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: Nadine Carroll who wrote (237063)	7/19/2007 12:02:14 AM
From: neolib	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

that's just another way of saying that creating an Arab state in Palestine would have been legitimate, but creating a Jewish one was illegitimate, despite (or because of?) the fact that the Jews were interested in having a state and the Arabs weren't. No, the legitimacy or lack thereof had to do with the flux of people into the region. The British decided that a recent large influx of people with the promise of many more to come should count as equal with the rights of those who had lived there for generations. That was the mistake. You have a hangup for obvious reasons on the concept of a State. That is the same sort of reasoning that says the USA was not stolen from the NA, because the NA didn't have the same concept of land ownership that the new immigrants brought with them, hence they didn't really own their own country. The concepts of new arrivals should not be given preference over the concepts of the original inhabitants.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (237063)	7/19/2007 3:47:58 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

If you are trying to say that the Brits should have given it to the Arabs and not the Jews, that's just another way of saying that creating an Arab state in Palestine would have been legitimate, but creating a Jewish one was illegitimate, despite (or because of?) the fact that the Jews were interested in having a state and the Arabs weren't. Strange that you forget the option of giving the land to both the Arabs and Jews and Christians and everyone else that lived there, and had it be non-denominational, a la Lebanon. Voila - not a Jewish nor Arab state, but a state for any and all human beings. The institutionalized separation of "types" of humans is the catalyst for the tragic situtation that has followed. A declaration, a la USA's charter, that all men are created equal in the to be created land would clearly have been preferable to the mess that developed. Which brings us to Elroy's solution to what you consider an unsolvable problem - Pasreal! Message 23214027