No, it's not. You could ask the same question about Israel. The Palestinians, who were there before Israel's modern state, are not analogous to Spain's minority, really. And I actually do support the Kurds getting a state, I guess you don't. Each case is a case by case analysis. It looks like you just lump them all together if you want the answer to be no.
Indeed. My analysis is case-by-case. I am certainly more supportive of the Kurds because the Kurdish regions of Iraq, Turkey and Iran could probably form a free, law-governed democratic state. The Kurdish region of Iraq certainly provides the nucleus of a such a potential state. But, again, I am supportive of the Kurds based on the quality of their nascent state, not simply based on the fact that they are an oppressed minority within these regions.
Nice speech. I don't believe it. As I've posted here again and again, the right shows itself the enemy of democracy. Democracy is a card they pull out only when it's convenient, such as to defend Israel in their false, idealized argument about it.
So you believe that I do not want a Palestinian state, but you do not believe the reasons I give for not wishing to see one? I am taking you at your word that you believe what you say you believe, and I do not presume that your motivations for protesting Israel is because you want to see the Jews of Israel exterminated.
Again, I do not argue for nor do I claim to value democracy in and of itself. Again, I only value free, law-governed democracies. Simple democracy is not the sina qua non that I respect. Plenty of tyrannical nations have extend the franchise to their subject populations and hold elections, such as Iran, North Korea, Russia and Venezuela.
To reiterate: For me to want to advocate for the creation or continued existence of a state, that state must be (1) democratic, i.e., provides for regular fair and open elections so that the citizenry can make the ultimate decision as to who governs them; (2) the state must be free, i.e., the provides for the protections of the personal liberty of its citizens, most importantly those citizens who are political opponents of the sitting government; and (3) law-governed, i.e., the government is restrained
through rule of law and cannot exercise arbitrary power against its citizenry. If you disagree or think that these principles are of little to no practical value, please explain to me why and we can have it out on that basis.
You tell a largely false version of the history and situation - and offer exactly zero solution for the rights and freedoms of the Palestinians, who appear to care zero about. If they continue to live under tyranny forever, that's what you want. 'The beatings will continue until morale improves.' 'Tyranny will continue until resistance ends.'
The organizations supporting the Palestinians have broad Palestinian support. If it weren't for them the Palestinians would suffer even more. Israel is certainly happy for them to lose their lives to neglect.
This issue has a lot more to it than your biased, simplistic, one-sided argument cares about. Your argument is no better than a paid lawyer hired to argue one side and distort the truth. In short, your only answer is 'oppress the Palestinians until they're all killed', but you just will refuse to admit it. That appears to be Israel's plan: gradually take more and more land and drive out Palestinians, until they're gone, over decades.
Your position is based on the position that Palestinians have no rights. Easy to negotiate that: they simply get to shut up and do as they're told. Your 'love of democracy' clearly is very selective, as is Israels democracy, where they increasingly legalize discrimination and treat Palestinians terribly, ignoring international law. They've manipulated the US into being their 'muscle', abusing our UN veto to protect them from the world's condemnation. You love it.
Again, this is all a perfectly fine personal attack against me. None of this indicates why I or anyone else (including
you for that matter) should want a Palestinian state to come into existence. Again, knowing what we know about the nature of the Palestinian leadership, what is your argument for the necessity of a Palestinian state? Because you seem to treat it as some axiomatic law of the universe that the Palestinians must have a state. What I am asking for is what principles lead you to concluding that a Palestinian state must be founded? And would these same arguments apply to any other group, such as the Kurds of Turkey and Iraq, the ethnic Russians of Eastern Ukraine, or any other ethnic minorities who make claims to statehood?