are nothing more than Arab invaders is dishonest.

 

[JoelT1]

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?


And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Coyote, with all due respect:

"The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity."


You are confusing the people.

The Jews have been in, if one prefers to call it, Palestine.
They are the Palestinians the Romans changed the name into Syria Palestinia.

The Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the same ethnicity of Arabs who invaded the area in the 7th century, while Jews were still living there, and continued to live there. The Arabs did not call the Jews or any other people of the area "Palestinians".

The idea of calling Jews and Arabs, Druze, etc Palestinians, came from the British Mandate for Palestine (it should have been called after Israel, but it was not)

Not being able to stop the descendants of the ancient Jews from recreating their ancient nation, or destroy it after 1948, the Arabs leaders - Arafat - decided to adopt the identity of Palestinians, in 1964.

That was not because they wanted to create a State called Palestine because they identified as such. It was to continue to try to destroy Israel.

And these facts seem to be something you cannot absorb and think about.

Since the first Arab riot in 1920, the Jewish leaders have been able to share the land. 78 % was taken without asking the Jews and given to the Hashemites.
In 1937 the Jewish leaders agreed to a partition for Jews and Arabs.
What were they in the middle of? Did the Arab leaders accept?

The same thing for 1947 and the UN proposed partition.

Q: If the Arab leaders so identify with a Palestinian identity, and I am not speaking about the rest of the population, why are they so intent in destroying Israel in order to have their State on top of it?

I'm not confusing anyone Sixties...but you are mixing issues. Let's stick to one argument at the time.

Are the Palestinian a "people" - at this point in time? Yes.

Do they have a heritage and roots in those lands they inhabit? Yes.

You say they are nothing more than Arab invaders. Think on this a moment. The Arab culture and Muslim religion spread widely - by conquest and also by benign conversion as with most religions. The people who lived there - what of them? Did they automatically disappear? No. They converted, intermarried, whatever - but they are the same people who's ancestors were Christians, Jews and pagans and who farmed those same lands and grazed their herds. Those - plus immigrants from other Arab countries are who the Palestinians are today. Genetic studies support that. Palestinians are very close to Jews - infact closer than some Jewish groups are to each other. So saying they are nothing more than Arab invaders is dishonest.

There’s no palestinian ppl. It’s a hoax. They’re simply Arab ppl

 

[JoelT1]

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?


And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Coyote, with all due respect:

"The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity."


You are confusing the people.

The Jews have been in, if one prefers to call it, Palestine.
They are the Palestinians the Romans changed the name into Syria Palestinia.

The Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the same ethnicity of Arabs who invaded the area in the 7th century, while Jews were still living there, and continued to live there. The Arabs did not call the Jews or any other people of the area "Palestinians".

The idea of calling Jews and Arabs, Druze, etc Palestinians, came from the British Mandate for Palestine (it should have been called after Israel, but it was not)

Not being able to stop the descendants of the ancient Jews from recreating their ancient nation, or destroy it after 1948, the Arabs leaders - Arafat - decided to adopt the identity of Palestinians, in 1964.

That was not because they wanted to create a State called Palestine because they identified as such. It was to continue to try to destroy Israel.

And these facts seem to be something you cannot absorb and think about.

Since the first Arab riot in 1920, the Jewish leaders have been able to share the land. 78 % was taken without asking the Jews and given to the Hashemites.
In 1937 the Jewish leaders agreed to a partition for Jews and Arabs.
What were they in the middle of? Did the Arab leaders accept?

The same thing for 1947 and the UN proposed partition.

Q: If the Arab leaders so identify with a Palestinian identity, and I am not speaking about the rest of the population, why are they so intent in destroying Israel in order to have their State on top of it?

I'm not confusing anyone Sixties...but you are mixing issues. Let's stick to one argument at the time.

Are the Palestinian a "people" - at this point in time? Yes.

Do they have a heritage and roots in those lands they inhabit? Yes.

You say they are nothing more than Arab invaders. Think on this a moment. The Arab culture and Muslim religion spread widely - by conquest and also by benign conversion as with most religions. The people who lived there - what of them? Did they automatically disappear? No. They converted, intermarried, whatever - but they are the same people who's ancestors were Christians, Jews and pagans and who farmed those same lands and grazed their herds. Those - plus immigrants from other Arab countries are who the Palestinians are today. Genetic studies support that. Palestinians are very close to Jews - infact closer than some Jewish groups are to each other. So saying they are nothing more than Arab invaders is dishonest.

Must be difficult for “palestinians” who are Arabs to write and say “palestinian” in Arabic: No p

 

[Coyote]

So what is your solution?

Since “palestinians” identify with Greek Philistines, let them go to Greece LOL

Do you wont give a straight answer?

22 Arab countries to accommodate “palestinians” including nearby Jordan. In fact, they have similar flags

So you are talking about forced deportationn of millions of people? That is what you support?

Coyote, Joel is not Jewish. Nor Israeli.
He is speaking for himself and what he believes in.
That is not the Israeli or Jewish position, and you need to consider that.

Reacting to what one poster or another says, instead of looking at the facts on the ground, and what the history has been since 1920 needs to be the starting point of thinking and discussing about this.

One cannot sweep before 1948 or before 1967 under the rug.

Or the Muslim, Arab culture and mentality in regards to the Jewish people, either.

The previous 1300 years tell a lot about how Muslims were taught about the Jewish people and how they should be treated.

And, yes, that matters a lot and is at the bottom of this conflict, and why the Arab leaders (not the population) have refused a State in 1937, 1947 and after that.

A couple of things. Joel's position is not unique, there are other members here who have presented similar points of view. Israeli's and Jews are as diverse as any other group imo.

On how Muslims feel about Jewish people - Muslims and Jews largely got along historically. Was it a 20th century relationship of human rights, religious tolerance and democratic values? Of course not - that did not exist in any culture of those eras. It sucked to be the minority religions/ethnicities (and sucked worse to be a woman). But Jews in many areas flourished in ways they could not in Christian Europe.

The real conflict arose with the mandate, the rise of pan-Arab and of Jewish nationalism, and - yes - the unwillingness of the Arabs to accept a Jewish state on "Muslim land". But all that - and the virulant anti-semitism is relatively recent in the long history of both those faiths.

 

[Coyote]

Self identification is important and most self identify as Palestians now and for generations.

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

They are saying the Palestinians have no right to self determination or a nation because other Arab peoples have it already and they are doing it by denying them their rights as a people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

When does a people become a people? Is there a magical line where it is decided no new peoples can come into being or is it only Palestinians held to that line?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.

Where does it end? This creation of new peoples and disappearance of Israel? Where does this creation of "new" peoples become an encroachment on the rights of the Jewish people to ALSO have a State? When 75% is removed? When 90% is removed? When 95% is removed? 100%? How to we prevent the Jewish State from growing smaller, and smaller and smaller with the continuous invention of new peoples?

Let's put shoe on other foot. Let's say the Jewish people decide they are actually four different peoples, based on their long history in so many places. They demand a sovereign State in Jordan. Another in Syria. Another in Lebanon. Yay or nay? And why?


And keep in mind, I am asking these questions because I'm a shit disturber (grin) and am looking for a higher level of conversation here (which you graciously provide). You know I believe that the Arab Palestinian people in the "West Bank" and Gaza should have another State if they want one. Or they should be able to join with Jordan or Egypt if they so desire.

All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Coyote, with all due respect:

"The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity."


You are confusing the people.

The Jews have been in, if one prefers to call it, Palestine.
They are the Palestinians the Romans changed the name into Syria Palestinia.

The Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the same ethnicity of Arabs who invaded the area in the 7th century, while Jews were still living there, and continued to live there. The Arabs did not call the Jews or any other people of the area "Palestinians".

The idea of calling Jews and Arabs, Druze, etc Palestinians, came from the British Mandate for Palestine (it should have been called after Israel, but it was not)

Not being able to stop the descendants of the ancient Jews from recreating their ancient nation, or destroy it after 1948, the Arabs leaders - Arafat - decided to adopt the identity of Palestinians, in 1964.

That was not because they wanted to create a State called Palestine because they identified as such. It was to continue to try to destroy Israel.

And these facts seem to be something you cannot absorb and think about.

Since the first Arab riot in 1920, the Jewish leaders have been able to share the land. 78 % was taken without asking the Jews and given to the Hashemites.
In 1937 the Jewish leaders agreed to a partition for Jews and Arabs.
What were they in the middle of? Did the Arab leaders accept?

The same thing for 1947 and the UN proposed partition.

Q: If the Arab leaders so identify with a Palestinian identity, and I am not speaking about the rest of the population, why are they so intent in destroying Israel in order to have their State on top of it?

I'm not confusing anyone Sixties...but you are mixing issues. Let's stick to one argument at the time.

Are the Palestinian a "people" - at this point in time? Yes.

Do they have a heritage and roots in those lands they inhabit? Yes.

You say they are nothing more than Arab invaders. Think on this a moment. The Arab culture and Muslim religion spread widely - by conquest and also by benign conversion as with most religions. The people who lived there - what of them? Did they automatically disappear? No. They converted, intermarried, whatever - but they are the same people who's ancestors were Christians, Jews and pagans and who farmed those same lands and grazed their herds. Those - plus immigrants from other Arab countries are who the Palestinians are today. Genetic studies support that. Palestinians are very close to Jews - infact closer than some Jewish groups are to each other. So saying they are nothing more than Arab invaders is dishonest.

There’s no palestinian ppl. It’s a hoax. They’re simply Arab ppl

Joel honey...you are trolling.

 

[JoelT1]

Most acknowledge that there is no difference between Palestinians and Jordanians and Syrians. That they are one people. They self-identify as one people.

That is NOT what team Israel are saying. No one on team Israel is saying that the Palestinians can't have a State of any kind on any territory. Not even Joel is saying that. Joel is simply saying that the Arab Palestinians shouldn't have yet ANOTHER State or three on territory that was granted to the Jewish people.

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

Second i want clarify a few things.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria? See I havent seen Joel state snything beyond denying them any rights of place or identity. It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

If what you mean is the territory that is currently recognized as Israel then i agree with you. There is Gaza and the West Bank (exactly what parts to be negotiated) then that is reasonable as many will still be in the area where they have cultural and familial ties.

There is a very significant difference between "You can not have a State ANYWHERE on this territory (or anywhere in the world) because you do not exist" and saying, "You can't have a State HERE because this is the place for the Jewish people, but you can have one THERE because that is the place for the Arab Palestinian people".

Agree.

The equivalent would be for team Israel to say, "The Arab Palestinians can not have a State anywhere in the world because they do not exist." (And we are going to stay at war with them until their State is destroyed.)

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

THAT is a fascinating question. Actually, I think the question should be reversed. When does a people cease to belong to a broad cultural group (a people)? Is self-identification the ONLY criteria? Or is there some requirement for some sort of significant cultural change or difference? If yes, what criteria would you choose?

Great questions...and i am not sure I have an answer but it deserves a post of its own and fits into the topic perfectly. I am going to answer this part later.


All these are great discussion points so i sill answer them later when i am not so constrained!

Coyote, with all due respect:

"The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people. It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others. They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years. They have been overrun and conquered and married into other peoples and they include immigrants from other Arab countries. They have deep family ties to place that is equal to thogh different from the ties claimed by the Jews. This is one thing some here will not recognize as having any validity."


You are confusing the people.

The Jews have been in, if one prefers to call it, Palestine.
They are the Palestinians the Romans changed the name into Syria Palestinia.

The Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the same ethnicity of Arabs who invaded the area in the 7th century, while Jews were still living there, and continued to live there. The Arabs did not call the Jews or any other people of the area "Palestinians".

The idea of calling Jews and Arabs, Druze, etc Palestinians, came from the British Mandate for Palestine (it should have been called after Israel, but it was not)

Not being able to stop the descendants of the ancient Jews from recreating their ancient nation, or destroy it after 1948, the Arabs leaders - Arafat - decided to adopt the identity of Palestinians, in 1964.

That was not because they wanted to create a State called Palestine because they identified as such. It was to continue to try to destroy Israel.

And these facts seem to be something you cannot absorb and think about.

Since the first Arab riot in 1920, the Jewish leaders have been able to share the land. 78 % was taken without asking the Jews and given to the Hashemites.
In 1937 the Jewish leaders agreed to a partition for Jews and Arabs.
What were they in the middle of? Did the Arab leaders accept?

The same thing for 1947 and the UN proposed partition.

Q: If the Arab leaders so identify with a Palestinian identity, and I am not speaking about the rest of the population, why are they so intent in destroying Israel in order to have their State on top of it?

I'm not confusing anyone Sixties...but you are mixing issues. Let's stick to one argument at the time.

Are the Palestinian a "people" - at this point in time? Yes.

Do they have a heritage and roots in those lands they inhabit? Yes.

You say they are nothing more than Arab invaders. Think on this a moment. The Arab culture and Muslim religion spread widely - by conquest and also by benign conversion as with most religions. The people who lived there - what of them? Did they automatically disappear? No. They converted, intermarried, whatever - but they are the same people who's ancestors were Christians, Jews and pagans and who farmed those same lands and grazed their herds. Those - plus immigrants from other Arab countries are who the Palestinians are today. Genetic studies support that. Palestinians are very close to Jews - infact closer than some Jewish groups are to each other. So saying they are nothing more than Arab invaders is dishonest.

There’s no palestinian ppl. It’s a hoax. They’re simply Arab ppl

Joel honey...you are trolling.

Translation: You’re uninformed and unable to debate me

 

[JoelT1]

Since “palestinians” identify with Greek Philistines, let them go to Greece LOL

Do you wont give a straight answer?

22 Arab countries to accommodate “palestinians” including nearby Jordan. In fact, they have similar flags

So you are talking about forced deportationn of millions of people? That is what you support?

Coyote, Joel is not Jewish. Nor Israeli.
He is speaking for himself and what he believes in.
That is not the Israeli or Jewish position, and you need to consider that.

Reacting to what one poster or another says, instead of looking at the facts on the ground, and what the history has been since 1920 needs to be the starting point of thinking and discussing about this.

One cannot sweep before 1948 or before 1967 under the rug.

Or the Muslim, Arab culture and mentality in regards to the Jewish people, either.

The previous 1300 years tell a lot about how Muslims were taught about the Jewish people and how they should be treated.

And, yes, that matters a lot and is at the bottom of this conflict, and why the Arab leaders (not the population) have refused a State in 1937, 1947 and after that.

A couple of things. Joel's position is not unique, there are other members here who have presented similar points of view. Israeli's and Jews are as diverse as any other group imo.

On how Muslims feel about Jewish people - Muslims and Jews largely got along historically. Was it a 20th century relationship of human rights, religious tolerance and democratic values? Of course not - that did not exist in any culture of those eras. It sucked to be the minority religions/ethnicities (and sucked worse to be a woman). But Jews in many areas flourished in ways they could not in Christian Europe.

The real conflict arose with the mandate, the rise of pan-Arab and of Jewish nationalism, and - yes - the unwillingness of the Arabs to accept a Jewish state on "Muslim land". But all that - and the virulant anti-semitism is relatively recent in the long history of both those faiths.

Uninformed, as usual. Muslims perpetrated the first holocaust of Jews. Not a good start

 

[Coyote]

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

No worries, my friend. I'm happy you find my comments worthy of a serious response.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people.

Sure. Maybe. But their peoplehood is predicated on opposition to a Jewish State. Now, that might be a perfectly fine criterion for peoplehood -- to make oneself distinct from another cultural group solely for the purpose of making oneself distinct. BUT I would argue that the intent of this distinction is the opposition to Jewish self-determination.

I can agree that is where it STARTED...but now, it has gone beyond that. In addition...boiling it down to that ignores the realities of their dispossion and loss of belonging.

It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others.

Which seems to suggest that self-identity is the sole criterion.

They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years.

Sure. But I would argue that the ties to a land are distinctly different than the desire for sovereignty as a people. And that they are not necessarily mutually compatible. Thus the Arab Palestinians MAY have to choose between the desire to be attached to that particular piece of land under Jewish sovereignty OR find a new piece of land to embrace their distinctive Palestinian sovereignty. The Jewish people certainly had to embrace that choice -- giving up any ties to land and country and nationality and wealth and possessions in order to become part of the Israeli sovereignty. The Jewish people who settle in land which MAY become part of Palestine are also make that, very distinct, choice.

Interesting point and in the long view - that which accepts the idea of a Palestinian state alongside an Israeli state - I totally agree.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria?

I said absolutely nothing about them "going" anywhere. Why would you assume that of me? What I mean is that we can't keep carving off chunks of the Jewish State to satisfy Arabs who don't want there to BE a Jewish State. Sooner or later we have to say, "enough". This part is the Jewish State. That part is the Arab Palestinian State. If you want to hold on to your private piece of land, you have to live under Jewish sovereignty. If you want to live under Arab sovereignty, you have to go to a place of Arab sovereignty.

And that is reasonable - I just am not so sure it's what some of your fellow Team Israel'ers think.

And THIS leads to the very uncomfortable, but entirely real end game. The Jewish State will not be comfortably and safely the Jewish State until it is relatively ethnically homogeneous. I can't see any way around it. Its a yucky thing to face. But its the price of peace.

Woah. What exactly are you suggesting? If it involves any forced transfers of people...that's a no-go for me.

It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

Um. Its the same except for all the differences. I'm just going to leave this alone. Because I think its a terrible comparison. Namely, the Arab Palestinians do have a name, and citizenship and international recognition and an identity and are not actually being systematically murdered and removed (despite the bullshit TP will try to sell you).

No it isn't a terrible comparison - not when taken only in the sense of erasing an identity. I'm not talking about the "real world" per se but about people here on this forum and the ceaseless attempt to erase the Palestinian identity by labeling them just Arabs, Palestinians were invented, they are a fake people etc etc. Do you deny that occurs? Btw - I specifically noted that unlike Myanmar there is no systemic genocide going on. But I read how Myanmar denied the Rohinga even an identity and that is exactly what folks here on this forum attempt to do with the Palestinians.

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

Yes. I believe that is EXACTLY what they are saying. The Jewish people are not eligible for self-determination. Everyone on TP with exceptions of Humanity and yourself, essentially disregards the Israeli (Jewish) right to self-determination. They all have slightly different takes on the "why". For some, the Jewish people are "just a religion". For others the Jewish people of today are synthetic, and not real Jews. For some the Jewish people are European or some other nationality and therefore can't be Jewish. Others say its because Jews are inherently evil. Tinmore says that the Jewish people (the real ones) aren't eligible for self-determination because they don't want self-determination.

I'm not sure I totally agree. Yes - there are some notable people who say Jews have no rights to self determination period - but many define it in terms of Palestine only, and regards to the rights of Palestinians. I don't think I've heard anyone express the thought that they have no rights anywhere in the world. Realistically - I do think some of those arguments against Jewish rights and in support of Palestinian rights are transparent efforts to negate the recognition of any rights for Jews at ....but...I've seen some here saying the same for Palestinians...send them to Jordan.

 

[Shusha]

Each group that wants to be recognized as a "people" has to make a case for it first - you can't just negate them automatically based on the premise they will eventually swallow a land. In fact, that isn't happening. No other group is fighting for same territories or claiming any rights.

Can you clarify what you mean by this. I'm not sure I understand and don't want to assume.

 

[JoelT1]

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

No worries, my friend. I'm happy you find my comments worthy of a serious response.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people.

Sure. Maybe. But their peoplehood is predicated on opposition to a Jewish State. Now, that might be a perfectly fine criterion for peoplehood -- to make oneself distinct from another cultural group solely for the purpose of making oneself distinct. BUT I would argue that the intent of this distinction is the opposition to Jewish self-determination.

I can agree that is where it STARTED...but now, it has gone beyond that. In addition...boiling it down to that ignores the realities of their dispossion and loss of belonging.

It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others.

Which seems to suggest that self-identity is the sole criterion.

They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years.

Sure. But I would argue that the ties to a land are distinctly different than the desire for sovereignty as a people. And that they are not necessarily mutually compatible. Thus the Arab Palestinians MAY have to choose between the desire to be attached to that particular piece of land under Jewish sovereignty OR find a new piece of land to embrace their distinctive Palestinian sovereignty. The Jewish people certainly had to embrace that choice -- giving up any ties to land and country and nationality and wealth and possessions in order to become part of the Israeli sovereignty. The Jewish people who settle in land which MAY become part of Palestine are also make that, very distinct, choice.

Interesting point and in the long view - that which accepts the idea of a Palestinian state alongside an Israeli state - I totally agree.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria?

I said absolutely nothing about them "going" anywhere. Why would you assume that of me? What I mean is that we can't keep carving off chunks of the Jewish State to satisfy Arabs who don't want there to BE a Jewish State. Sooner or later we have to say, "enough". This part is the Jewish State. That part is the Arab Palestinian State. If you want to hold on to your private piece of land, you have to live under Jewish sovereignty. If you want to live under Arab sovereignty, you have to go to a place of Arab sovereignty.

And that is reasonable - I just am not so sure it's what some of your fellow Team Israel'ers think.

And THIS leads to the very uncomfortable, but entirely real end game. The Jewish State will not be comfortably and safely the Jewish State until it is relatively ethnically homogeneous. I can't see any way around it. Its a yucky thing to face. But its the price of peace.

Woah. What exactly are you suggesting? If it involves any forced transfers of people...that's a no-go for me.

It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

Um. Its the same except for all the differences. I'm just going to leave this alone. Because I think its a terrible comparison. Namely, the Arab Palestinians do have a name, and citizenship and international recognition and an identity and are not actually being systematically murdered and removed (despite the bullshit TP will try to sell you).

No it isn't a terrible comparison - not when taken only in the sense of erasing an identity. I'm not talking about the "real world" per se but about people here on this forum and the ceaseless attempt to erase the Palestinian identity by labeling them just Arabs, Palestinians were invented, they are a fake people etc etc. Do you deny that occurs? Btw - I specifically noted that unlike Myanmar there is no systemic genocide going on. But I read how Myanmar denied the Rohinga even an identity and that is exactly what folks here on this forum attempt to do with the Palestinians.

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

Yes. I believe that is EXACTLY what they are saying. The Jewish people are not eligible for self-determination. Everyone on TP with exceptions of Humanity and yourself, essentially disregards the Israeli (Jewish) right to self-determination. They all have slightly different takes on the "why". For some, the Jewish people are "just a religion". For others the Jewish people of today are synthetic, and not real Jews. For some the Jewish people are European or some other nationality and therefore can't be Jewish. Others say its because Jews are inherently evil. Tinmore says that the Jewish people (the real ones) aren't eligible for self-determination because they don't want self-determination.

I'm not sure I totally agree. Yes - there are some notable people who say Jews have no rights to self determination period - but many define it in terms of Palestine only, and regards to the rights of Palestinians. I don't think I've heard anyone express the thought that they have no rights anywhere in the world. Realistically - I do think some of those arguments against Jewish rights and in support of Palestinian rights are transparent efforts to negate the recognition of any rights for Jews at ....but...I've seen some here saying the same for Palestinians...send them to Jordan.

Uninformed.

Jews lived in palestine for thousands of years. In fact, palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel, about 2000 years ago. Arabs did not populate the land and Muslims didn’t exist

 

[Coyote]

Each group that wants to be recognized as a "people" has to make a case for it first - you can't just negate them automatically based on the premise they will eventually swallow a land. In fact, that isn't happening. No other group is fighting for same territories or claiming any rights.

Can you clarify what you mean by this. I'm not sure I understand and don't want to assume.

Well...who decides when a people is a people? I don't know. I think each group that wants that recognition must make a case for it. I guess self identitification is a major part of it. Despite the seeming ease of it we don't have hundreds of groups clammering for recognition and rights. Does that clarify at all?

 

[Coyote]

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

No worries, my friend. I'm happy you find my comments worthy of a serious response.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people.

Sure. Maybe. But their peoplehood is predicated on opposition to a Jewish State. Now, that might be a perfectly fine criterion for peoplehood -- to make oneself distinct from another cultural group solely for the purpose of making oneself distinct. BUT I would argue that the intent of this distinction is the opposition to Jewish self-determination.

I can agree that is where it STARTED...but now, it has gone beyond that. In addition...boiling it down to that ignores the realities of their dispossion and loss of belonging.

It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others.

Which seems to suggest that self-identity is the sole criterion.

They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years.

Sure. But I would argue that the ties to a land are distinctly different than the desire for sovereignty as a people. And that they are not necessarily mutually compatible. Thus the Arab Palestinians MAY have to choose between the desire to be attached to that particular piece of land under Jewish sovereignty OR find a new piece of land to embrace their distinctive Palestinian sovereignty. The Jewish people certainly had to embrace that choice -- giving up any ties to land and country and nationality and wealth and possessions in order to become part of the Israeli sovereignty. The Jewish people who settle in land which MAY become part of Palestine are also make that, very distinct, choice.

Interesting point and in the long view - that which accepts the idea of a Palestinian state alongside an Israeli state - I totally agree.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria?

I said absolutely nothing about them "going" anywhere. Why would you assume that of me? What I mean is that we can't keep carving off chunks of the Jewish State to satisfy Arabs who don't want there to BE a Jewish State. Sooner or later we have to say, "enough". This part is the Jewish State. That part is the Arab Palestinian State. If you want to hold on to your private piece of land, you have to live under Jewish sovereignty. If you want to live under Arab sovereignty, you have to go to a place of Arab sovereignty.

And that is reasonable - I just am not so sure it's what some of your fellow Team Israel'ers think.

And THIS leads to the very uncomfortable, but entirely real end game. The Jewish State will not be comfortably and safely the Jewish State until it is relatively ethnically homogeneous. I can't see any way around it. Its a yucky thing to face. But its the price of peace.

Woah. What exactly are you suggesting? If it involves any forced transfers of people...that's a no-go for me.

It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

Um. Its the same except for all the differences. I'm just going to leave this alone. Because I think its a terrible comparison. Namely, the Arab Palestinians do have a name, and citizenship and international recognition and an identity and are not actually being systematically murdered and removed (despite the bullshit TP will try to sell you).

No it isn't a terrible comparison - not when taken only in the sense of erasing an identity. I'm not talking about the "real world" per se but about people here on this forum and the ceaseless attempt to erase the Palestinian identity by labeling them just Arabs, Palestinians were invented, they are a fake people etc etc. Do you deny that occurs? Btw - I specifically noted that unlike Myanmar there is no systemic genocide going on. But I read how Myanmar denied the Rohinga even an identity and that is exactly what folks here on this forum attempt to do with the Palestinians.

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

Yes. I believe that is EXACTLY what they are saying. The Jewish people are not eligible for self-determination. Everyone on TP with exceptions of Humanity and yourself, essentially disregards the Israeli (Jewish) right to self-determination. They all have slightly different takes on the "why". For some, the Jewish people are "just a religion". For others the Jewish people of today are synthetic, and not real Jews. For some the Jewish people are European or some other nationality and therefore can't be Jewish. Others say its because Jews are inherently evil. Tinmore says that the Jewish people (the real ones) aren't eligible for self-determination because they don't want self-determination.

I'm not sure I totally agree. Yes - there are some notable people who say Jews have no rights to self determination period - but many define it in terms of Palestine only, and regards to the rights of Palestinians. I don't think I've heard anyone express the thought that they have no rights anywhere in the world. Realistically - I do think some of those arguments against Jewish rights and in support of Palestinian rights are transparent efforts to negate the recognition of any rights for Jews at ....but...I've seen some here saying the same for Palestinians...send them to Jordan.

Uninformed.

Only Jews lived in palestine for thousands of years. In fact, palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel, about 2000 years ago. Arabs did not populate the land and Muslims didn’t exist

You've only said that about 324 times.

 

[JoelT1]

Each group that wants to be recognized as a "people" has to make a case for it first - you can't just negate them automatically based on the premise they will eventually swallow a land. In fact, that isn't happening. No other group is fighting for same territories or claiming any rights.

Can you clarify what you mean by this. I'm not sure I understand and don't want to assume.

Well...who decides when a people is a people? I don't know. I think each group that wants that recognition must make a case for it. I guess self identitification is a major part of it. Despite the seeming ease of it we don't have hundreds of groups clammering for recognition and rights. Does that clarify at all?

People are classified by language. Is there a palestinian language?

 

[Coyote]

Each group that wants to be recognized as a "people" has to make a case for it first - you can't just negate them automatically based on the premise they will eventually swallow a land. In fact, that isn't happening. No other group is fighting for same territories or claiming any rights.

Can you clarify what you mean by this. I'm not sure I understand and don't want to assume.

Well...who decides when a people is a people? I don't know. I think each group that wants that recognition must make a case for it. I guess self identitification is a major part of it. Despite the seeming ease of it we don't have hundreds of groups clammering for recognition and rights. Does that clarify at all?

People are classified by language. Is there a palestinian language?

That is one of many classifications.

 

[JoelT1]

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

No worries, my friend. I'm happy you find my comments worthy of a serious response.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people.

Sure. Maybe. But their peoplehood is predicated on opposition to a Jewish State. Now, that might be a perfectly fine criterion for peoplehood -- to make oneself distinct from another cultural group solely for the purpose of making oneself distinct. BUT I would argue that the intent of this distinction is the opposition to Jewish self-determination.

I can agree that is where it STARTED...but now, it has gone beyond that. In addition...boiling it down to that ignores the realities of their dispossion and loss of belonging.

It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others.

Which seems to suggest that self-identity is the sole criterion.

They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years.

Sure. But I would argue that the ties to a land are distinctly different than the desire for sovereignty as a people. And that they are not necessarily mutually compatible. Thus the Arab Palestinians MAY have to choose between the desire to be attached to that particular piece of land under Jewish sovereignty OR find a new piece of land to embrace their distinctive Palestinian sovereignty. The Jewish people certainly had to embrace that choice -- giving up any ties to land and country and nationality and wealth and possessions in order to become part of the Israeli sovereignty. The Jewish people who settle in land which MAY become part of Palestine are also make that, very distinct, choice.

Interesting point and in the long view - that which accepts the idea of a Palestinian state alongside an Israeli state - I totally agree.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria?

I said absolutely nothing about them "going" anywhere. Why would you assume that of me? What I mean is that we can't keep carving off chunks of the Jewish State to satisfy Arabs who don't want there to BE a Jewish State. Sooner or later we have to say, "enough". This part is the Jewish State. That part is the Arab Palestinian State. If you want to hold on to your private piece of land, you have to live under Jewish sovereignty. If you want to live under Arab sovereignty, you have to go to a place of Arab sovereignty.

And that is reasonable - I just am not so sure it's what some of your fellow Team Israel'ers think.

And THIS leads to the very uncomfortable, but entirely real end game. The Jewish State will not be comfortably and safely the Jewish State until it is relatively ethnically homogeneous. I can't see any way around it. Its a yucky thing to face. But its the price of peace.

Woah. What exactly are you suggesting? If it involves any forced transfers of people...that's a no-go for me.

It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

Um. Its the same except for all the differences. I'm just going to leave this alone. Because I think its a terrible comparison. Namely, the Arab Palestinians do have a name, and citizenship and international recognition and an identity and are not actually being systematically murdered and removed (despite the bullshit TP will try to sell you).

No it isn't a terrible comparison - not when taken only in the sense of erasing an identity. I'm not talking about the "real world" per se but about people here on this forum and the ceaseless attempt to erase the Palestinian identity by labeling them just Arabs, Palestinians were invented, they are a fake people etc etc. Do you deny that occurs? Btw - I specifically noted that unlike Myanmar there is no systemic genocide going on. But I read how Myanmar denied the Rohinga even an identity and that is exactly what folks here on this forum attempt to do with the Palestinians.

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

Yes. I believe that is EXACTLY what they are saying. The Jewish people are not eligible for self-determination. Everyone on TP with exceptions of Humanity and yourself, essentially disregards the Israeli (Jewish) right to self-determination. They all have slightly different takes on the "why". For some, the Jewish people are "just a religion". For others the Jewish people of today are synthetic, and not real Jews. For some the Jewish people are European or some other nationality and therefore can't be Jewish. Others say its because Jews are inherently evil. Tinmore says that the Jewish people (the real ones) aren't eligible for self-determination because they don't want self-determination.

I'm not sure I totally agree. Yes - there are some notable people who say Jews have no rights to self determination period - but many define it in terms of Palestine only, and regards to the rights of Palestinians. I don't think I've heard anyone express the thought that they have no rights anywhere in the world. Realistically - I do think some of those arguments against Jewish rights and in support of Palestinian rights are transparent efforts to negate the recognition of any rights for Jews at ....but...I've seen some here saying the same for Palestinians...send them to Jordan.

Uninformed.

Only Jews lived in palestine for thousands of years. In fact, palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel, about 2000 years ago. Arabs did not populate the land and Muslims didn’t exist

You've only said that about 324 times.

Jews originally were called palestinians, by the British in the 20th century. Arabs began identifying as palestinians in the 1960s

The word palestinian does not appear in Middle East history before the 20th century. But, you think palestinians have a history of thousands of years?

 

[Coyote]

First I want to apologize for the scarcity of my answers as I am relying on my phone and it sucks to type and produces a ton of typos. I would rather be more verbose snd use sources. Tonight i will try to be on the computer.

No worries, my friend. I'm happy you find my comments worthy of a serious response.

The Palestinians are now a people. They consider themselves a people.

Sure. Maybe. But their peoplehood is predicated on opposition to a Jewish State. Now, that might be a perfectly fine criterion for peoplehood -- to make oneself distinct from another cultural group solely for the purpose of making oneself distinct. BUT I would argue that the intent of this distinction is the opposition to Jewish self-determination.

I can agree that is where it STARTED...but now, it has gone beyond that. In addition...boiling it down to that ignores the realities of their dispossion and loss of belonging.

It should not mstter if they are culturally very similar to others.

Which seems to suggest that self-identity is the sole criterion.

They have lived in the area referred to as Palestine for thousands of years.

Sure. But I would argue that the ties to a land are distinctly different than the desire for sovereignty as a people. And that they are not necessarily mutually compatible. Thus the Arab Palestinians MAY have to choose between the desire to be attached to that particular piece of land under Jewish sovereignty OR find a new piece of land to embrace their distinctive Palestinian sovereignty. The Jewish people certainly had to embrace that choice -- giving up any ties to land and country and nationality and wealth and possessions in order to become part of the Israeli sovereignty. The Jewish people who settle in land which MAY become part of Palestine are also make that, very distinct, choice.

Interesting point and in the long view - that which accepts the idea of a Palestinian state alongside an Israeli state - I totally agree.

When you are saying they should not have another state on the territory granted to Jews what exactly do you mean? They should go to Africa...South America? Or shift tbem to Jordan and Syria?

I said absolutely nothing about them "going" anywhere. Why would you assume that of me? What I mean is that we can't keep carving off chunks of the Jewish State to satisfy Arabs who don't want there to BE a Jewish State. Sooner or later we have to say, "enough". This part is the Jewish State. That part is the Arab Palestinian State. If you want to hold on to your private piece of land, you have to live under Jewish sovereignty. If you want to live under Arab sovereignty, you have to go to a place of Arab sovereignty.

And that is reasonable - I just am not so sure it's what some of your fellow Team Israel'ers think.

And THIS leads to the very uncomfortable, but entirely real end game. The Jewish State will not be comfortably and safely the Jewish State until it is relatively ethnically homogeneous. I can't see any way around it. Its a yucky thing to face. But its the price of peace.

Woah. What exactly are you suggesting? If it involves any forced transfers of people...that's a no-go for me.

It isnt too disimilar to the ways that Myanmar is erasing the Rohinga identity (without the murder and violence Myanmar is conducting) banning even the word. They are nobody. A people with no name or citizenship. I see a systemic effort to deny the Palestinians an identity.

Um. Its the same except for all the differences. I'm just going to leave this alone. Because I think its a terrible comparison. Namely, the Arab Palestinians do have a name, and citizenship and international recognition and an identity and are not actually being systematically murdered and removed (despite the bullshit TP will try to sell you).

No it isn't a terrible comparison - not when taken only in the sense of erasing an identity. I'm not talking about the "real world" per se but about people here on this forum and the ceaseless attempt to erase the Palestinian identity by labeling them just Arabs, Palestinians were invented, they are a fake people etc etc. Do you deny that occurs? Btw - I specifically noted that unlike Myanmar there is no systemic genocide going on. But I read how Myanmar denied the Rohinga even an identity and that is exactly what folks here on this forum attempt to do with the Palestinians.

Is anyone saying the Jews can not have state anywhere in the world?

Yes. I believe that is EXACTLY what they are saying. The Jewish people are not eligible for self-determination. Everyone on TP with exceptions of Humanity and yourself, essentially disregards the Israeli (Jewish) right to self-determination. They all have slightly different takes on the "why". For some, the Jewish people are "just a religion". For others the Jewish people of today are synthetic, and not real Jews. For some the Jewish people are European or some other nationality and therefore can't be Jewish. Others say its because Jews are inherently evil. Tinmore says that the Jewish people (the real ones) aren't eligible for self-determination because they don't want self-determination.

I'm not sure I totally agree. Yes - there are some notable people who say Jews have no rights to self determination period - but many define it in terms of Palestine only, and regards to the rights of Palestinians. I don't think I've heard anyone express the thought that they have no rights anywhere in the world. Realistically - I do think some of those arguments against Jewish rights and in support of Palestinian rights are transparent efforts to negate the recognition of any rights for Jews at ....but...I've seen some here saying the same for Palestinians...send them to Jordan.

Uninformed.

Only Jews lived in palestine for thousands of years. In fact, palestine originated as a Roman name imposed on Jews and ancient Israel, about 2000 years ago. Arabs did not populate the land and Muslims didn’t exist

You've only said that about 324 times.

Jews originally were called palestinians, by the British in the 20th century. Arabs began identifying as palestinians in the 1960s

The word palestinian does not appear in Middle East history before the 20th century. But, you think palestinians have a history of thousands of years?

325

 

[JoelT1]

Each group that wants to be recognized as a "people" has to make a case for it first - you can't just negate them automatically based on the premise they will eventually swallow a land. In fact, that isn't happening. No other group is fighting for same territories or claiming any rights.

Can you clarify what you mean by this. I'm not sure I understand and don't want to assume.

Well...who decides when a people is a people? I don't know. I think each group that wants that recognition must make a case for it. I guess self identitification is a major part of it. Despite the seeming ease of it we don't have hundreds of groups clammering for recognition and rights. Does that clarify at all?

People are classified by language. Is there a palestinian language?

That is one of many classifications.

Anthropologists generally classify people by language Do people speak palestinian? Can you even show me a history of palestinians?

 

[Shusha]

Woah. What exactly are you suggesting? If it involves any forced transfers of people...that's a no-go for me.

Not suggesting anything -- yet. Just pointing out that we (humanity) don't yet seem capable of creating stable nation states consisting of disparate ethnic groups. The solution to that seems, at this point, to create stable nation states of homogeneous ethnic groups, at least for now. In that regard, in terms of size of territory, Israel made a mistake in not ethnically cleansing the territory the way all the ME Arab states did. Realistically, as horrible as it is, if she had done so, all the Palestinians would be living in Jordan and probably content with it.

 

[Shusha]

On how Muslims feel about Jewish people - Muslims and Jews largely got along historically.

I call bullshit. Or, because I like you and you usually have good arguments, I respectfully disagree. Its kinda like saying that women and men get along great in the US. I mean, only three women a day get killed by their intimate partners and only 1 in 4 women are raped before they graduate college. Compared to Arab ME countries where we aren't allowed to drive, or show our ankles, or go to school or have a sexuality, or go to the grocery store without a male escort.


Was it a 20th century relationship of human rights, religious tolerance and democratic values? Of course not - that did not exist in any culture of those eras. It sucked to be the minority religions/ethnicities (and sucked worse to be a woman). But Jews in many areas flourished in ways they could not in Christian Europe.

and the virulant anti-semitism is relatively recent in the long history of both those faiths.

Again, calling bullshit, but nicely. Anti-semitism of the Arab/Muslim people CHANGED with the importation of Christian European ideas in the early 1900s but it existed consistently throughout thousands of years of history.

 

[Shusha]

The Arab culture and Muslim religion spread widely - by conquest and also by benign conversion as with most religions.

"Benign" conversion can only happen in a place of equality. There was never such a thing, until VERY recently, and then only in certain places, the ME not being one of them, except for Israel. So, no, I'm not buying what you are selling.