Highest Rated Comments
Abohani-1 karma
Case-in-point: in what way, in any scenario, is building a terror tunnel more useful for the Palestinian people than building schools and hospitals, which are not infrequently destroyed when rockets are fired precisely from those locations?
I don't think violence is the solution at all so the answer is no scenario, I also don't think there is any scenario where the current treatment of Palestinians in occupied territories (including Gaza) will lead to less attacks in the long run.
Abohani-2 karma
I am glad you replied.
The surrounding Arab states took issue with there being a Jewish state and attempted to destroy it
I believe this is a misconception, the problem with Israel is that it is foreign, as a majority of it's population immigrated to the land while it was under occupation from the Brits, Arabs are also hostile to the notion of a nation state with different religion but that is not why they are against Israel.
I am not saying Arabs were good to the Palestinians or that they are doing the right thing by crowding refugees in Ghettos with no prospect of work or dignified life but the origin of the problem is that a long time ago a war happened and the parents and grand parents of the current refugees were forced to leave their homes.
Another issue i have with the Israeli narrative is that it assumes that the Arabs should have accepted the creation of Israel and considers that the Arabs started the 1948 war, I don't believe any population would accept the establishment of a foreign entity by foreign powers, If European Jews immigrated to India under British rule and had Israel established there the Indians would have went to war too.
with many people voluntarily leaving, intending to return after the land was conquered
That doesn't make any sense, People left because there was war and death where they lived, that is not voluntarily, if you are referring to the story that Arab armies told them to leave till the war ends then it still doesn't make sense because it means they have been informed that fighting is going to take place at their homes(which i don't believe is the reason 700,000 people left).
while those who were expelled should be (and have been quite handsomely) monetarily compensated to accept the reality of what took place.
How were the refugees monetarily compensated ?
Why shouldn't they have to grant citizenship? They claimed the land and people as their own for over 20 years.
After googling it, it seems we were both misinformed as most of the Palestinian refugees who fled the west bank during 1967 war are actually granted full citizenship.
The annexation was not recognized by Arab nations at that time and some countries lead by Egypt proposed that Jordan be expelled from the Arab league.
It is noted that the Annexation granted full citizenship to all people living in the west bank, it is the equivalent of the one state solution being applied today.
I wish to clarify my position, I think that the creation of the state of Israel is a mistake and should be considered an act of colonization but I treat Israel's existence in this time as a fact as there is no way to return the millions living there to Europe, I think embraces policies that harm the general Palestinian population under the pretense of security, most notably economic harm and that these policies will lead to more fanaticism by the Palestinians which will lead to harsher treatment and so on.
Abohani0 karma
Honest question here, why do you suppose that they are wrong to believe so ? The reason they are displaced and stateless is because western states decided to move Jewish populations from Europe to the middle east.
Not a fan of any Arab regime but I don't think Jordan is obliged to grant citizenship to those displaced by other nations, I would certainly prefer that they would but I can't say they should.
I hope you are not offended, I thought your comment offered a point of view I wish to discuss.
View HistoryShare Link