Jews were expelled by the hundreds of thousands from Iraq, Jordan and other Arab Nations in the 40s.
That was in large part thanks to the British colonizing and partitioning the old Ottoman Empire. The Palestinian Mandate was, after all, their idea. The Brits wanted to force a mass exodus of Jews from England and the zionists were the useful idiots who would get the job done. If you really want to go deep, you can trace a lot of that slander back to “The International Jew”, composed and published by American entrepreneur Henry Ford.
By the 40s, Jews got scapegoated in the Middle East the same way they’d been scapegoated in Europe a decade earlier. Sunni and Shia factions turned to infighting across territory the Brits had parceling out with a deliberate eye on maximizing conflict. And then we can consider a series of foreign-backed coups - from the military occupation of Egypt during WW1 to the '41 forced abdication of Iranian leader Reza Shah Pahlavi - that destablized the region for decades.
There’s a certain irony in Churchill’s “Final Solution” for the Jewish people being not all that different from Hitler’s original plan. Shove them all into a tiny patch of land on the Mediterranean coastline, as far from mainland Europe as we can get them, and transform them into a client state of the world’s largest arms exporters.
So you’re blaming Churchill for the Jews losing their land in Arab controlled territories but it’s the Jews fault Arabs lost land in British controlled areas that were established as the nation of Israel? A nation that was immediately attacked by 5 countries I probably need to remind you.
Ya, that’s exactly the Anti Semitic bullshit I’d expect.
Lemmie know when the Jews will be given back their lands in the surrounding Arab Nations and I’ll start listening to the calls for the same to happen within Israel.
My thoughts are that the UN resolution establishing Israel clearly calls for the necessary actions to occur to allow for Eretz Israel which unfortunately required the relocation of some residents. Article 39, says that any attempt to alter the settlement called for in the resolution to be addressed. That’s political speak for 'gtfo or we’ll do it for you '. The resolution also called on the Palestinians to get on board or get out of the way. The Palestinians didn’t follow the mandate, they started a fight instead.
That’s entirely different from the removal of Jews from the surrounding Arab Nations, who had no such mandate from the United Nations.
As for your claims it’s ongoing, as soon as Israel was established they were attacked. They’ve been attacked a dozen times since, never being the one who started the fighting either. Nasser amassing troops on the border and threatening to start a war, triggering an engagement isn’t Israel starting a war. That’s the only one that’s even possibly debatable. When Hamas stops, the fighting stops.
Your reference to the people of the region also being semitic is either out of ignorance or again, Antisemitism because the origins of that phrase have a very very clear anti-semitic history. Only those with the loudest dog whistles are out there trying to make the claim that being anti-Semitic includes the other groups of the region other than Jews.
You seem like one of those people who learned about this situation 3 weeks ago. Suggest shutting up, sitting down and learning something that doesn’t come from tik tok. The history is well set out.
My thoughts are that the UN resolution establishing Israel clearly calls for the necessary actions to occur to allow for Eretz Israel which unfortunately required the relocation of some residents.
I think Andrew Jackson said something to the same effect while negotiating with Cherokee Nation.
That’s entirely different from the removal of Jews from the surrounding Arab Nations, who had no such mandate from the United Nations.
Can you remind me how many deciding votes the Arab Nations had in the UN when Eretz Israel was established?
as soon as Israel was established they were attacked
That’s a very myopic view of history, as it skips over all five Aliyahs, the Arab Revolt of '36, and half a decade of Haganah guerrilla activity throughout the Palestinian Mandate during the 1940s against the British military. These domestic insurgencies - some of which even included inter-Zionist infighting - ran straight up to the day of Independence as part of the '47-'48 Palestine Civil War (a conflict that had been on-and-off since 1920). To claim Israel was immediately attacked, you’d have to limit your historical perception to the brief ceasefire from April to May of '48, and conveniently ignore the Nakba which had begun the prior year.
Your reference to the people of the region also being semitic is either out of ignorance or again, Antisemitism because the origins of that phrase have a very very clear anti-semitic history.
So using the term “semitic” is itself anti-Semitic?
Jews are from Israel and have a right of return
Actually, native Palestinians aren’t really Semitic in origin
Absolutely incoherent. This feels like I’m trying to explain to a Nazi where the term “Aryan” comes from.
So you’re taking issue with Israel following the law set out for them. Yet I’ve yet to see you take issue with the ongoing hostage situation or the civilian attack the other week, so again your hypocrisy exposes itself.
You’re going to sit there and claim Arabs didn’t massacre Jewish villages and towns for decades? Sfat got wiped out how many times? Talk about cherry picking. This is a joke, tantamount to saying it’s ok for Arabs to attack Jewish settlements… sure. If that’s how you want to roll, you’re okay with the West Bank situation then. Or are you again a hypocrite?
The manner in which you’re using the term, along with the context and your established position of being a bigot makes your use of that term Anti Semitic.
Palestinians aren’t from Judea, they are from the Arabian peninsula. I can send you a map if you need. They’re welcome to return there.
You’ve quite often reminded me of the Sartre quote ’
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies.’ But your latest reply is so devoid of reality, it’s become comical. It’s comforting to know that you’re in the vast minority globally, right along with the Q groups, and Israel will continue to have the support of the world in the face of terrorism and rising Anti Semitism such as what you’re pushing.
So you’re taking issue with Israel following the law set out for them.
Absent enfranchisement, this isn’t civil law it is military dictatorship.
You’re going to sit there and claim Arabs didn’t massacre Jewish villages and towns for decades?
I’m going to sit here and claim the Israelis gave as good as they got in what amounted to an extension of the World Wars in Arab territory. And that these purges were as much a result of the Nakba and the Six Day War as any domestic policy. Absent the slaughter of Arabs by an invading European force, and the insidious anti-Semitic propaganda of Henry Ford, you would not have seen segregationist policies sweeping the Middle East like they had swept Europe decades before.
Palestinians aren’t from Judea, they are from the Arabian peninsula.
Might as well claim Jews aren’t from Judea, they’re from Brooklyn.
Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies
That was in large part thanks to the British colonizing and partitioning the old Ottoman Empire. The Palestinian Mandate was, after all, their idea. The Brits wanted to force a mass exodus of Jews from England and the zionists were the useful idiots who would get the job done. If you really want to go deep, you can trace a lot of that slander back to “The International Jew”, composed and published by American entrepreneur Henry Ford.
By the 40s, Jews got scapegoated in the Middle East the same way they’d been scapegoated in Europe a decade earlier. Sunni and Shia factions turned to infighting across territory the Brits had parceling out with a deliberate eye on maximizing conflict. And then we can consider a series of foreign-backed coups - from the military occupation of Egypt during WW1 to the '41 forced abdication of Iranian leader Reza Shah Pahlavi - that destablized the region for decades.
There’s a certain irony in Churchill’s “Final Solution” for the Jewish people being not all that different from Hitler’s original plan. Shove them all into a tiny patch of land on the Mediterranean coastline, as far from mainland Europe as we can get them, and transform them into a client state of the world’s largest arms exporters.
So you’re blaming Churchill for the Jews losing their land in Arab controlled territories but it’s the Jews fault Arabs lost land in British controlled areas that were established as the nation of Israel? A nation that was immediately attacked by 5 countries I probably need to remind you.
Ya, that’s exactly the Anti Semitic bullshit I’d expect.
Lemmie know when the Jews will be given back their lands in the surrounding Arab Nations and I’ll start listening to the calls for the same to happen within Israel.
I’m blaming Churchill for exacerbating ethnic tensions as Secretary of State for the British Colonies because it was in the job description.
If you think putting the blame for the partitioning of the Palestinian Mandate on the people who did it is Antisemitism…
I’m curious to hear your thoughts on the genocide of a Semitic people ongoing in Palestine since the Nakba of '48.
My thoughts are that the UN resolution establishing Israel clearly calls for the necessary actions to occur to allow for Eretz Israel which unfortunately required the relocation of some residents. Article 39, says that any attempt to alter the settlement called for in the resolution to be addressed. That’s political speak for 'gtfo or we’ll do it for you '. The resolution also called on the Palestinians to get on board or get out of the way. The Palestinians didn’t follow the mandate, they started a fight instead.
That’s entirely different from the removal of Jews from the surrounding Arab Nations, who had no such mandate from the United Nations.
As for your claims it’s ongoing, as soon as Israel was established they were attacked. They’ve been attacked a dozen times since, never being the one who started the fighting either. Nasser amassing troops on the border and threatening to start a war, triggering an engagement isn’t Israel starting a war. That’s the only one that’s even possibly debatable. When Hamas stops, the fighting stops.
Your reference to the people of the region also being semitic is either out of ignorance or again, Antisemitism because the origins of that phrase have a very very clear anti-semitic history. Only those with the loudest dog whistles are out there trying to make the claim that being anti-Semitic includes the other groups of the region other than Jews.
You seem like one of those people who learned about this situation 3 weeks ago. Suggest shutting up, sitting down and learning something that doesn’t come from tik tok. The history is well set out.
I think Andrew Jackson said something to the same effect while negotiating with Cherokee Nation.
Can you remind me how many deciding votes the Arab Nations had in the UN when Eretz Israel was established?
That’s a very myopic view of history, as it skips over all five Aliyahs, the Arab Revolt of '36, and half a decade of Haganah guerrilla activity throughout the Palestinian Mandate during the 1940s against the British military. These domestic insurgencies - some of which even included inter-Zionist infighting - ran straight up to the day of Independence as part of the '47-'48 Palestine Civil War (a conflict that had been on-and-off since 1920). To claim Israel was immediately attacked, you’d have to limit your historical perception to the brief ceasefire from April to May of '48, and conveniently ignore the Nakba which had begun the prior year.
So using the term “semitic” is itself anti-Semitic?
Jews are from Israel and have a right of return
Actually, native Palestinians aren’t really Semitic in origin
Absolutely incoherent. This feels like I’m trying to explain to a Nazi where the term “Aryan” comes from.
So you’re taking issue with Israel following the law set out for them. Yet I’ve yet to see you take issue with the ongoing hostage situation or the civilian attack the other week, so again your hypocrisy exposes itself.
You’re going to sit there and claim Arabs didn’t massacre Jewish villages and towns for decades? Sfat got wiped out how many times? Talk about cherry picking. This is a joke, tantamount to saying it’s ok for Arabs to attack Jewish settlements… sure. If that’s how you want to roll, you’re okay with the West Bank situation then. Or are you again a hypocrite?
The manner in which you’re using the term, along with the context and your established position of being a bigot makes your use of that term Anti Semitic.
Palestinians aren’t from Judea, they are from the Arabian peninsula. I can send you a map if you need. They’re welcome to return there.
You’ve quite often reminded me of the Sartre quote ’ Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies.’ But your latest reply is so devoid of reality, it’s become comical. It’s comforting to know that you’re in the vast minority globally, right along with the Q groups, and Israel will continue to have the support of the world in the face of terrorism and rising Anti Semitism such as what you’re pushing.
Absent enfranchisement, this isn’t civil law it is military dictatorship.
I’m going to sit here and claim the Israelis gave as good as they got in what amounted to an extension of the World Wars in Arab territory. And that these purges were as much a result of the Nakba and the Six Day War as any domestic policy. Absent the slaughter of Arabs by an invading European force, and the insidious anti-Semitic propaganda of Henry Ford, you would not have seen segregationist policies sweeping the Middle East like they had swept Europe decades before.
Might as well claim Jews aren’t from Judea, they’re from Brooklyn.
Rubber glue etc.