One-state-solution? Two-state-solution? Well, what about the Move-State-Solution

[al-Hasani]

Jews themselves are not native to Israel. According to their own scriptures they are from Egypt and in terms of history (I am here talking about the real ancient Hebrews/Jews) they were Semites and Semites are originally from the Arabian Peninsula or Arabia as our old Jewish MOROCCAN friend based in the UK writes.

Canaanites another Semitic people had an older presence in what is now Israel/Palestine than the ancient Hebrews and similarly the nearby Semitic Phoenicians.

Palestinians are obviously Semites too and are the offspring of those native Semitic peoples and Semitic Arabs who came from NEIGHBORING Arabia. Even to this day you can see Israel with the barren eye from KSA (Gulf of Aqaba).

Now in regards to the actual Jewish Israelis of today then they are mostly from across the Arab world (Yemen, Morocco, Iraq, Syria, Egypt etc.) or from Eastern Europe (Poland, Russia, Ukraine, Romania, Belarus) and some are from Ethiopia or Black Jews.

Obviously none of those above have a bigger claim on the land than the Palestinians. Surnames mean nothing and can change during time and can be adopted by anyone. One again needs to know Arab naming traditions before writing such nonsense.

In KSA and the Arab world some family names are apparently of Jewish origin. Does that mean that those people are Jews? Some Jews would claim that but I am for sure not this certain.

 

[janon]

I dont like your signature.

It's true, though.

 

[Sugarcane]

Depends on which period of history you want to examine. Who detroyed the second temple? Who destroyed the first? Not Europeans, by any stretch of imagination.

Yeah sure - If you consider Romans are Arabs.

Jewish people, since the destruction of the second temple, were always outcasts - whether they lived on Europe or Asia (except Inndia), they always lived on the periphery of cities, in ghettoes. They were never allowed to be part of the mainstream in any country. The people you call "european" were never British or French or German, they always lived in ghettos with their own identity..

You can't blame Muslims or Arabs for this.

Throughout history, christians first and muslims later persecuted them. You know as well as I do, the anti semitism inherent in islam, beginning with the quran.

Keep religious scripture aside because that's altogether different debate and you will find a lot of things in Jewish scripture against non-Jews as well - If there were some Muslim rulers who didn't treated Jews well than there was also Salaudin who after defeating crusaders invited Jews back to Jerusalem? Anyway can you give example of Jewish massacre by Muslims like Romans/Christians?

As far as the jewish people are concerned, in 1948 they were simply returning to the land that their forefathers wre thrown out of.

I have to reiterate that I am not taking sides - I am fully aware of the injustices suffered by the Palestinians (mostly muslims) who were dispossessed in 1948. I want all people over there to have a state for themselves - but your pretence that the jews have no business to be there is a farce.

Your support of returning people back after thousands of years by displacing the people living there is only justified if you also support that America & Australia should be given back to natives whom European enslaved and massacred with impunity.

 

[TheNoob]

It's true, though.

Then by that, Every nation on this planet is divided from society on nationalist lines. lol

 

[MarkovChain]

Don't think you know your history man.

History of the Arab–Israeli conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

During the time of the Mandatory Palestine, the Balfour Declaration signed in 1917, stated that the government of Great Britain supported the establishment of a "Jewish national home" in Palestine. This exacerbated tensions between the Arabs living in Mandate Palestine and the Jews who emigrated there during the Ottoman period. Signed in January 1919, the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement promoted Arab-Jewish cooperation on the development of a Jewish national homeland in Palestine and an Arab nation in a large part of the Middle East, though this event had little to no effect on the conflict.[4]

In 1920, the San Remo conference largely endorsed the 1916 Anglo-French Sykes–Picot Agreement, allocating to Britain the area of present day Jordan, the area between theJordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, and Iraq, while France received Syria and Lebanon. In 1922, the League of Nations formally established the British Mandate for Palestine and Transjordan, at least partially fulfilling Britain's commitments from the 1915–16 McMahon–Hussein Correspondence by assigning all of the land east of the Jordan River to the Emirate of Jordan, ruled by Hashemite king Abdullah but closely dependent on Britain, leaving the remainder west of the Jordan as the League of NationsMandatory Palestine. While the British had made promises to give both Arabs and Jews land, the British claimed they had never promised to give either side all of the land.

This lead to the proposal of two-state solution in 1947 - but the Palestinians flatly refused - hence the whole mess.

Continuing:
The Arabs, however, rejected it while demanding "an end to Jewish immigration and land sales to Jews, calling for independence of Palestine as an independent Arab state."

It's extremely funny when Palestinian supporters get excited when Britain recognizes Palestine. What they should be asking instead is - "why the heck did you create this mess Britain??!"

 

[janon]

Then by that, Every nation on this planet is divided from society on nationalist lines. lol

Yes, nations are defined by nationalism. That's a tautology.

 

[sarthak]

Can you tell me how it is supposed to be israeli land? It was ruled by muslims for centuries and jews lived their under MUSLIM rule equally

So? as if muslims were on that land ever since the Big bang took place. If muslims were there before jews , then there was someone else before the muslims , and someone before the someone else who was there before the muslims , etc etc. Yeah , so you should go track the real owner down and let us know. We are all waiting to be enlightened.

 

[l'ingénieur]

History of the Arab–Israeli conflict - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

During the time of the Mandatory Palestine, the Balfour Declaration signed in 1917, stated that the government of Great Britain supported the establishment of a "Jewish national home" in Palestine. This exacerbated tensions between the Arabs living in Mandate Palestine and the Jews who emigrated there during the Ottoman period. Signed in January 1919, the Faisal–Weizmann Agreement promoted Arab-Jewish cooperation on the development of a Jewish national homeland in Palestine and an Arab nation in a large part of the Middle East, though this event had little to no effect on the conflict.[4]

In 1920, the San Remo conference largely endorsed the 1916 Anglo-French Sykes–Picot Agreement, allocating to Britain the area of present day Jordan, the area between theJordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, and Iraq, while France received Syria and Lebanon. In 1922, the League of Nations formally established the British Mandate for Palestine and Transjordan, at least partially fulfilling Britain's commitments from the 1915–16 McMahon–Hussein Correspondence by assigning all of the land east of the Jordan River to the Emirate of Jordan, ruled by Hashemite king Abdullah but closely dependent on Britain, leaving the remainder west of the Jordan as the League of NationsMandatory Palestine. While the British had made promises to give both Arabs and Jews land, the British claimed they had never promised to give either side all of the land.

This lead to the proposal of two-state solution in 1947 - but the Palestinians flatly refused - hence the whole mess.

Continuing:
The Arabs, however, rejected it while demanding "an end to Jewish immigration and land sales to Jews, calling for independence of Palestine as an independent Arab state."

It's extremely funny when Palestinian supporters get excited when Britain recognizes Palestine. What they should be asking instead is - "why the heck did you create this mess Britain??!"

yes wikipedia is a very reliable source and it can't be edited by anyone.

 

[livingdead]

whats the problem with israel being where it is.. ?
they are having a blast and so are palestinians..

 

[Judge]

And why exactly should Israel be relocated.

Its their land. They should never move.

I think Indians are too blinded by their dislike for not only Pakistanis (who happen to be Muslim) but also for Indian Muslims themselves. I have only seen one Indian user in this forum who was against Israel, and he was Indian-American.
I hope they come to their senses eventually.

In any case Israel is loosing internationally. Im talking about the Swedish, Brithish moves to recognize Palestine. Then we have BDS-movement.
Even if wont have an immediate impact, the walls are closing in on Israel, as we know it today.

As a country, we support Palestine to become a full fledged country. We vote in favour of that where it counts - UN.

This however should not be confused with our support for Israel. We support them where they are as well. We advocate a 2 state solution - with well defined permanent borders b/w Israel and Palestine and coordial relations.

What is frightening is that they are more radical than the most radical Jews on PDF themselves and that's a frightening conclusion given that they have absolutely NOTHING to do with this conflict other than them claiming to be "best buddies with Israel". The same Israel that treats Indian "Jews" as they treat Ethiopian "Jews".

No wonder that Muslims have suffered from cleanings in India in recent years with this kind of behavior.

We support the State of Israel for the support that Israel has given to India steadfastly in our time of need.
Hard as that may be for you to understand Sir, we are with Israel.

How Israel deals with Israeli citizens is an issue that is upto them. I am however willing to put money on the fact that those of 'Indian descent' are treated a hundred times more fairly and with more democratic rights than in any other Arab country.

So if you think that this is a criteria - on how a country treats or discriminates between its people - then Israel is without a single doubt the best country in that entire region and puts the rest of the countries there to utter shame.

All that said, India supports the official formation of a country - Palestine. We advocate that they form a country and live peacefully.

 

[TankMan]

Two state solution is dead - finished, it's practically impossible now. There are hundreds of thousands of Israelis living on the land that was supposed to be Palestine. It's not like Gaza, where they just moved the settlements. It's too many people, there is no way any Israeli leader would allow for a two state solution unless he really fancies political suicide. Loss of support from Zionist lobby = political death in Israel.

One state solution isn't good at all, it's not practical either, though it's probably in the Israeli politicians' best interest but the Palestinians won't like it and undoubtedly they will cause problems in Israel.

At the end of the day, It was the Palestinians' land. There is absolutely no doubt in that.

Moving Israel is the most Ideal solution but of course, politicians won't like it. I mean, who would like to be the leader that gave up ''the Jews' promised land''? Americans can be easily made to agree to it through some good propaganda and some money making opportunities (for the the corporations and politicians). I mean, they agree to constantly and unconditionally fund and support Israel, so they'll probably agree to let them take some land. It's funny but moving a country is actually a very practical thing to do.

 

[Judge]

At the end of the day, It was the Palestinians' land. There is absolutely no doubt in that.

It was Palestinians land. Just like it was Jewish land before that in history. Funny how many people choose to look at just one period in history to decide who the land belongs to.

As of today, it is Israeli land. They have full rights on it.

 

[TankMan]

It was Palestinians land. Just like it was Jewish land before that in history. Funny how many people choose to look at just one period in history to decide who the land belongs to.

As of today, it is Israeli land. They have full rights on it.

''Before in history'' doesn't count. As recent as the 1900s, the land was Palestinian. You can't just throw an entire population out because their land used to be your ancestors' at some point in time.
As of right now, according to international law, Israel has no rights on most of that land. The West Bank is Palestinian land. The Gaza Strip is Palestinian land. That's according to the UN.
Israel has disregarded more UN resolutions than North Korea ,Pakistan and Iran (the ''rogue states'') combined. Many of those are about land.
And the UN was even being unfair, I mean, you don't give 60% of the land to 30% of the population.
Look, fine, lets say the Jews own that land. It's still a massive human rights violation to oppress an entire population like that. Even worse is that Israel constantly claims moral superiority over the people it murders.

 

[BestUsernameEver]

Why into the United States, why not into the Jewish Autonomous Oblast ?

Jewish Autonomous Oblast - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Btw the Jewish Autonomous Oblast was established in 1934, 14 years before Israel and is almost twice as big (36 thousand square kms vs Israels 20k).

What is frightening is that they are more radical than the most radical Jews on PDF themselves and that's a frightening conclusion given that they have absolutely NOTHING to do with this conflict other than them claiming to be "best buddies with Israel". The same Israel that treats Indian "Jews" as they treat Ethiopian "Jews".

Very true, I've noticed it as well.

 

[Judge]

''Before in history'' doesn't count. As recent as the 1900s, the land was Palestinian. You can't just throw an entire population out because their land used to be your ancestors' at some point in time.
As of right now, according to international law, Israel has no rights on most of that land. The West Bank is Palestinian land. The Gaza Strip is Palestinian land. That's according to the UN.
Israel has disregarded more UN resolutions than North Korea ,Pakistan and Iran (the ''rogue states'') combined. Many of those are about land.
And the UN was even being unfair, I mean, you don't give 60% of the land to 30% of the population.
Look, fine, lets say the Jews own that land. It's still a massive human rights violation to oppress an entire population like that. Even worse is that Israel constantly claims moral superiority over the people it murders.

You are right - before in history does not count.
As of this period - this age - the land belongs to Israel.

Your statement - that the land 'belongs to Palestinians' is incorrect. The land belongs to Israelis.

That said, your other statement, that of Israel taking up more land beyond what was agreed upon is indeed wrong. And that is indeed not Israeli land, it is indeed Palestinian land.

For that, Israel must be condemned. They should unilaterally vacate that extra land.