Zimmerman, in his one-eyed perspectives, always ignores that the settlements are not a transfer of ownership, they’re a transfer of sovereignty, equivalent to Mexicans moving to Texas, setting up a community and – with the support of the Mexican Government –
declaring it to be part of Mexico.
For this reason the comparisons Zimmerman draws between the West Bank settlements and other immigrant populations (he argues that Palestinians objecting to the settlements is evidence of blatant antisemitism) is nonsense as the people of any country would object, as the Palestinians do, to such a unilateral transfer of sovereignty and almost certainly resort to force, if it were necessary, to prevent such a transfer of sovereignty.
equivalent to Mexicans moving to Texas, setting up a community and
They did move to Texas. Then they revolted against Mexico.
they’re a transfer of sovereignty
The “Palestinians” never had sovereignty. Such a group as portrayed by the use of the word today, never existed. They were citizens of other countries.
The Palestinian territories are not a sovereign nation so the basic premise of your comment is bollocks. Israelis in the West Bank are not “immigrants,” they’re the equivalent of Americans living in the territorial West of the late 19th or early 20th centuries, or of Americans living in Alaska and Hawaii prior to 1959.
Even if there was a sovereign “Palestine,” the settlements would be amply justified as war reparations. It has often been the case, historically, that nations which lose wars also lose territory to the victors. When the loser is also the one that launched the conflict, this loss is a simply a matter of just desserts.
The “Palestinians” have participated, enthusiastically, in several wars against Israel started by others and have, on their own, also launched at least two wars (intifadas) against Israel. As perennial losers, the Palestinians richly deserve their territorial losses.
In fact, they deserve to lose even more. The Israelis would be completely within their rights to take the entire West Bank, plus Gaza and expel all the current “Palestinian” residents to Syria.
In fact, they deserve to lose even more. The Israelis would be completely within their rights to take the entire West Bank, plus Gaza and expel all the current “Palestinian” residents to Syria.
Especially considering that the West Bank and Gaza were part of Israel prior to Arab invasions.
Palestine, as it is portrayed today is a figment of the imagination. Palestine, and Palestinians, used to refer to the Jews and where they lived. Prior to the current situation, the Arabs living there were citizens of the neighboring countries. Prior to that they were citizens of the Ottoman Empire.
When Germany lost their wars, they had to give up land. Why is it crazy that the Ottomans were expected too? And since the Arabs expelled the Jews, why wouldn’t a similar population displacement be ok going the other way?
The majority of countries in the world recognize Palestine as a sovereign state.
Your might-is-right argument could also be used to justify the holocaust or any number of other instances in which persecution has be argued as justified.
A majority of countries are various forms of dictatorships and thugocracies that hate the West and Israel.
Civilized people stand for freedom and self determination for all, fascists and totalitarians stand for freedom for some and subjugation of others.
The “Palestinians” (they’re just Arabs) don’t want freedom and self determination; they want to drive the Jews into the sea.
“they’re just Arabs” which, what, makes them less human than Israelis and Americans?
This delusion that people in other countries are always out to get Americans, Israelis, Germans etc is the usual justification for oppression. The irony is that it’s the oppressors who are always using it, Hitler used it to subjugate the Jews, He argued that he was only protecting the Germany people from the evil Jews, now Israeli’s use the same argument to justify their own oppression of another people.
“they’re just Arabs” which, what, makes them less human than Israelis and Americans?
No, it makes them not special in their justification to be allowed to drive the Jews into the sea.
So the Israelis oppression of the Palestinians is self defense, just as Hitler justified his barbarism as self defense.
To the degree that Israel “oppresses” the “Palestinians,” (they treat them better than any Arab country does), pretty much yes. They have been under an existential threat from them for going on seven decades now. But I understand your utter ignorance of the history of the region.
Rather curiously this is how Texas itself started. I still think its a bogus landgrab though.
Zimmerman, in his one-eyed perspectives, always ignores that the settlements are not a transfer of ownership, they’re a transfer of sovereignty, equivalent to Mexicans moving to Texas, setting up a community and – with the support of the Mexican Government –
declaring it to be part of Mexico.
For this reason the comparisons Zimmerman draws between the West Bank settlements and other immigrant populations (he argues that Palestinians objecting to the settlements is evidence of blatant antisemitism) is nonsense as the people of any country would object, as the Palestinians do, to such a unilateral transfer of sovereignty and almost certainly resort to force, if it were necessary, to prevent such a transfer of sovereignty.
equivalent to Mexicans moving to Texas, setting up a community and
They did move to Texas. Then they revolted against Mexico.
they’re a transfer of sovereignty
The “Palestinians” never had sovereignty. Such a group as portrayed by the use of the word today, never existed. They were citizens of other countries.
The Palestinian territories are not a sovereign nation so the basic premise of your comment is bollocks. Israelis in the West Bank are not “immigrants,” they’re the equivalent of Americans living in the territorial West of the late 19th or early 20th centuries, or of Americans living in Alaska and Hawaii prior to 1959.
Even if there was a sovereign “Palestine,” the settlements would be amply justified as war reparations. It has often been the case, historically, that nations which lose wars also lose territory to the victors. When the loser is also the one that launched the conflict, this loss is a simply a matter of just desserts.
The “Palestinians” have participated, enthusiastically, in several wars against Israel started by others and have, on their own, also launched at least two wars (intifadas) against Israel. As perennial losers, the Palestinians richly deserve their territorial losses.
In fact, they deserve to lose even more. The Israelis would be completely within their rights to take the entire West Bank, plus Gaza and expel all the current “Palestinian” residents to Syria.
In fact, they deserve to lose even more. The Israelis would be completely within their rights to take the entire West Bank, plus Gaza and expel all the current “Palestinian” residents to Syria.
Especially considering that the West Bank and Gaza were part of Israel prior to Arab invasions.
Palestine, as it is portrayed today is a figment of the imagination. Palestine, and Palestinians, used to refer to the Jews and where they lived. Prior to the current situation, the Arabs living there were citizens of the neighboring countries. Prior to that they were citizens of the Ottoman Empire.
When Germany lost their wars, they had to give up land. Why is it crazy that the Ottomans were expected too? And since the Arabs expelled the Jews, why wouldn’t a similar population displacement be ok going the other way?
The majority of countries in the world recognize Palestine as a sovereign state.
Your might-is-right argument could also be used to justify the holocaust or any number of other instances in which persecution has be argued as justified.
A majority of countries are various forms of dictatorships and thugocracies that hate the West and Israel.
Civilized people stand for freedom and self determination for all, fascists and totalitarians stand for freedom for some and subjugation of others.
The “Palestinians” (they’re just Arabs) don’t want freedom and self determination; they want to drive the Jews into the sea.
“they’re just Arabs” which, what, makes them less human than Israelis and Americans?
This delusion that people in other countries are always out to get Americans, Israelis, Germans etc is the usual justification for oppression. The irony is that it’s the oppressors who are always using it, Hitler used it to subjugate the Jews, He argued that he was only protecting the Germany people from the evil Jews, now Israeli’s use the same argument to justify their own oppression of another people.
“they’re just Arabs” which, what, makes them less human than Israelis and Americans?
No, it makes them not special in their justification to be allowed to drive the Jews into the sea.
So the Israelis oppression of the Palestinians is self defense, just as Hitler justified his barbarism as self defense.
To the degree that Israel “oppresses” the “Palestinians,” (they treat them better than any Arab country does), pretty much yes. They have been under an existential threat from them for going on seven decades now. But I understand your utter ignorance of the history of the region.
Rather curiously this is how Texas itself started. I still think its a bogus landgrab though.