Ok but you don’t reject the Israeli State. Which was founded on a genocide. This is like saying you’re anti-genocide but you support the US’s right to exist.
Ok but you don’t reject the Israeli State. Which was founded on a genocide. This is like saying you’re anti-genocide but you support the US’s right to exist.
Alaknar@sopuli.xyz 1 week ago
I disagree here.
Palestinians and Israelites lived in the region for - literally - thousands of years, but neither had a nation. The exact same resolution that established Israel, also established Palestine, and that happened after the “civil war” between them. It wasn’t genocide, it was a ham-fisted attempt at stopping a genocide, because both parties wanted to eliminate the other.
Do I agree to all Israel’s policies, including the occupation of West Bank and Gaza? Absolutely not. Do I agree that the way these two nations were established was correct? Absolutely not.
But this is what they got, and they need to learn to live with it. Just like Qatar did. Or Yemen. Or Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, and Jordan, etc. They were all established by the colonial powers after the fall of the Ottoman Empire, they were all created by moronic Europeans who divided the land based off of oil reserves, and not history, culture, or religion. But - somehow - you don’t see Qatar fighting Bahrain non stop, or Emirates bombing the Saudis.
I’m against going “ooh, but historically X should be Y”. What’s the historical state you want to turn back the borders to? Should Poland stop existing because we’re turning back time to the 18th century? Are we going back to 19th century, where Ukraine was under the russian boot? What is the “correct” state of the world’s borders, in your opinion?