The last line of dialogue I was criticized for using too much history, now I'm being criticized for using not enough history...

Tell me, how far back to you have to go before the creation of the modern state of Israel to where the Jews were a majority population in the area?

So can the Cherokee waltz into the White House and start killing people while maintaining the moral high ground because they have millennia old ties to the land here?

What about the Mexican people who are descendants of the tribes who occupied the areas we know as Texas, Arizona, New Mexico, California? Can they take back their land?

This post was edited by inkanddagger on May 16 2018 10:12am

If you're going to use history as a way to justify ownership of something make sure it's all encompassing, not conveniently stopping at a point where it fits your narrative. I'm from eastern Europe, my homeland was ruled and occupied by the Ottoman empire on and off for 600 years, with plenty of wars and rebellions. That does not somehow automatically give them rights over that land just because they were there for multiple centuries. They occupied it by force and numbers but once their empire started to crumble they were kicked out.



You can lay claim over whatever you want, but in the real world if you don't have power to back your claim you will be ignored. So it's pretty irrelevant what the Mexicans or Natives want to lay claim to

This post was edited by ofthevoid on May 16 2018 10:50am

no because Hispanic peoples are a mixture of European and native. whereas native population in the US have stayed more independent and segregated. Blame Cortez for condoning rapes.

So you argument has shifted from "Israel has a historical claim to the land" to "Israel has stronger weapons and might makes right"

At least you're being intellectually honest now.

There's really only two arguments of what gives someone claim over land. History and/or power. Israel has the historical rights to that land over Arabs. Israel also has the "power" to hold that land.

We in the US might not have the historical right to this land but having the power to posses supersedes history

while that was true historically it's not inherantly valid in a global society. "might is right" has been subverted by "our combined might is right".

The UN and other large multinational bodies could influence israel to drop all of the "god told us this land is ours" nonsense, but they wont. give it another 10 years of them getting 23x the kills in this "war" tho and we'll see what happens.

This post was edited by thesnipa on May 16 2018 11:08am

So do you also favor Anschluss?

You're right by saying our combined might is right but the thing is we are the Hegemon of the world. As long as the US continue to support Israel with money/political backing what the UN says won't have much of an impact.

I think if we get to the point where US retreats into isolationism from the world stage there might be more pressure on Israel.



You can do better with these type of gotcha questions.

Me telling you how the world works doesn't mean i support or oppose it, it's simply being descriptive.

on that we agree entirely. no qualms at all with that post, not one word.