badgenome said:
No? I think it does. The Jews didn't belong there any less than did the Arabs, yet you insist that the Arabs are the natives and the Jews are the "foreigners". Many Jews were recent immigrants, true, but if both groups were Ottoman subjects, and both groups were later citizens of Palestine, then it's really not that clear cut. Also, if you'll look at the population records from the time, you'll see that both the Jewish and Arab populations were increasing faster than was natural due to there being an economic boom prior to the outbreak of the war. So many of the Arabs were even more recent immigrants than the European Jews, which by your logic would seem to make their presence in Palestine somehow less legitimate. But it doesn't because as Arabs, they somehow belonged there more... I guess? But what matters is that the Jews were there. And as they increasingly faced such intense violence that the British couldn't maintain order or guarantee their safety, it doesn't strike me as particularly illegitimate for them to assert their right for self-determination - and when the Arabs used their territory to launch an offense and lost spectacularly, the Jews relieved them of some of that land as well, something that is hardly unprecedented in war So, I guess I don't really understand the problem on its merits. Two peoples shared a spot on the map and nothing else, so, predictably, they got into a tiff. One side won, though not the side with which you seem to identify. Like I said, this strikes me as a conclusion in search of evidence. |
Where do you get your history from? This is absurd in its entirety.
1) Jews, in the 1930's and before, were less than 10% of the entire population. Hell, there were more Christians Arabs than Jews.
2) Jews increased by millions in a manner of a few years ALL from immigration from Europe. AFTER 1948 it had another big increase of Jews from Arab lands.
3) Arabs only increased by normal population growth. How else would the population base go from 90% Arab and 10% Jewish to 55% Arab and 45% Jewish in less than 5 years?
4) The Stern Gang and Irgun were the reason for most of the bloodshed pre-1948. They are the reason the British pulled out as the British were under constant attack from them, not Arabs. They were the original terrorists in the region. The Arabs learned these tactics from them, as it worked in removing the British and establishing Israel. They bombed hotels, homes, kidnappings, and the slaughter of an entire village Old Testament style including all animals; look up Deir Yassin. Additionally, most of the Prime Ministers and controlling government officials were once leaders or part of these gangs.
However what matters is not what happened then but what's now. Now you have an advanced and very large military and government supporting a terrorist enclave of settlers in the continued illegal expansion of Jewish homes on Arab lands for the sole purpose of pushing out the Palestinians and preventing any form of peace. The Arabs have no reason to vocally support a Jewish state while their homes are still under direct attack.
