By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 11 April 2012
Edit Thread
Player1x3 said:
Kasz216 said:
Mnementh said:
Kasz216 said:
Mnementh said:
killerzX said:

palestaine, but thats a made up country.


Palestine has the same legitimation as Israel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine


Not really.  I mean, Palestine rejected that.  It's like having two brothers fight over their fathers possessions, one of them agreeing to a legal deal, the other disagreeing, using other methods to get what he wants, but fails, ends up with less then he would of gotten then uses the past deal as a basis on what they should get.  (Despite having rejected it).

I don't agree that there is no legitamcy to a palestinian state, but there is less so then there is an Israeli state.  If there was a one or the other situation (which there isn't and it should never get to that) you'd have to go with Israel.

The "made up" country part though I think is probably a reference to the fact that there never was really a historic palestine.  The area pretty much always being a part of some other distant empire, except when being ruled by the jews.

Yeah, you are right to a degree. But the UN-plan was the legitimation for the formation of israel, so saying that Palestine is no country borders on withdrawing legitimation to Israel. sure, the plan (especially the borderlines discussed at that time) cannot be executed unchanged today. But I think there is no other solution, that the existance of two indepent countries: Israel and Palestine. The situtation at the moment is unbearable.

And the made up country-part and historic precedents: at some time in history always was a nation constructed. So every nation is disputable from a historic standpoint.

 

The large difference currently is that Palestine isn't a nation.  Other nations existence are less disputable because they are currently nations.

An "flipped" example would be something like Kosovo.  Which was disputable as a nation, then became one, and now it a nation.  This is slightly different since more or less Palestine is more of a "no mans land" then it is a part of Israel, but it's closer then compaing Palestine to say Greece, later Kosvo or even something like South Ossetia.

 


Kosovo was never in its entire history of existence even close of becoming anything even remotely related to a nation. The most close it got when it was an autonomous province within Serbia. And no one even referred to it as a province before that. It was just a geographical region, like Rock Mountains.  And even when the war was over, Resolution 1244 assured that Kosovo would remain as a Serbian territory. But of course USA and the other Westerners broke that Resolution (cuz you know, they need to build their bases and feed their paranoia of Russia) and that's why kosovo is considered an independent nation by some people today. Even tho Kosovo  is everything but ''independent''

See... Palestine?  Nothing you said there actually differs from Palestine... well outside of Russia.