4 ms·

> Doesn't defend what happened to Jewish people in Egypt and Lebanon, but certainly puts some context around it. Which context? That zionism is right and it's

by yhavr 7mo ago

> Doesn't defend what happened to Jewish people in Egypt and Lebanon, but certainly puts some context around it. Which context? That zionism is right and it's great that Jews had a backup safe land to go? > depopulation of Jews from Yemen and Iraq, that was Israeli policy and they managed it by themselves > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Iraq#Persecution_by_Iraqi_authorities https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_in_Iraq#Pe... > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_anti-Jewish_riots_in_Aden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947_anti-Jewish_riots_in_Aden Arabs started to bully Jews, and thus prove that the idea of a safe homeland for Jews is the right idea. For generations. What a smartasses.

donkeybeer 7mo ago
You seem confused and didn't seem to read the message you are replying to. I think the main point should be repeated to avoid the reading issues problem: >So we agree that the first move in this conflict was a 20th century European nationalist group setting up a new state by force in the middle of an inhabited nation? With the blessing of the colonial power in charge.
- yhavr 7mo ago
  I didn't want to spread the answer too much, bit if you're asking. > of an inhabited nation https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/nation https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/nation > a tribe of Native Americans or a group of Native American tribes that share the same history, traditions, or language They're not native americans. > a large area of land that is controlled by its _own_ government Mandatory Palestine was controlled by British. So it was not an inhabited nation, I guess.
  - donkeybeer 7mo ago
    It had someone living there, those someone's weren't asked and their land handed over to someone else. If we see it from the perspective of it having being a British colonial project, then it's even worse having gone from one colonial master to another without asking the natives.
    - yhavr 7mo ago
      > and their land handed over to someone else Well, they were offered a partition plan, and instead of further negotiations chose to start a war. Multiple wars, in fact, and managed to fail all of them.

by yhavr 7mo ago

donkeybeer 7mo ago

You seem confused and didn't seem to read the message you are replying to. I think the main point should be repeated to avoid the reading issues problem: >So we agree that the first move in this conflict was a 20th century European nationalist group setting up a new state by force in the middle of an inhabited nation? With the blessing of the colonial power in charge.

yhavr 7mo ago
I didn't want to spread the answer too much, bit if you're asking. > of an inhabited nation https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/nation https://www.britannica.com/dictionary/nation > a tribe of Native Americans or a group of Native American tribes that share the same history, traditions, or language They're not native americans. > a large area of land that is controlled by its _own_ government Mandatory Palestine was controlled by British. So it was not an inhabited nation, I guess.
- donkeybeer 7mo ago
  It had someone living there, those someone's weren't asked and their land handed over to someone else. If we see it from the perspective of it having being a British colonial project, then it's even worse having gone from one colonial master to another without asking the natives.
  - yhavr 7mo ago
    > and their land handed over to someone else Well, they were offered a partition plan, and instead of further negotiations chose to start a war. Multiple wars, in fact, and managed to fail all of them.