Some joyous tidings from Israel

[Hooahguy]

No its not by anyone outside of israel.

fixed it for ya. but realize that saying "anyone" you mean governments, not people. im sure there are many all over the world who say that jeruslaem is the capital of israel.

I'm pretty sure Tel Aviv is meant to be that capitol of Israel but after the war Israel decided to keep the city as their little war trophy. In reality as the original partition suggests Jerusalem should be a U.N administrated neutral city but hey, Israel just thought they'd keep it. Jerusalem shouldn't even be in their hands but hey as the ruling Israelis would say "land, land , land."

not a trophy. in jerusalem is the holiest site in judaism, the western wall. considering the UN is pretty inept, do you think that they would keep it an international city? i think not. most likely jews and arabs would be shooting at each other while the UN peace keepers would stand down, since they havent been fired upon. at least thats what they did in Rwanda, AFAIK.

Of course we don't think it belongs to Israel, Palestinians had to go through metal detectors to enter the second holiest mosque in Islam. Not only that, but they were massacred in it.
Frankly, I don't put the whole blame on Israel due to what happened recently, just most of it. I admire the fact that a single Israeli is enough for them to go crazy. At least they're not sitting on their asses while their brothers are being massacred.

you forget that before israel was established jews, to visit THE HOLIEST site in Judaism they had to pass through hostile arabs neighborhoods, and one Rosh HAshanah, the jewish new year, they were massacred by arabs at the Western Wall. btw i thought the Masjid Al-Aqsa was the THIRD most holy site to islam.

Hey man, give peace a chance.

let hamas give peace a chance first.

Wrong. The attacks were a consequence, not a cause. The problems began when the UN created a country where it shouldn't have created, and illegitimately, because by doing so, they'd have to create a bucketload more of countries whose people also want independence. If, instead of Israel, there had been a joint Arab-Jew Palestine, then there would have been no attack. But the jews wanted a country of their own, where they wouldn't have to share power with the arabs.

how could it be joint-arab jew if a bit before that there were riots on both sides against the other? the people at the UN recognized this. it wasnt as if they were living in peace only until Israel was created. the result was that former Palestine was split up into two, and jordan was given as a whole to the palestinians.

Israel is an apartheid state founded on ethnic cleansing. On top of which it is aggressive and expansionist and has killed over 3000 Palestinians in the last few years. It isn't that suprising that it gets a hundred or so casualties from Palestinian attacks. They are just lucky in their enemies. The Palestinian strategy is stuck in a losing rut.

really? i idnt see any death camps for palestinians.
nor do i see them aggressively expanding as of now. if they were, wed have syria, lebabnon, jordan and id wager much of egypt.

and if the palestinians were in a losing rut, wouldnt it make sense for them to lay down their arms. oh wait- thats unreasonable to ask of hamas.
i guarantee you that if the palestinians would lay down their arms, israel would to. they would live peacefully together if the arabs stopped aiming for our destruction.

[rory_20_uk]

The West bank is a concentration camp: borders sealed, little food in. Random deaths from outside with no warning. I imagine that when the ground offensive starts for many it will be a death camp.

[Hooahguy]

The West bank is a concentration camp: borders sealed, little food in. Random deaths from outside with no warning. I imagine that when the ground offensive starts for many it will be a death camp.

um, no its not. IMO, comparing the west bank to concentration camps is incedibly offensive to me and those who have lost ancestors to the nazis.

[rory_20_uk]

um, no its not. IMO, comparing the west bank to concentration camps is incedibly offensive to me and those who have lost ancestors to the nazis.

Concentration camps happened elsewhere you know. South Africa, Cuba, Russia to name a few. People are being concentrated in an area

Are you referring to the extermination camps? This is a comparison I did not make.

Your indignation doesn't alter that this IMO is a fair comparison. I'm not going to let past events influence how I react to todays occurences. Israel / Jews don't get carte blanche based on one terrible episode under the one regime however horriffic it was.

[rasoforos]

um, no its not. IMO, comparing the west bank to concentration camps is incedibly offensive to me and those who have lost ancestors to the nazis.

Imagine how offensive Israel's actions are to the people who gave their lives so your ancestors were able to survive to have descendants.

With closed borders, restriction in water electricity etc the palestinian areas are concentration camps. There is no escape from Gaza.

A few days ago a ship carrying aid, doctors and journalists was rammed by the Israeli navy in international waters just because it was heading for Gaza. Israel makes a point about maximizing the suffering of civilians.

The current state of Gaza does draw Holocaust parallels. Denying it is happening draws its own parallels too.

[Fragony]

Imagine how offensive Israel's actions are to the people who gave their lives so your ancestors were able to survive to have descendants.

With closed borders, restriction in water electricity etc the palestinian areas are concentration camps. There is no escape from Gaza.

A few days ago a ship carrying aid, doctors and journalists was rammed by the Israeli navy in international waters just because it was heading for Gaza. Israel makes a point about maximizing the suffering of civilians.

The current state of Gaza does draw Holocaust parallels. Denying it is happening draws its own parallels too.

Called a blockade perfectly normal in wartime, and it is a good thing the Palestinians have something to think about. I would imagine that the people surviving the holocaust would be blessed with a very keen sense for survival and Israel shows it does without being anything near what the nazi's were trying to establish. Again: sooooooooooooooooooooo soooooooo unfair give them nosy's a break already if they would be anything remotely like the nazi's there wouldn't be any arabs.

[Hooahguy]

Imagine how offensive Israel's actions are to the people who gave their lives so your ancestors were able to survive to have descendants.

With closed borders, restriction in water electricity etc the palestinian areas are concentration camps. There is no escape from Gaza.

A few days ago a ship carrying aid, doctors and journalists was rammed by the Israeli navy in international waters just because it was heading for Gaza. Israel makes a point about maximizing the suffering of civilians.

The current state of Gaza does draw Holocaust parallels. Denying it is happening draws its own parallels too.

ignore the fact that it was an unmarked vessel, when only red cross and the like vessels are allowed in. ignore the fact that the ship refused to make radio contact with the israeli navy, ignore the fact that israel cant afford to assume things. for all they know, the vessel had weapons in it.
my former congresswoman, Cynthia McKinney (who is rumored to be an anti-semite after some controversial comments about jews in an election to the state legislature, and has some issues with the capitol hill police) was on that boat. im glad they rammed it.

about drawing parallels to gaza with the holocaust:

im sorry, you really cant. the holocaust was a genocide. whats happening in gaza isnt a genocide- to say that it is one is just wrong. we arent rounding up palestinians and shooting them. there is no ethnic cleansing. to say there is, then i suggest you actually go to israel, tour the land, ask a few israeli-palestinians about the "genocide" there, then come back talk. ive done that already.
i suggest you take an in-depth course on the Holocaust. then maybe you will change your view.

[rasoforos]

we arent rounding up palestinians and shooting them.

So Gaza isnt one one of the most densely populated areas in the world and Palestinians can freely walk in and out of it and into Israel whenever they want...

there is no ethnic cleansing.

No. Israel carpetbombs criminal elements in its non-Palestinian territories as well I suppose.

to say there is, then i suggest you actually go to israel, tour the land, ask a few israeli-palestinians about the "genocide" there, then come back talk.

I wouldn't want to give money to a regime that does things I do not approve. From a historical perspective I would love to when there is peace and a fair solution.

(i.e the Sumerians gain control because they were there first or something )

i suggest you take an in-depth course on the Holocaust. then maybe you will change your view.

Do u really think that if I know more about the techniques the Nazis used to murder Jewish people I will gain an appreciation for the techniques Israel used to murder Palestinians? (Or the techniques Palestinians use to kill Israelis?).

Its murder of innocent people, people who have no possibility of escape and are considered second class citizens, people who due to their religious background are uniformly considered dangerous to the state.

My point is that from a people that suffered so much, such brutal actions bring only shame. I dont give a rat's whether (and I don't think) they are the same. But they are both atrocities and both have deniers (and that parallel I will draw, I don't want or need to draw more because that is not my point). And I condemn both.

[Hooahguy]

I wouldn't want to give money to a regime that does things I do not approve. From a historical perspective I would love to when there is peace and a fair solution.

then how can you be a fair judge on the situation? the way i see it, you are only hearing this from the media, who isnt always bias-free on either side. the best way to asses a situation is if you go there. why do you think so many people looking for a resolution to conflicts actually go to the place on conflict? sitting at a comfy desk at a computer doesnt cut it.

Do u really think that if I know more about the techniques the Nazis used to murder Jewish people I will gain an appreciation for the techniques Israel used to murder Palestinians? (Or the techniques Palestinians use to kill Israelis?).

no, but it will make you realize that how the holocaust cant compare to the treatment of palestinians.

[tibilicus]

um, no its not. IMO, comparing the west bank to concentration camps is incedibly offensive to me and those who have lost ancestors to the nazis.

If you don't want to call it a concentration camp call it the worlds largest cesspool. What you have to remember is that most of the people in Gaza aren't originally from Gaza but more people thrown of their land and people who have been evicted from their homes all because of the influx of Israeli immigrants who needed that land.

If you look at what hamas are doing they're simply performing the basic task by any organization to have their homeland restored to them these are;

1: A war of attrition against enemy personnel based on causing as many deaths as possible so as to create a demand from their people at home for their withdrawal.

2: A bombing campaign aimed at making the enemy's financial interests in our country unprofitable while at the same time curbing long term investment in our country.

3: To make the territories ungovernable except by military rule.

4: To sustain the war and gain support for its ends by National and International propaganda and publicity campaigns.

5:By defending the war of liberation by punishing criminals, collaborators and informers

I know if I had my house taken of me by some Israeli and was thrown into this cesspool I would happily pick up an AK 47 and attack the people who took my house.

Do you honestly blame hamas for this?

[seireikhaan]

let hamas give peace a chance first.

That's just being lazy. As Israel holds about 97% of the chips in this, the onus is on them to be the better man and "give peace a chance". If Israel adopted a pacifist, ultra-defensive approach, not launching air strikes, not blockading some one million people into a tiny little patch of utterly undesirable land, and the Palestinians continue their rocket attacks for a prolonged period, THEN you can say that Hamas must give peace a chance.

[rvg]

That's just being lazy. As Israel holds about 97% of the chips in this, the onus is on them to be the better man and "give peace a chance". If Israel adopted a pacifist, ultra-defensive approach, not launching air strikes, not blockading some one million people into a tiny little patch of utterly undesirable land, and the Palestinians continue their rocket attacks for a prolonged period, THEN you can say that Hamas must give peace a chance.

Nah. Israel is not in the business of being "a better man". Israel is in the business of defending its citizens, since unlike Hamas, Israel actually values the lives of its people. If being a "better man" means sitting dily and letting Hamas cause trouble, then screw it. Toothless morality is worthless morality. Let Hamas cry victim and wait out the offensive in bunkers. They can have that moral high ground (if one indeed could call it that), while Israel will be satisfied with having the land and the power. The bottomline is that Hamas does not care about the lives of the people it rules over. To Hamas, the Gazan population is merely expendable cattle that can be sacrificed for perceived political gains. Israel might be the regional boogeyman, but at least it cares about its own people, something that Hamas would be wise to replicate.

[FactionHeir]

Nah. Israel is not in the business of being "a better man". Israel is in the business of defending its citizens, since unlike Hamas, Israel actually values the lives of its people. If being a "better man" means sitting dily and letting Hamas cause trouble, then screw it. Toothless morality is worthless morality. Let Hamas cry victim and wait out the offensive in bunkers. They can have that moral high ground (if one indeed could call it that), while Israel will be satisfied with having the land and the power. The bottomline is that Hamas does not care about the lives of the people it rules over. To Hamas, the Gazan population is merely expendable cattle that can be sacrificed for perceived political gains. Israel might be the regional boogeyman, but at least it cares about its own people, something that Hamas would be wise to replicate.

Actually, as I said previously, the "international" community and Israel boycotted and blockaded Gaza once Hamas won their democratic elections because of their social institutions and because they cared for the people. They didn't even fire a rocket at that time until no aid came in and attacks on them continued.

Besides, they kept the 6 month cease fire fairly well and did what they could to enforce it. Read the wiki article I linked to.

[seireikhaan]

Nah. Israel is not in the business of being "a better man". Israel is in the business of defending its citizens, since unlike Hamas, Israel actually values the lives of its people. If being a "better man" means sitting dily and letting Hamas cause trouble, then screw it. Toothless morality is worthless morality. Let Hamas cry victim and wait out the offensive in bunkers. They can have that moral high ground (if one indeed could call it that), while Israel will be satisfied with having the land and the power. The bottomline is that Hamas does not care about the lives of the people it rules over. To Hamas, the Gazan population is merely expendable cattle that can be sacrificed for perceived political gains. Israel might be the regional boogeyman, but at least it cares about its own people, something that Hamas would be wise to replicate.

Whoever said ANYTHING about morality, about rights, or any of the such? I'm talking about results. Tribes nailed the problem. What about Israel's tactics have successful in dissolving this conflict? NOT A THING. The conflict continues to spiral even further into tit-for-tat life trading despite Israeli air strikes, blockades, and property destruction. As Seamus quite accurately noted, the only alternative to a pacifist resolution to this conflict is all out ethnic cleansing of more than a million people, and maybe far more depending on what the reaction to said efforts is by the Arab/Islamic community. Tell me, which is a more appealing option to you? A few (ten?) thousand dead, or millions?

[rvg]

Whoever said ANYTHING about morality, about rights, or any of the such? I'm talking about results. Tribes nailed the problem. What about Israel's tactics have successful in dissolving this conflict? NOT A THING. The conflict continues to spiral even further into tit-for-tat life trading despite Israeli air strikes, blockades, and property destruction. As Seamus quite accurately noted, the only alternative to a pacifist resolution to this conflict is all out ethnic cleansing of more than a million people, and maybe far more depending on what the reaction to said efforts is by the Arab/Islamic community. Tell me, which is a more appealing option to you? A few (ten?) thousand dead, or millions?

The way I see it, conflict resolution would be nice, but it really is not Israel's primary goal. Survival is Israel's primary goal, and so far they've been surviving just fine. Peace *would* have made things easier, but they can live without it. Also, Palestinians have been split into Hamas and Fatah camps not only ideologically but now also geographically. Now Israel can point at the West Bank and say to the world: "Look, Fatah is staying civil, and we are staying civil in return. Hamas throws a tantrum and we get medieval on their ." If Fatah can be pacified separately, it makes things that much easier and brings peace that much closer. As for which option would *I* prefer? I'd prefer that Brits had never left the area, but that's just me.

[LeftEyeNine]

Keep on with your "they need rockets" politics and the righteousness of Israel and the very collapse of your so called "civilizations" since 9/11...

http://fotogaleri.ntvmsnbc.com/detay...3&picID=0&dp=1

...while I get disgusted as hell with your unsurpassed inhumanity.

[Fragony]

Not my world just living there and the world is a cruel place. Having a really hard time actually caring about even the children which is sick as can be but this is the moral credit crisis for the Palestinians and I don't feel responsible at all, people shouldn't cry after hitting someone, everybody should have seen this comming, if you absolutely insist on a fight you can't win, well that's gene-theory.

edit, ok that is terrible but I mean it's what they always wanted, the pity of the world, but they have gone too far and lost it. I can't sympathise with these people and their sorrow. If you burn your you have to sit on the blisters, dutch proverb.

[LittleGrizzly]

I don't see why everyopne gets upset about valid comparisons to concentration camps, though the most hurtful insults are quite often the truest i guess...

Both leaders are muderous thugs and both countrys (whatever you want to call the 2 palestinian area's + israel) are filled with vengeful hateful people, there are plenty on both sides who want peace but unfortunatly extremity seems to win out in both cases, Hamas because they provide social programs for the people with money from backers against israel, so thats going to leave any populace who doesn't have anyone else to look out for them in to the hands of extremists... and don't mention the PLO, israel had years to work with them, but decided not go down thier own route, and look at result, Hamas. Israel for reasons i don't understand has also gone to extremity, though people mention coalitions causing fringe elements to have more power.... both these goverments democratically elected through the will of thier own people...

Well i think screw the free will of both people's. I don't want my goverment working with either butchers, the world in unison should cut both israel and palestine off (i would be happy to send food aid and other basic essentials to any who need it in the countrys) they not only cause huge problems to themselves but they inflict this crap on the rest of us, Iraq... 9/11... and why the middle east is filled with dictators. It isn't solely down to israel and palestine conflict but it shares a large responsibility in each case

The dictators one is arguable but it has certaintly been an obstacle to reform as dictators instead concentrate peoples mind on the enemy

Blame can be shared all round but if were going to talk about the 2 countrys making a peace themselves then thew ball is firmly in israel's court, with the continuation of israeli tactics the palestine population is only going to get more extreme, anyone somehow hoping the palestinians will suddenly accept what has happened and reject violence en masse are waiting for hell to freeze over, as a state israel has the power to stop the violence, palestine in its current state can no way stop the conflict. Hell, i don't now about you but if a foriegn state starting bombing my country because it didn't like our democratically elected leaders it would only sure up thier support, even for myself i would be more inclined to vote for them rather than agreeing with those bombing me who want a different result.

Of course there is 1 other option, mass murder, but unless israel want to be become mass murderers they're going to have to go for peace.... although i guess status qou could be seen as another option....

people shouldn't cry after hitting someone

So you will feel equally unfeeling to israelis crying about thier losses in the latest retaliation ?

As far as im concerned they are both equally undeserving of death, it is why i tend to end up on the palestinian side (even they they are wrong as well) as they have far worse casulties for thier eqaul wrongness...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Logistics, not tactics.....Israel is doomed to a slow spiral into dissolution.

1. They are grossly outnumbered and the native resources of the arab states around them are greater than those Israel can bring to bear. This places Israel in a long-term "behind the 8-ball" situation. To date, Israel has maintained an "edge" anyway by leveraging other factors.

2. Part of the edge Israel maintains despite this inequity of native resources is a result of US support. Efforts by various political elements throughout the West and throughout much of the Muslim world to decouple the US and Israel will bear increasing fruit as America's demographics change. Dwindling support will leave Israel on its own and that is a losing game in terms of resources.

3. Another part is the Israeli hyper-patriot doctrine coming out of the kibbutz era. This sense of patriotism and its "us" mentality is being eroded from within. Israel's "force multipliers" vis-a-vis the resource inequity are fading -- without a replacement on the horizon.

4. Palestinian motivation shows little signs of wavering or atenuating itself.


Suggested implications:


A. Removing US resources will result in the destruction of Israel, though not quite so quickly nor cleanly as Rory implies. The Israeli will to win is the component that can counteract this.

B. Israel itself is losing the will to win in the face of the horrific cost of victory -- terrorism is working in that it has shifted the primary focus of warfare onto the civilian populations -- and Israel is held to a different standard of behavior than is its opposition (by the Western media, by common morality).

C. Israel is progressively being placed into a forced choice scenario by its terror-tactic opponents: Lose or butcher everybody in the opposition (and I mean everybody -- a desert called peace).



As I don't believe that Israel is capable of eradicating the Palestinians, I must conclude that Israel will dwindle and, ultimately, dissolve. The Jews will be a minority ruled by arabs and there will be no uniquel Jewish state.




Stray thoughts:

The warlords are winning this one. One more joyous step towards barbarism.

[rvg]

...C. Israel is progressively being placed into a forced choice scenario by its terror-tactic opponents: Lose or butcher everybody in the opposition (and I mean everybody -- a desert called peace)...

So, they'll just butcher everyone. If Israel ever gets backed to the wall, nukes will fly (or drive, or even walk, doesn't matter), and the region will light up like a christmas tree. Jews didn't get their country through timidity, they conquered it and will fight to the last man to protect it. If that means that they'll have to kill millions to ensure their own survival as a state, so be it. Desperate times would call for desperate measures.

[FactionHeir]

and if the palestinians were in a losing rut, wouldnt it make sense for them to lay down their arms. oh wait- thats unreasonable to ask of hamas.
i guarantee you that if the palestinians would lay down their arms, israel would to. they would live peacefully together if the arabs stopped aiming for our destruction.

Except that it doesn't work. If all Palestinians laid down their arms, they wouldn't be welcomed into Israel because then Jews would be the minority rather than the majority. And they don't exactly want that last I checked. So the Palestinians would for the most part be deported off their rightful land and a few integrated as second class citizens.

[Guildenstern]

but countries have a duty to protect their citizens, no?

I think it is correct to say that Hamas's failure to cause significant Israeli casualties should not be a reason against Israel's military response. Hamas's rocket attacks, however ineffectual, are not merely hypothetical or potential. No nation should be expected to wait for an enemy's attacks to pass some threshold of deadliness before a response is warranted.

That said, I do not think it is utterly senseless to speak of the "proportionality" of Israel's response. In my opinion, Israel's response is "disproportionate" because it results to be more forceful than necessary to achieve its (justifiable) goal, which here is the defense of its territory. This sense of "disproportionality", I think, remains in the criticisms of these attacks, even after we reject the argument that the attacks are disproportionate because Hamas has generally been unable to kill many Israelis. In other words, I think the subject still needs to be addressed.

I think critics against the Israeli raids here are also responding to the sense that Israel's "military necessity" here seems largely the product of a situation Israel is substantially responsible for. Israel has turned Gaza into something resembling a prison camp, so that now even the entry of humanitarian aid into the country is a newsworthy event, to say nothing of regular economic activity or the remittance of money owed to Palestinians living there. This fact may or may not justify Hamas's violent resistance, but it certainly does suggest that Israel is not without non-violent alternatives to resolving this crisis.

Another factor here that makes the Israeli attacks unseemly is that they're probably substantially the product of electoral politics in Israel. Tzipi Livni in particular has an interest in casting herself as a strong leader ready to use military force against the Palestinians, since her main rival for the PM spot is Netanyahu. Given Israeli public frustration with perceived governmental inaction against the rocket attacks, it seems a particularly difficult time for a figure like Livni to urge restraint. So in my opinion critics, in calling Israel's attacks "disproportionate", are also responding to a perception that the attacks are in some sense politically motivated, as well.

I can not accept the argument that your ineffective military campaign against me prevents me from responding in an effective away against you. But I think the argument about "proportionality" here is really about many aspects of the conflict besides that illogical and unacceptable bit of reasoning. The "wisdom" or "long-term effectiveness" of Israel's action is not just an ancillary consideration. As far as I am concerned, it really lies at the center of the criticism.

[Jolt]

how could it be joint-arab jew if a bit before that there were riots on both sides against the other? the people at the UN recognized this. it wasnt as if they were living in peace only until Israel was created. the result was that former Palestine was split up into two, and jordan was given as a whole to the palestinians.

What did you expect? Arabs dominated and populated Palestine for more than 1000 years, and the jewish population in Palestine was minimal and suddenly in five decades (1950), the jewish population grows something like starts swelling like crazy, and were there were a few dozen thousand jewish, a very clear minority in Palestine, more than half a million jewish immigrants migrated to Palestine. Obviously the Arabs, who weren't even in control didn't like the jewish invasion and arabs and jews started to clash. In five decades, the Arab majority now had to deal with an increasingly radical jewish community, who because of their recent numbers now had the distinct nerve of asking for a nation of their own, on a ground which was ruled by arab kin for millenia. It is obvious that with the growth of Jewish migrants, so grew their boldness and their confrontation of the Arab population.

[rvg]

...In five decades, the Arab majority now had to deal with an increasingly radical jewish community, who because of their recent numbers now had the distinct nerve of asking for a nation of their own, on a ground which was ruled by arab kin for millenia...

If we start taking the route of historical claims, the Jews still win out since before Israel, British madate, Ottoman Empire, The Mamluks, The Crusaders, The Romans, The Macedonians, The Persians, The Chaldeans and The Assyrians, that land belonged to the Jews. Well, there were Canaanites before that, but they are all dead and cannot claim that land.

[LittleGrizzly]

If we start taking the route of historical claims, the Jews still win out since before Israel, British madate, Ottoman Empire, The Mamluks, The Crusaders, The Romans, The Macedonians, The Persians, The Chaldeans and The Assyrians, that land belonged to the Jews.

You don't notice a slight difference in people still living there now and people who are still alive having lived there and historical claims going back is it a 1000 years ?

Because one claim has a lot of sense to it... the other is quite frankly laughable...

[Jolt]

If we start taking the route of historical claims, the Jews still win out since before Israel, British madate, Ottoman Empire, The Mamluks, The Crusaders, The Romans, The Macedonians, The Persians, The Chaldeans and The Assyrians, that land belonged to the Jews. Well, there were Canaanites before that, but they are all dead and cannot claim that land.

Ooh! I know! What about Bulgars, Magyars (e.g. Hungarians), Polish, and basically every other Slavic and non-Slavic people inhabitting Eastern Europe start declaring that they want their homelands in Russia? Using that argument, they were there before the Russians. Doesn't matter if they left it, right? What about Native Americans? They were there before the United States of America, and since they still exist, and on the grounds of the reason you just gave, they have the historical claim and legitimacy to take large swaths of the United States and their own lands, on basis that they were there before the "Americans".

[rvg]

Ooh! I know! What about Bulgars, Magyars (e.g. Hungarians), Polish, and basically every other Slavic and non-Slavic people inhabitting Eastern Europe start declaring that they want their homelands in Russia? Using that argument, they were there before the Russians. Doesn't matter if they left it, right? What about Native Americans? They were there before the United States of America, and since they still exist, and on the grounds of the reason you just gave, they have the historical claim and legitimacy to take large swaths of the United States and their own lands, on basis that they were there before the "Americans".

Exactly.

[Jolt]

Exactly.

That is the problem. The claims that have been used to legitimize Israel would lead to the creation of a myriad other countries, and since the myriad countries will not be created since the very same governments who accept the reasons for the creation of Israel refuse for others to use those same reasons to create new nations on their own territory, one can only argue that the creation of Israel is an exception, and using the concept of jurisprudence, therefore illegal and illegitimate.

[rvg]

That is the problem. The claims that have been used to legitimize Israel would lead to the creation of a myriad other countries, and since the myriad countries will not be created since the very same governments who accept the reasons for the creation of Israel refuse for others to use those same reasons to create new nations on their own territory, one can only argue that the creation of Israel is an exception, and using the concept of jurisprudence, therefore illegal and illegitimate.

No, the problem is that historical claims in general are absurd and irrelevant. As such, the Palestinian claim of owning that land is as worthless as the possible Hungarian claim of the Urals or the Jewish claim. It doesn't matter who was there first or who has lived there for centuries. The only thing that matters is who owns it now. Such is the nature of land grabs throughout the history.