Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: neolib who wrote (156581)	1/19/2005 11:24:48 AM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"Necessity drove each tribe to fall on their neighbors and drive then further out, but that does not in anyway reduce the disaster for those on the receiving end." True enough and no one denys this but as nadine points out, the arab refugees are the only refugees in the world today who have retained this status for decades. This is by order of the arab leaders who have political interests in this sore festering. mike

To: neolib who wrote (156581)	1/19/2005 2:47:27 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

IMHO, you are confusing cause and effect. The effect of Jewish migration was colonial. The cause was indeed desperate necessity The effect was displacement. It wasn't colonial because Israel is not a colony. Your basic premise is that if Europeans displace Asians, this equals colonialization and is utterly unacceptable. However, if Asians displace Asians, they may displace and ethnically clear to their hearts content; different rules for them. This seems more than a little peculiar, as the results for the displaced people, whom you claim to care about, are the same. Not to mention that the results for the displacers are also different, if they were running for their lives. Show me a post-colonial history of South Africa that puts all the blame on the Zulus and not on the Boers.