• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:#299]Is Israel dying as the middle East's only liberal democracy?

We should remember that the European refugees we're looking for sanctuary when no other countries would take them. The population of Palestine doubled with these refugees in 15 years before 1930.
Between 1914 and 1931, Palestine's population increased by around 50%, from 0.69 million to 1.03 million, distributed as follows:
Christians, plus 18 thousand
Jews, plus 81 thousand (86% increase)
Muslims, plus 235 thousand (45% increase)

As soon as they got there they began mocking and bullying the Arab natives.
Source? Specifically that this was a widespread pattern of Jews, outnumbered five to one, "bullying" residents of the region they were lucky enough to take refuge in? Current nativist fears in regions like America and Europe would imply that the opposite was more likely the case, even before considering the prior history of anti-semitism in the Arab world.

By 1922 they were forming terror gangs like Hagana , Stern gang and Irgun.
Haganah (literally, The Defence): "Formed [in 1920] out of previous existing militias, its original purpose was to defend Jewish settlements from Arab attacks, such as the riots of 1920, 1921, 1929 and during the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine."

Lehi, often known pejoratively as the Stern Gang, split from Irgun in 1940. Irgun, formed in 1931: "Leaders within the mainstream Jewish organizations, the Jewish Agency, Haganah and Histadrut, as well as the British authorities, routinely condemned Irgun operations as terrorism and branded it an illegal organization as a result of the group's attacks on civilian targets.[86]"

You seem to have absorbed quite a bit of misinformation/revisionist history from somewhere, a simplistic, one-sided anti-Jewish narrative that even on its face should not be accepted by any reasonable person. Reality is always more complex than that. One might argue that increasing Jewish migration (and the condescending if not outright imperialist attitudes of some backers and leaders of Zionism) was understandably viewed as threatening by Palestinian locals. But that doesn't justify the apparent fact that in those early years after the Ottoman conquest the aggression and violence between the two groups was mostly carried out by Arabs against Jews - pretty much as anyone would expect who wasn't coming to the topic with entrenched biases - any more than increasing Jewish desperation in the lead-up, during and after the Holocaust justified the instances of excessive Jewish retaliation and terrorism.

It's hard to imagine how different things might have been had the people of Palestine been at least cautiously welcoming and receptive to the creation of a Jewish homeland in the 1920s, even if it was just a fifth of the territory: An established Palestinian state alongside Israel, less regional resentment and impetus for Arab-Nazi relations, perhaps a few hundred thousand more Jews managing to escape rather than dying in the Holocaust, no expulsion of Palestinians from Israel or Jews from Arab countries, no Arab-Israeli wars and all the fallout from them, perhaps less effective meddling in the Middle East by the cold war powers, less resentment to fuel Islamic terrorism...
 
Last edited:
Between 1914 and 1931, Palestine's population increased by around 50%, from 0.69 million to 1.03 million, distributed as follows:
Christians, plus 18 thousand
Jews, plus 81 thousand (86% increase)
Muslims, plus 235 thousand (45% increase)


Source? Specifically that this was a widespread pattern of Jews, outnumbered five to one, "bullying" residents of the region they were lucky enough to take refuge in? Current nativist fears in regions like America and Europe would imply that the opposite was more likely the case, even before considering the prior history of anti-semitism in the Arab world.


Haganah (literally, The Defence): "Formed [in 1920] out of previous existing militias, its original purpose was to defend Jewish settlements from Arab attacks, such as the riots of 1920, 1921, 1929 and during the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine."

Lehi, often known pejoratively as the Stern Gang, split from Irgun in 1940. Irgun, formed in 1931: "Leaders within the mainstream Jewish organizations, the Jewish Agency, Haganah and Histadrut, as well as the British authorities, routinely condemned Irgun operations as terrorism and branded it an illegal organization as a result of the group's attacks on civilian targets.[86]"

You seem to have absorbed quite a bit of misinformation/revisionist history from somewhere, a simplistic, one-sided anti-Jewish narrative that even on its face should not be accepted by any reasonable person. Reality is always more complex than that. One might argue that increasing Jewish migration (and the condescending if not outright imperialist attitudes of some backers and leaders of Zionism) was understandably viewed as threatening by Palestinian locals. But that doesn't justify the apparent fact that in those early years after the Ottoman conquest the aggression and violence between the two groups was mostly carried out by Arabs against Jews - pretty much as anyone would expect who wasn't coming to the topic with entrenched biases - any more than increasing Jewish desperation in the lead-up, during and after the Holocaust justified the instances of excessive Jewish retaliation and terrorism.

It's hard to imagine how different things might have been had the people of Palestine been at least cautiously welcoming and receptive to the creation of a Jewish homeland in the 1920s, even if it was just a fifth of the territory: An established Palestinian state alongside Israel, less regional resentment and impetus for Arab-Nazi relations, perhaps a few hundred thousand more Jews managing to escape rather than dying in the Holocaust, no expulsion of Palestinians from Israel or Jews from Arab countries, no Arab-Israeli wars and all the fallout from them, perhaps less effective meddling in the Middle East by the cold war powers, less resentment to fuel Islamic terrorism...

The 245,000 increase is a lie.
 
Between 1914 and 1931, Palestine's population increased by around 50%, from 0.69 million to 1.03 million, distributed as follows:
Christians, plus 18 thousand
Jews, plus 81 thousand (86% increase)
Muslims, plus 235 thousand (45% increase)


Source? Specifically that this was a widespread pattern of Jews, outnumbered five to one, "bullying" residents of the region they were lucky enough to take refuge in? Current nativist fears in regions like America and Europe would imply that the opposite was more likely the case, even before considering the prior history of anti-semitism in the Arab world.


Haganah (literally, The Defence): "Formed [in 1920] out of previous existing militias, its original purpose was to defend Jewish settlements from Arab attacks, such as the riots of 1920, 1921, 1929 and during the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine."

Lehi, often known pejoratively as the Stern Gang, split from Irgun in 1940. Irgun, formed in 1931: "Leaders within the mainstream Jewish organizations, the Jewish Agency, Haganah and Histadrut, as well as the British authorities, routinely condemned Irgun operations as terrorism and branded it an illegal organization as a result of the group's attacks on civilian targets.[86]"

You seem to have absorbed quite a bit of misinformation/revisionist history from somewhere, a simplistic, one-sided anti-Jewish narrative that even on its face should not be accepted by any reasonable person. Reality is always more complex than that. One might argue that increasing Jewish migration (and the condescending if not outright imperialist attitudes of some backers and leaders of Zionism) was understandably viewed as threatening by Palestinian locals. But that doesn't justify the apparent fact that in those early years after the Ottoman conquest the aggression and violence between the two groups was mostly carried out by Arabs against Jews - pretty much as anyone would expect who wasn't coming to the topic with entrenched biases - any more than increasing Jewish desperation in the lead-up, during and after the Holocaust justified the instances of excessive Jewish retaliation and terrorism.

It's hard to imagine how different things might have been had the people of Palestine been at least cautiously welcoming and receptive to the creation of a Jewish homeland in the 1920s, even if it was just a fifth of the territory: An established Palestinian state alongside Israel, less regional resentment and impetus for Arab-Nazi relations, perhaps a few hundred thousand more Jews managing to escape rather than dying in the Holocaust, no expulsion of Palestinians from Israel or Jews from Arab countries, no Arab-Israeli wars and all the fallout from them, perhaps less effective meddling in the Middle East by the cold war powers, less resentment to fuel Islamic terrorism...
Would you have been welcoming if immigrants forcibly took your property?
 
Is there any scenario in which Palestinians could resist the Israeli occupation, theft and annexation of land without being labeled a terrorist?
They can't resist theft that doesn't exist, they can peacefully protest however whatever they like and many do. Those who murder innocent civilians because they are born to a certain ethnicity or religion are terrorists.
 
They can't resist theft that doesn't exist,

So all of the land belongs to Israel?

they can peacefully protest however whatever they like and many do. Those who murder innocent civilians because they are born to a certain ethnicity or religion are terrorists.

Great, so Israel is definitionally a terrorist state.
 
So all of the land belongs to Israel?



Great, so Israel is definitionally a terrorist state.
The land that makes the nation known as Israel belongs to that nation, yes. Theft is when one steals something that is owned by another away.
And again, when a Palestinian targets innocents for murder he is first of all simply a vile murderer who needs to be put down, and then also a terrorist, yes.
 
The land that makes the nation known as Israel belongs to that nation, yes. Theft is when one steals something that is owned by another away.
And again, when a Palestinian targets innocents for murder he is first of all simply a vile murderer who needs to be put down, and then also a terrorist, yes.
European and American history is replete with facts concerning the slughter of innocent civilians. Were any American soldiers put down for what happened at My Lai and other localities in S.E. Asia? I don't remember any, do you?
 
The land that makes the nation known as Israel belongs to that nation, yes. Theft is when one steals something that is owned by another away.

So when Israel illegally removes occupied Palestinians from their homes, replacing them with Israeli settlers, that's not stealing?

And again, when a Palestinian targets innocents for murder he is first of all simply a vile murderer who needs to be put down, and then also a terrorist, yes.

Murdering civilians is literal Israeli policy. Look up Mowing the Lawn.
 
So when Israel illegally removes occupied Palestinians from their homes, replacing them with Israeli settlers, that's not stealing?



Murdering civilians is literal Israeli policy. Look up Mowing the Lawn.
When did Israel remove Palestinians from their homes and move settlers into those homes? That's quite the stupid blood libel.
Israel targets terrorists, which is self-defense. It doesn't target civilians. Palestinian Islamist terrorists target civilians for murder.
 
European and American history is replete with facts concerning the slughter of innocent civilians. Were any American soldiers put down for what happened at My Lai and other localities in S.E. Asia? I don't remember any, do you?
History is filled with dark moments. When examining the morality of the current armed forces of the civilized democracies, I think the "moral high ground" is a crystal clear fact, especially compared to their enemies from the dictatorships, theocracies and autocracies like Russia, Iran, China, North Korea, Syria, etc.
 
Would you have been welcoming if immigrants
Yes. As I pointed out several times, in our western countries the contrary attitude tends to be championed by right-wing white nativists, so I tend to take the opposite approach.

forcibly took your property?
You earlier claimed that Jewish refugees to Palestine in the 1910s and 20s, outnumbered five- or ten-to-one, immediately "began mocking and bullying the Arab natives." You've failed to substantiate that claim, but now you're going to upgrade it to claims that they were forcibly taking property too. Is it going to be blood libel next?

Apparently early zionist migrants purchased quite a lot of property, which was often from absentee landlords due to prior Ottoman administration and resulted in evictions of Arab tenants. Even if legal, and even if those numbers affected were only a small fraction of the total Arab population, that's still obviously not ideal and helped fuel local fears and resentment. However trying to turn the complexities of reality into a simplistic anti-Jewish villain story just isn't okay.
 
Last edited:
When did Israel remove Palestinians from their homes and move settlers into those homes?

You'd have to be blind to be living in Israel to not know that Israel has been engaging in ethnic cleansing for decades.




That's quite the stupid blood libel.
Israel targets terrorists, which is self-defense. It doesn't target civilians. Palestinian Islamist terrorists target civilians for murder.

Israel has some of the most sophisticated targeting systems and weaponry on the planet, and yet they can't help slaughtering civilians. I guess that's what happens when you fire into a ****ing prison.
 
You'd have to be blind to be living in Israel to not know that Israel has been engaging in ethnic cleansing for decades.






Israel has some of the most sophisticated targeting systems and weaponry on the planet, and yet they can't help slaughtering civilians. I guess that's what happens when you fire into a ****ing prison.
You claimed Israel was removing Palestinians from their homes and placing settlers in those houses instead.
Your article speaks of Israel removing illegal settlers from Palestinian-owned lands, not houses and not settlers Israel inserted into those houses after removing Palestinians from those houses that are theirs.
Your claim was wrong and an empty blood libel, and a stupid one too.
Israel's military is advanced. That doesn't mean that the tragedy that is collateral damage is unique only to the armed forces of the US, UK, France, etc.
Israel doesn't target civilians and the Palestinian terrorists do.
 
Yes. As I pointed out several times, in our western countries the contrary attitude tends to be championed by right-wing white nativists, so I tend to take the opposite approach.


You earlier claimed that Jewish refugees to Palestine in the 1910s and 20s, outnumbered five- or ten-to-one, immediately "began mocking and bullying the Arab natives." You've failed to substantiate that claim, but now you're going to upgrade it to claims that they were forcibly taking property too. Is it going to be blood libel next?

Apparently early zionist migrants purchased quite a lot of property, which was often from absentee landlords due to prior Ottoman administration and resulted in evictions of Arab tenants. Even if legal, and even if those numbers affected were only a small fraction of the total Arab population, that's still obviously not ideal and helped fuel local fears and resentment. However trying to turn the complexities of reality into a simplistic anti-Jewish villain story just isn't okay.

The Zionists had purchased less than 7% of the land byb1948?

See Zionist Aspirations in the, July 1920.

 
You claimed Israel was removing Palestinians from their homes and placing settlers in those houses instead.

I don't know how much clearer I can make it.



Your claim was wrong and an empty blood libel, and a stupid one too.
Israel's military is advanced. That doesn't mean that the tragedy that is collateral damage is unique only to the armed forces of the US, UK, France, etc.
Israel doesn't target civilians and the Palestinian terrorists do.

Absolutely they do. They've also targeted journalists. I mean, come on.
 
They can't resist theft that doesn't exist, they can peacefully protest however whatever they like and many do. Those who murder innocent civilians because they are born to a certain ethnicity or religion are terrorists.
Peaceful? The Zionists looted and destroyed over 300 Arab villages.

This isn't about religion. Israel wants more land and water assets.
 
You claimed Israel was removing Palestinians from their homes and placing settlers in those houses instead.
Your article speaks of Israel removing illegal settlers from Palestinian-owned lands, not houses and not settlers Israel inserted into those houses after removing Palestinians from those houses that are theirs.
Your claim was wrong and an empty blood libel, and a stupid one too.
Israel's military is advanced. That doesn't mean that the tragedy that is collateral damage is unique only to the armed forces of the US, UK, France, etc.
Israel doesn't target civilians and the Palestinian terrorists do.

They did that.. and recently they tore down many houses that were over 400 years old to build cheap government apartments for the ultra Orthodox in East Jerusalem.
 
It's not. Only dishonest people say such things.

Concern about antisemitism in the U.S. has grown following recent rises in deadly assaults, vandalism, and harassment. Public accounts of antisemitism have focused on both the ideological right and left, suggesting a “horseshoe theory” in which the far left and the far right hold a common set of anti-Jewish prejudicial attitudes that distinguish them from the ideological center. However, there is little quantitative research evaluating left-wing versus right-wing antisemitism. We conduct several experiments on an original survey of 3500 U.S. adults, including an oversample of young adults. We oversampled young adults because unlike other forms of prejudice that are more common among older people, antisemitism is theorized to be more common among younger people. Contrary to the expectation of horseshoe theory, the data show the epicenter of antisemitic attitudes is young adults on the far right.
 
I don't know how much clearer I can make it.





Absolutely they do. They've also targeted journalists. I mean, come on.
In order to be "clear" on your statement that Israel is evicting Palestinians from their homes and settles Jews to live in those homes instead, you need to show at least one such case. You've done no such thing. You can't do such thing because it's a blood libel similar to the beloved claim that Jews make matzo balls from Christian children blood. It's also just as stupid.

Israel didn't target any journalist. A journalist dying in a war zone doesn't mean they were being targeted.
People who want to bend reality to fit their radical views might think like that.
 
Peaceful? The Zionists looted and destroyed over 300 Arab villages.

This isn't about religion. Israel wants more land and water assets.
Israel wants to defend its citizens from Islamist terrorism and will continue to do so obviously.
 
They did that.. and recently they tore down many houses that were over 400 years old to build cheap government apartments for the ultra Orthodox in East Jerusalem.
Every country in the world destroys houses that are built without a permit.
 
In order to be "clear" on your statement that Israel is evicting Palestinians from their homes and settles Jews to live in those homes instead, you need to show at least one such case. You've done no such thing. You can't do such thing because it's a blood libel similar to the beloved claim that Jews make matzo balls from Christian children blood. It's also just as stupid.

Israel didn't target any journalist. A journalist dying in a war zone doesn't mean they were being targeted.
People who want to bend reality to fit their radical views might think like that.
They sure killed Rachel Corrie. That's not blood libel.

Ariel Sharon's butchery wasn't blood libel. Taking over East Jerusalem wasn't blood libel.
 
Back
Top Bottom