Should Israel exist?

[Antonio the Sixth]

What a stupid question.

[Oakvale]

It shouldn't, but unfortunately that particular ship has long since sailed.

[ingemann]

If people asked me in 1920 my answer would be no.

If they asked me in 1936, my answer would be maybe.

Today it would be yes.

[Simfan34]

What a stupid question.

And why is that..?

[Indy Texas]

What alternative would you have reccomended for the Jewish people following World War II in its stead?

The United States, Canada or Australia would have been compelling places to go. South African-administered Namibia, being a historically German-speaking colony, might have interested some.

I think it would have been better in the long term for them to limit an unconditional right of immigration to people who were affected by the Holocaust. It makes zero sense to let anyone and anyone go there because their great-great-grandmother was Jewish when they refuse citizenship to people who have lived there all their lives because their great-great-grandmothers weren't Jewish. They should not have allowed Jews from the Middle East and North Africa to move there and they should not have allowed Jews from the Soviet Union to move there. Even purely in terms of the dynamics within Israeli society itself, the presence of those groups of people has been a net negative for the country.

[Blue3]

Israel says peace is dependent on everyone recognizing it as a "Jewish state."

Israel also says it's part of the West, wants itself held to  those higher standards, but equal to that of others in the West. It's unfortunate, but we expect a third world country to be less civilized. Israel is a first world country, and says it's civilized. Yet it says there will be no peace until Israel is recognized as a Jewish state.

There are Western, developed countries with state religions.

And those state churches should have been privatized or abolished decades ago, it's a hideous leftover of the middle ages.

[ingemann]

What alternative would you have reccomended for the Jewish people following World War II in its stead?

The United States, Canada or Australia would have been compelling places to go. South African-administered Namibia, being a historically German-speaking colony, might have interested some.

I think it would have been better in the long term for them to limit an unconditional right of immigration to people who were affected by the Holocaust. It makes zero sense to let anyone and anyone go there because their great-great-grandmother was Jewish when they refuse citizenship to people who have lived there all their lives because their great-great-grandmothers weren't Jewish. They should not have allowed Jews from the Middle East and North Africa to move there and they should not have allowed Jews from the Soviet Union to move there. Even purely in terms of the dynamics within Israeli society itself, the presence of those groups of people has been a net negative for the country.

The establishment of Israel had nothing to do with the Holocaust, already in the thirties the Jewish population of Palestina was big enough that there was discussion about how it shouldf be partitioned. Those Jews wouldn't go somewhere. Of course evferything would have been better with a partition in the 30ties, where UK would have kept the status quo.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Israel says peace is dependent on everyone recognizing it as a "Jewish state."

Israel also says it's part of the West, wants itself held to  those higher standards, but equal to that of others in the West. It's unfortunate, but we expect a third world country to be less civilized. Israel is a first world country, and says it's civilized. Yet it says there will be no peace until Israel is recognized as a Jewish state.

There are Western, developed countries with state religions.

And those state churches should have been privatized or abolished decades ago, it's a hideous leftover of the middle ages.

But you're saying Israel should hold itself to the standards of the West, no? I'm just saying that state religion is the standard in much of the West.

[IceSpear]

Yes

[© tweed]

should have been carved out of Germany.

[dead0man]

I don't get why people don't understand how unacceptable that would have been.  It's like they only think things 1/4 of the way through....

[© tweed]

I don't get why people don't understand how unacceptable that would have been.  It's like they only think things 1/4 of the way through....

unacceptable to certain white people, yes, as opposed to unacceptable to brown unpeople, as is the current situation.

[Sbane]

Oh I know that Israel/Palestine is basically a wasteland and never had a large population, and I would argue still doesn't. Do you have a citation showing the land that was given to Israel was majority Jewish?

whatever cbs.gov.il is or this place.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Correct.  "took" in a defensive war.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most of the land was owned by the state (previously the Ottomans and then, after they lost their empire, the UK), but Jewish investors did buy a LOT of land from the few private land holders.  Mostly wasteland (as most of the place was wasteland at the time) nobody really wanted.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

All of the nations surrounding Israel were created out of the same thin air, odd that we don't have a thread as to whether Jordan should exist or not.

Again, you don't seem to get that the Jewish people in Israel were mostly people who came from Europe as opposed to those other countries where their ancestors had been living in that land for generations. In any case, British mapmaking has created numerous problems around the world. Iraq being the obvious example.

[Sbane]

The creation of a Jewish state in Palestine was a mistake, but one it's far, far too late to correct now.  Israel is here to stay.

I would agree with this, but the third question presents a real block- what should have been done instead? Mass immigration to the US, would have probably been a boon for us- but would it have really happened?

I agree with Mikado's statement as well. I think mass immigration to the US would have been the best option at that time. Creating a Jewish state anywhere would have been a bad idea though since some other group would have to be uprooted/disenfranchised. The Palestinians were the chosen ones.

[dead0man]

Again, you don't seem to get that the Jewish people in Israel were mostly people who came from Europe as opposed to those other countries where their ancestors had been living in that land for generations. In any case, British mapmaking has created numerous problems around the world. Iraq being the obvious example.

I get it, I just don't see it as the big deal you do.  The few people that lived there could have stayed (some did, and are doing MUCH better than the perpetual refugees) but for the actions of their kin in Cairo, Damascus, Beruit and Amman.


As for why a Jewish state made up of part of Germany wouldn't have worked, it seems fairly obvious, it's been mentioned before.  It's got nothing to do with brown people.

[Sbane]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Line

Another great example. And one of the reasons I am glad partition occurred since I don't know how Pashtuns would have fit into an undivided India.

[Sbane]

Again, you don't seem to get that the Jewish people in Israel were mostly people who came from Europe as opposed to those other countries where their ancestors had been living in that land for generations. In any case, British mapmaking has created numerous problems around the world. Iraq being the obvious example.

As for why a Jewish state made up of part of Germany wouldn't have worked, it seems fairly obvious, it's been mentioned before.  It's got nothing to do with brown people.

What reason would that be? They would still be surrounded by hostile Germans?

[dead0man]

Indeed.  Surrounded by an entire continent that they felt hated them, living next door to a people that had just tried to wipe them off the planet.  And actually really tried to do it, not the faux "genocide" or "slaughter" you occasionally hear Hamas apologists call Israeli actions against Palestinians.

[Sbane]

Indeed.  Surrounded by an entire continent that they felt hated them, living next door to a people that had just tried to wipe them off the planet.  And actually really tried to do it, not the faux "genocide" or "slaughter" you occasionally hear Hamas apologists call Israeli actions against Palestinians.

I can completely understand why Jews wouldn't have wanted a country within Europe but they didn't get a much better deal, did they? I guess the difference is the Palestinians are brown and poor so they are easier to control than Europeans would have been.

In terms of justice, giving German land to the Jews would have made perfect sense. Instead, in order to help the people of one injustice, we created a whole another injustice. Taking all this into consideration, immigration to countries friendly to Jews would have been the best option.

[dead0man]

Indeed.  Surrounded by an entire continent that they felt hated them, living next door to a people that had just tried to wipe them off the planet.  And actually really tried to do it, not the faux "genocide" or "slaughter" you occasionally hear Hamas apologists call Israeli actions against Palestinians.

I can completely understand why Jews wouldn't have wanted a country within Europe but they didn't get a much better deal, did they? I guess the difference is the Palestinians are brown and poor so they are easier to control than Europeans would have been.

Indeed.  Germans, even if completely de-nutted after WWII, were still a first world country, with the ability to rearm quickly if allowed.  Put a bunch of Jews in Bavaria, and you have two good motivators for Germans to hate Jews even more.  Even if they knew the level of hatred they'd get in Palestine it would still make more sense to move there as they knew that the Arab states, mostly newly created like the Jewish state, couldn't and wouldn't put up the same level of violence the Germans could.

It would have be stupid to do that to the Jews and people in 2014 that suggest it clearly lack the ability to think things through.  It might sound good on the surface, but any digging/thinking at all and the theory falls to pieces faster than a cease fire in Gaza.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In hind sight, yeah, maybe.  Too bad the countries where it might of worked were almost as racist as Europeans and said "awww f@(k no".

[Storebought]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

So Palestinian Arabs are made to pay the price for German culpability for the holocaust and general European bigotry against Jews?

Non-violent resistance and appeals to the UN would have been the option for European Jews to take upon continued state-sanctioned persecution in eastern Europe after WWII.

[dead0man]

You say that as if there wasn't state-sanctioned persecution of Jews in eastern Europe after WWII.

[Storebought]

I'm entirely aware of it. What that have I said would be in contradiction to it?

My contention is that holocaust and its aftermath was, and remains, an entirely European matter for Jews and non-Jews to settle. The presence of Israel confounds this point.

[dead0man]

I'm entirely aware of it. What that have I said would be in contradiction to it?

Well you implied that had Jews stayed in Europe they could have asked and would have received help from the UN.  Perhaps I misunderstood?

Non-violent resistance and appeals to the UN would have been the option for European Jews to take upon continued state-sanctioned persecution in eastern Europe after WWII.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

An Israel carved out of Germany would be way more peaceful and have less conflict than Israel today. I have no clue how anyone can argue otherwise.