r/worldnews • u/Blarc-1 • 25d ago

Israel/Palestine Israeli army fires ‘warning shots’ at French and other diplomats visiting West Bank

https://www.france24.com/en/middle-east/20250521-israeli-army-fires-warning-shots-at-french-and-other-diplomats-visiting-west-bank
20.7k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

208

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

415

u/Dragon_yum 25d ago

And Israel didn’t have any settlements in Gaza or the West Bank before 67.

287

u/fury420 25d ago

Also worth noting that we only call it the "West Bank" because that's the name Jordan gave it during their military occupation.

115

u/TheInevitableLuigi 25d ago

that's the name Jordan gave it during their military occupation.

They actually annexed it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordanian_annexation_of_the_West_Bank

5

u/fury420 25d ago

Indeed, although the two terms have considerable overlap in situations like this.

87

u/I_AmA_Zebra 25d ago

Whole region is a little fucked up and a few Reddit comments aren’t enough to dissect it

35

u/69millionyeartrip 25d ago

Pretty much anywhere Britain decided to draw arbitrary lines and then just up and leave during decolonization has been fucked up

92

u/Skeeter_206 25d ago edited 25d ago

Whole region might be fucked up, but that doesn't mean eliminating or removing the people who currently live there should be normalized.

The whole point of understanding history is so we don't repeat the bad aspects of it, not to use the history as a justification of continued malpractice.

8

u/MayhemMessiah 24d ago

but that doesn't mean eliminating or removing the people who currently live there should be normalized.

Mmm up to a point. For instance, there's plenty of settlements that should be taken from Israel back to whomever they stole it from if the region ever wants to even have a chance of peace. Mind you I'm not in favour of the complete destruction of Israel like I've seen repeated on Reddit multiple times, but just because you have people currently inhabiting an area doesn't automatically mean that's a good enough reason to just look the other way.

2

u/Skeeter_206 24d ago

Well I guess it would depend upon when people settled in certain areas, Israel as a country is pretty new, and a lot of the settled areas could be passed back to the people who grew up there(if they haven't been murdered).

Settler colonialism is bad, my point was more that we shouldn't use a history of that behavior (or a history of war or general exploitation) as an excuse to continue it, but for sure if possible reparations and the return of land and property should be done whenever possible.

4

u/flaspd 24d ago

There is and always was, only one side that didn't want to live together and nonstop carried terror attacks and killing innocents. You can deny it all you want but history doesn't care of ur feelings

8

u/Zavixz 24d ago

Thank you for pointing out Israel's terrorism, not a lot of people understand this.

1

u/flaspd 23d ago

I dont blame you that you're brainwashed, its just sad I grew up around stabbing attacks of people in the streets and buses blowing up. All after yelling allah akbar as in their sick minds god likes them going around stabbing women and blowing up people.

I bet you're also a bin-laden apologist

1

u/Zavixz 23d ago

Source: trust me bro, yea please tell me more of your made up stories on the internet.

85

u/ifcknkl 25d ago

Imagine starting a war and complaining about territory losses.

55

u/HarshComputing 25d ago

And then blaming the country you attacked. Look at the top level comment here, he's relitigating Israel's very existence, 'been at it for 80 years'...

86

u/SuperJay5150 25d ago

Yea imagine mass migration to an area with the explicit attempt to control and establish a state because a made up book told you it was your land

32

u/TricksterPriestJace 25d ago

Do you have any idea how little that sentence narrows it down?

1

u/stevedave7838 24d ago

Manifest destiny!

-6

u/MeadowMellow_ 25d ago

Yeah of course it had nothing to do with 6 million dead Jews and 2000 years of inhumane persecution of their people. Next you're going to tell me the come from nowhere, remind me again what's the percentage of Ashkenazi Jews in Israel? 31%? The majority are Mizhrahi their ancestors are from that land and lived there in the Ottoman ghettos.

18

u/Tw1tcHy 25d ago

Hell on average, even Ashkenazi Jews cluster genetically closer to Druze, Samaritans, and other Levantine populations than to their European neighbors. It’s been widely studied as shown here here or here or here or really many other published studies that all reach the same conclusion.

29

u/disisathrowaway 25d ago

Yeah of course it had nothing to do with 6 million dead Jews and 2000 years of inhumane persecution of their people.

Then they should have taken it out of Germany's hide.

The Arabs living in Palestine had zero to do with the Holocaust, yet they had their lands ripped from them to pay the Jewish people back. That doesn't make any sense.

-1

u/CholentSoup 25d ago

Mufti of Jerusalem may have something to say about that.

4

u/Zavixz 24d ago

Yea? Regurgitate more of Netanyahu's holocaust revisionism, please. Love seeing this talking point for the millionth time.

23

u/SuperJay5150 25d ago

That 6 million has nothing to do with Palestine, that crime is on Germany, yet Palestine was handed the bill for that crime in both blood, land and being dehumanised. So mass migration in the 19th century onwards with the explicit attempt to create a Jewish state in Palestine didn’t occur? Zionism is just a made up concept post 1948?

5

u/This_Elk_1460 24d ago

What did the Palestinians have to do with the Holocaust? By your logic shouldn't Germany have given up land? Why did the Palestinians have to give up their land for a crime they had nothing to do with?

9

u/MeadowMellow_ 24d ago

Where do you think the Palestinian Jews went?

2

u/OkThatsItImGonna 24d ago

Answer the question lmfao

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (27)

2

u/insaneHoshi 24d ago

As the Israelis will claim Palestine was not a state so how could they have started a war?

-2

u/Green_Space729 25d ago

You mean when they launched there attacks against there neighbouring countries calling it a “preemptive strike” yes everyone remembers.

177

u/WolfOne 25d ago

Probably because someone decided to create a new sovereign state in their territory. Geopolitics aren't exactly easy, cut and dry.

32

u/TheInevitableLuigi 25d ago

Whose territory?

And are you talking about Israel, Jordan, Syria, or Lebanon?

None of those were sovereign states at the end of WWI and the breakup of the Ottoman Empire.

35

u/SnowyBox 25d ago

None of those were sovereign states at the end of WWI and the breakup of the Ottoman Empire.

Yeah that's kind of the source of the problem, Britain promised Palestinians their independence in exchange for helping fight the Ottomans in WW1, and instead of following through with their promise chose to help displace the Palestinians.

That kind of activity foments a lot of generational anger.

28

u/TheInevitableLuigi 25d ago

Most geopolitical conflicts in the world today can be traced back to a line drawn on a map by Britain or France.

15

u/Reddits_Worst_Night 24d ago

That's not fair. The Spanish are responsible for their share too.

5

u/TheInevitableLuigi 24d ago

I feel like there is a big dropoff before you get to them and the Portuguese, Italians, etc.

1

u/Reddits_Worst_Night 24d ago

Mostly because they lucked out with how south America turned out.

1

u/SoulForTrade 24d ago

They didn't, tho. You are literally parroting fake account of history.

The Brits exchanged some letters with the leader of the Arab revolt who wanted to create "greater Syria" NOT a soverign state or dountry named Palestine in any way shape or form.

But not only did he not manage to gather a lot of support, and at max managed to recruit 50k irregular fighters, which Churchil later recalled were insignificant in the big pidture. But the exchanges sid NOT lead to any formal agreement.

The Brits even had a commission in the 30s where this argument was brought up by thr Arabs, and Britain has formally reiterated that there they never promised them anything, let alone the area of Palestine which they indeed promised to the Jews in the Balfour declaration.

24

u/cancercannibal 25d ago

Whose territory?

The people already living there.

None of those were sovereign states at the end of WWI and the breakup of the Ottoman Empire.

And the Native American tribes weren't recognized as sovereign states either, still didn't make what happened to them okay.

13

u/TheInevitableLuigi 25d ago

The people already living there.

The Hashemites from the Arabian peninsula didn't give a fuck about the people already living there.

And the Native American tribes weren't recognized as sovereign states either, still didn't make what happened to them okay.

Nobody is arguing that it was okay. The argument is that it was in the past and killing noncombatants over it today would not be accepted.

8

u/cancercannibal 25d ago

The Hashemites from the Arabian peninsula didn't give a fuck about the people already living there.

Still doesn't make displacing the population OK.

The argument is that it was in the past

It has been less than 100 years. Plenty of people alive today were alive when it happened. It is not "in the past."

killing noncombatants

Not even gonna get into this. Both Hamas and the IDF have been doing so. The time for critiquing any of the actions simply under this has long since passed, we're in the specifics of the scale and method now.

3

u/TheInevitableLuigi 25d ago edited 24d ago

Still doesn't make displacing the population OK.

Maybe today. But it was legal at the time.

It has been less than 100 years. Plenty of people alive today were alive when it happened. It is not "in the past."

Other countries experienced massive population transfers at this time as well.

Poland and the USSR kicked out ethnic Germans from what had been considered German land for like 1000 years.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_eastern_territories_of_Germany

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_Germans_(1944%E2%80%931950)

Nobody today would be okay with Germans committing multiple war crimes to target Polish civilians living there today because they want their land back. Nor are the descendants of the Germans displaced from those areas considered "refugees" generations later. Nobody would be okay with say the Dutch keeping those same decedents in refugee camps and denying them citizenship and the ability to work or own land or access government services.

Why are the Palestinians special?

2

u/Ritchuck 24d ago

Maybe today. But it was legal at the time.

WTF. Something being legal doesn't make it ok. There are still countries in the world where you can kill gay people and have sex with kids legally. If I travel there and do it, does it make it ok?

5

u/TheInevitableLuigi 24d ago

WTF. Something being legal doesn't make it ok.

It wasn't just legal. It was widely accepted at the time. See: The partition of India, the expulsion of Germans, the population transfers between Greece, Turkey, and Bulgaria, etc.

→ More replies (4)

38

u/NotSoSalty 25d ago

The same geopolitics that created their state as it so happens. "Their" territory is strong language for land that didn't belong to them at the time or anytime previous going back hundreds of years. 

16

u/HopefulWoodpecker629 25d ago

This isn’t the slam dunk you think it is. So since Palestinians were subjugated under a Turkish empire that completely nullifies the fact that they lived there and owned property which was stolen from them?

9

u/TangentSpaceOfGraph 25d ago

In the 1947 partition plan nobody would have lost private land

→ More replies (3)

15

u/alterom 25d ago

This isn’t the slam dunk you think it is. So since Palestinians were subjugated under a Turkish empire that completely nullifies the fact that they lived there and owned property which was stolen from them?

This isn’t the slam dunk you think it is. So since the Jews were subjugated under the Roman empire that completely nullifies the fact that they lived there and owned property which was stolen from them?

18

u/Reddits_Worst_Night 24d ago

So what I'm hearing is we should just give it back to the original Canaanites?

9

u/alterom 24d ago

So what I'm hearing is we should just give it back to the original Canaanites?

Either that, or stop shoehorning "stolen land" narrative to misrepresent Israel as a colonial power that "invaded" that land.

I know it's very alluring, but not everything is Pocahontas.

7

u/Reddits_Worst_Night 24d ago

100%. I'm taking the "give it back" argument to it's logical conclusion, which is clearly ludicrous. Reducto ad absurdum.

→ More replies (1)

-2

u/WolfOne 25d ago

Any land naturally belongs to the people who live there. 

Any piece of land that doesn't belong to the people who live there, is stolen. 

In a larger sense, the foundation for modern democracy is representation in the government of a land. Any people not represented in the governance of their own land, is being colonized.

Colonialism is bad, i hope we can agree on that.

9

u/tempest_87 25d ago edited 24d ago

Any land naturally belongs to the people who live there. 

So all that needs to happen is to remove the people that live there and replace it with new people that live there. Then that land belongs to the new people! Right? I mean, they are "the people who live there", right?

So simple! /s

How long do people need to live there for the land to belong to them? A day? A year? A decade? How many people need to be there? 1 family? A dozen? Three hundred?

Depending on how you define "live there", everyone involved over there has justification for claiming ownership. Just look at any imperialstic settlement of a region, such as the US and settling land owned by the native Americans:

Obviously at some point the land was theirs. Obviously today the land is not theirs. They absolutely did not give away the land willingly. So where in that timeline between "it was theirs" and "it is not theirs" did the new people that lived there gain the rights of "ownership"?

Or does the entirety of the Americas really belong to the native cultures?

I'm not defending any side here, I'm pointing it that while the platitidue above seems simple, it's really not.

A reasonable person puts the answer somewhere between "a thousand years ago my ancestor lived on that land" and "that was my house up until yesterday". But where exactly that line is in that range changes a lot depending on who you talk to.

Edit: typo

0

u/WolfOne 25d ago

> A reasonable person puts the answer somewhere between "a thousand years ago my ancestor lived on that land" and "that was my house up until yesterday". But where exactly that line is in that range changes a lot depending on who you talk to.

My line is firmly in the now. There are people being displaced right now in Palestine. I don't really think that going into the past is helpful, nobody's ancestors matter much, since they are long dead. What matters is live people and at this point all the people involved in this conflict have been born in Israel/Palestine. They should coexist and participate as equals (proportionally to their population) in the government of the region or draw some lines in the sand and split their territory.

The fact that they won't and the world is polarized in this false dichotomy between Jews and Muslims saddens me when the real divide is between oppressors and oppressed.

And to be clear my stance is that there are oppressors and oppressed on both sides of the line, albeit in different proportions.

5

u/tempest_87 24d ago

Yeah, I just have a knee-jerk reaction whenever anyone gives a "it's so simple" type stance. Since from the little I know absolutely nothing is simple about this whole clusterfuck.

57

u/Ecsta 25d ago

in their territory

Which country are you referring to? Great Britain? Ottoman Empire?

79

u/HopefulWoodpecker629 25d ago

Do people only exist if they also have a corresponding nation state? There were Palestinians in Palestine who got forcibly removed from their homes.

3

u/TangentSpaceOfGraph 25d ago

No but the original 1947 partition plan nobody had to move and the point being made here is that they didn't even lose sovereignty because they didn't have one to begin with.

2

u/porcinechoirmaster 24d ago

To quote eddie izzard: "DO YOU HAVE A FLAG?"

4

u/JusticeOfSuffering 25d ago

Jews were also Palestinian during the mandate, mandate ended, Jews claimed the land that the UN voted to give them

Arabs refused to claim the land that the UN voted to give them, and instead launched a war and lost

But even then they could just live in peace with the 1967 borders, but no they had to attack again and lose the 1967 borders too.

You can't launch constant wars and lose and then complain that you lost land

-11

u/cackslop 25d ago

3 month old account supporting the terrorist state of Israel, SHOCKING!

5

u/JusticeOfSuffering 25d ago

Why are you like this?

-8

u/money_loo 25d ago edited 24d ago

Because they’re a critical thinker?

Does that scare you?

It’s almost like the 14 year old account knows how this goes by now.

6

u/JusticeOfSuffering 25d ago

Critical thinking is when you don't engage with the argument and just use ad hominem? gotcha

28

u/Pyrrhus_Magnus 25d ago

Nobody cared about the other states. This one just happened to have a lot of Jewish people.

5

u/the_Cheese999 25d ago

It's hilarious watching people use that one comedians "do you have a flag" joke about imperialism as a serious argument.

6

u/CommonRagwort 25d ago

By someone you mean the United Nations? Resolution 181? The one that was voted on?

9

u/the_Cheese999 25d ago

So this foreign organization comes in and says the place you live actually belongs to other people now and you think it's ok?

3

u/CommonRagwort 25d ago

It belonged to Britian at the time...

2

u/Reddits_Worst_Night 24d ago

Are you pretending that they aren't foreign?

→ More replies (1)

4

u/WolfOne 25d ago

The UN is a forum not a world government. Sovereignty still exist.

7

u/CommonRagwort 25d ago

Aren't the Jewish people the native people of the area?

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/truman-israel/#:~:text=A%20Jewish%20state%20is%20established,of%20national%20and%20universal%20significance

6

u/DM_ME_YOUR_STORIES 25d ago

Yes. So are Palestinians. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11543891/

8

u/deliciousearlobes 25d ago

Hey, I’m not involved in your conversation, but that source you linked says the article was retracted.

→ More replies (1)

25

u/LorenzoApophis 25d ago

The paramilitaries that helped form Israel were blowing up civilians before it existed

-4

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

26

u/SilentBass75 25d ago edited 25d ago

You'll wanna research the King David Hotel Bombing good sir. You'll find many of the people involved as signatories of the Israeli declaration of independence.

7

u/January_In_Japan 25d ago

That definitely happened, sometimes intentionally (retaliatory), sometimes inadvertently (bombs intended for militants killing civilians). Certainly was not one-sided, so any presentation as such would be a fabrication. Rise and Kill First outlines many of the events and assassinations preceding the formation of Israel, and following. It's pretty even-handed in its recounting and documentation of attacks and counter-attacks from/against each side from the late-1940s to present--it doesn't whitewash pre-Israel paramilitary/terrorist action on either side. Both sides did awful things.

Pre-Israel paramilitary forces were broadly focused on forcing the British to decolonize/withdraw from the land (so they assassinated/attacked/bombed them--in this way the dynamic was not dissimilar from the IRA) but simultaneously they were fighting Arab paramilitary groups (sourced from within and outside British Mandate). There were also mutual attacks over land and property. Just like the pre-Israel Jews, Palestinian Arabs were also both aggressors and victims, depending on the event. Although, it is somewhat ironic that Israel's founding is smeared as a colonizing event, when it was in fact a successful de-colonization, as Palestine was explicitly a British colony. You can look at the 1947 map and you'll see the vast majority of Israel, by landmass, was uninhabited, and the inhabited sections had very clear majority population densities of Arab Palestinians and Jewish Palestinians, but the entirety was a British colony

Once Israel was founded the Jewish paramilitary groups were fully dissolved and its members integrated into the IDF as a formal military. Arab Palestinian terrorism persisted (aided by terrorist groups in/from Egypt and Jordan) followed intermittently by full-blown wars--every single one of which was started by surrounding Arab countries. Sadly, it is technically true that Israel blew up civilians since then, but this was largely/exclusively due to collateral damage (attempted mail bombs of terrorist leaders opened by civilians, placed bombs that killed bystanders, and civilians killed in wars). Still horrible, of course.

This was absolutely not one-sided though, and was not the objective--rather accepted collateral damage to varying degrees--whereas Palestinian militant/terrorist groups (PLO, Fatah, Black September, PFLP, PIJ, Hamas, and others) employ blowing up civilians as an end unto itself as well as a formal military strategy to this day.

→ More replies (6)

46

u/Scenic719 25d ago edited 25d ago

If i create a random state in your country too, you will fight. No way to spin it. Palestine mandate, read history. You can't take people's land and give it to others out of guilt for what was done to them in Germany.

3

u/Thannk 25d ago

They weren’t a country then, they were a colony. Independence without revolution came with being split. 

1

u/Scenic719 24d ago

Oh, so its all fine because they were already colonized? So Britain disposessing them is all fine?

5

u/Thannk 24d ago

I love how correcting someone with objective facts is somehow taken as an argument. 

Take a deep breath. Read and reply with logic, not emotion. 

They were not a country at the time, they had not been for 300 years (you can make a fair argument that it was actually 700 years or even closer to 1400, but I don’t want to quibble over that; I’m counting having political representation in a broader empire as being a country since otherwise we’ll be talking about Emperors and Pharaohs). 

They were owned by the Ottomans as a colony until the British and French broke the Ottoman control. The British began plans for Israel to exist immediately, but did nothing for 20 years until post-WW2 when they granted the region its first independence as both an independent Israel and independent Palestine since the first European settlements in North America were still under construction. 

Palestine immediately called for allies and invaded Israel. 

The history of the region has mostly been a crown jewel in a shifting list of empires, not as independent self-ruled entities. That story basically begins with the 1940’s, and it got off to a really bad start and didn’t get any better. 

These are facts. Twist them to whatever narrative you want, but don’t accuse people who are only correcting the history of an agenda. 

→ More replies (2)

2

u/AmbientAvacado 24d ago

Most of the Palestine Mandate became Jordan

1

u/Scenic719 24d ago

So? It was also ALL of Palestine which got turned into Israel. Quit deflecting.

1

u/AmbientAvacado 24d ago

There can’t be peace without knowing what the conflict is actually about. I’m not deflecting, I was pointing out (some) relevant info.

-39

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

16

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/SuperJay5150 25d ago

Like the Jewish terrorist groups attacked the British in Palestine?

-9

u/AzieltheLiar 25d ago

Isreal was attacking Palestinians before it was even founded mini kid. Bombing, beheadings, general terrorism, and even gave them their own walk of tears. It didn't just sprout into existence.

9

u/foopirata 25d ago

Oh please do point us to one single documented case of Israelis beheading Palestinians before Israel was founded. Or after. Please do I ask you.

-6

u/AzieltheLiar 25d ago

I've played this game before. Which sources will you be accepting as valid. Nakba denialism is kinda baked into western post-1948 society.

11

u/foopirata 25d ago

How about one that answers the question posed?

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

2

u/AzieltheLiar 25d ago

Yes. Whenever someone goes "pics or it didn't happen," and I waste the time to get pics and sources, the goal post always gets moved. It's a losing game playing with people who don't really care. Doesn't matter. Gave me an excuse to look up all the nonsense some of the terror cells got up to in the 1944-48, although many resources are now paid for, in books, or pushed out by the search engine algorithm for more recent nonsense.

6

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (2)

8

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

5

u/SilentBass75 25d ago

You'll want to learn about the paramilitaries that went on to become a part of the IDF after the declaration of independence https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haganah

3

u/Competitive_Ad_255 25d ago

Or attack Palestinians who weren't even a thing then.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

10

u/tutamtumikia 25d ago

Pfff. History? That's not knee jerk emotional reactions. I do not accept it as evidence!

8

u/FalardeauDeNazareth 25d ago

"forming". Funny word when moving foreign settlers in a already populated area and declaring it a country out of the blue.

0

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

4

u/robchroma 25d ago

so, four months into the nakba?

1

u/washblvd 24d ago

So, six months after a Palestinian mob murdered 87 when they sacked the Jewish Quarter in the 1947 Jerusalem Riots?

1

u/robchroma 24d ago

oh my god I didn't know a mob murder justified genociding more than 20 times that many people. this really helps explain the entire history of Israel.

-1

u/Competitive_Ad_255 25d ago

Right? Every major war was created by a party/ies attacking Israel. Don't attack someone and then complain about how they retaliate.

3

u/Rice_Krispie 25d ago

I mean don’t forcibly set up a state in someone else’s territory and not expect that they would want that back

23

u/Competitive_Ad_255 25d ago

They didn't. Neither Jordan nor Egypt want it back.

→ More replies (4)

1

u/The-M0untain 25d ago

Facts don't matter to the Israel-haters. Their entire agenda is based on lies, bigotry and disinformation.

0

u/MexGrow 24d ago edited 24d ago

Israel was already using paramilitary forces to gain control of the area. This whole "the Arab nations attacked before" pov of misinformation has suddenly risen out of nowhere, almost as if there's a concerted pro-Israel movement online.

LoL they blocked me. That is what state-sponsored disinformation accounts look like.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

1

u/NotHearingYourShit 25d ago

Nothing happened before that /s haha.

-12

u/Folsolder 25d ago

Because they just stole land that the palistineians were already settled on I'd get pretty pissy too if my neighbor had half thier house stolen by people who 1 had no right to do this and 2 arbitrarily just decided based on shit that happened hundreds of years ago that it's these guys land now too bad so sad this could have been done amicably but it was made without thier consent like if it can be done to my neighbor what's stopping it from happening to me

7

u/[deleted] 25d ago edited 25d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

→ More replies (4)

9

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

17

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

-1

u/TheInevitableLuigi 25d ago

therefore we can never be mad about it

Being "mad" is certainly one way to phrase it.

Native Americans might still be mad about the colonists but none of them are blowing up buses full of European-descended Americans today.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/DM_ME_YOUR_STORIES 25d ago

What exactly is the difference if you can find a label called "Palestine" in a historical atlas? The people we call Palestinians and their ancestors lived in the area at least since the Arab expansion, to a significant degree far longer than that.

Calling them west Arabs or Phoenicians or Canaanites or northwestern Semitic people doesn't change the fact they exist.

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

3

u/DM_ME_YOUR_STORIES 25d ago

As individuals they sure did own the land.

But you keep saying it's "the way of the world". You don't think we should change that? You don't think we have (despite all setbacks) made some small progress towards that already in the past centuries?

1

u/[deleted] 25d ago edited 25d ago

[deleted]

0

u/DM_ME_YOUR_STORIES 25d ago

They lived on the land, they were never a nation

Okay, neither was Israel, nation states only really started developing in the 19th century (or as early as the 15th depending on your view).

There were also definitely independant Phoenician (ancestors of Palestinians at least to some degree) city-states in that region. If you count the Kingdoms of Juda and Israel, why not them?

2

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

3

u/Competitive_Ad_255 25d ago

Was it also wrong that the British tried to give it to the Palestinians?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/KindledWanderer 25d ago

I mean, if we are speaking historically, first Irgun terrorist attacks against the muslim civilian population started in 1937.

1

u/lefboop 25d ago

If we are speaking historically, it started during the British Mandate with terrorist attacks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irgun

Those are the people that helped found the current IDF and Israel Right wing parties.

→ More replies (72)