Chuck Schumer: Palestinians are the reason there is no peace in the Middle East

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I should have been more clear - The PA routinely denies Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, which is to deny the Jews their historic homeland.

No they don't. Not for the past 25 years. Read the Oslo Accords.

"We will never recognize the Jewishness of the State of Israel" - Mahmoud Abbas - November 2014.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-palestinians-will-never-recognize-israel-as-jewish-state/

That's not denying Israel's right to exist. That's standing up for the rights of Israeli Arabs and Druze (1.5 million) not to be considered foreigners in their own country.

You wouldn't support the United States being declared a white state, would you?

I wouldn't be surprised if at minimum he supported the U.S. being declared a Christian state.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The truth: Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud cohorts are the a reason there is no peace in the Middle East.

FTFY - There are multiple reasons why there is no peace there and Netanyahoo is merely one of them.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

their hard and thankless work in developing it properly

This is the Zionist claim that I have the hardest time swallowing for the simple reason it is the same bunk every other group of European colonialists used to justify their colonies.  The fact that Zionism  happened to be an European colonialist ideology centered around a group of European colonialists who could trace their ancestors to having once lived in the area they proposed to colonize doesn't justify it in my opinion.

That said, regardless of whether the State of Israel should've been created is a pointless argument.  It does exist, and the Israelis there exist, just as the Palestinians exist, and no peace is possible unless all sides admit those basic facts and accept the resulting implications of those facts.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

their hard and thankless work in developing it properly

This is the Zionist claim that I have the hardest time swallowing for the simple reason it is the same bunk every other group of European colonialists used to justify their colonies.  The fact that Zionism  happened to be an European colonialist ideology centered around a group of European colonialists who could trace their ancestors to having once lived in the area they proposed to colonize doesn't justify it in my opinion.

[...]

I understand, but there's a very clear difference. The European colonialists (save for Americans and perhaps some other unique cases, which are also different in many ways) dumped money and modern armies on the colonies and forced the natives to work for them, while Jewish settlers did the hard work themselves, while facing opposition from both British authorities (who also admittedly had a hand in developing the place, but in different ways) and Arabic locals.

[...]

You're still operating from the colonialist presumptions that:
1) Only outsiders could have developed the area, and
2) Development is always intrinsically good.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

their hard and thankless work in developing it properly

This is the Zionist claim that I have the hardest time swallowing for the simple reason it is the same bunk every other group of European colonialists used to justify their colonies.  The fact that Zionism  happened to be an European colonialist ideology centered around a group of European colonialists who could trace their ancestors to having once lived in the area they proposed to colonize doesn't justify it in my opinion.

[...]

I understand, but there's a very clear difference. The European colonialists (save for Americans and perhaps some other unique cases, which are also different in many ways) dumped money and modern armies on the colonies and forced the natives to work for them, while Jewish settlers did the hard work themselves, while facing opposition from both British authorities (who also admittedly had a hand in developing the place, but in different ways) and Arabic locals.

[...]

You're still operating from the colonialist presumptions that:
1) Only outsiders could have developed the area, and
2) Development is always intrinsically good.

Am I saying only Jews (not outsiders- there have always been at least some Jews in Israel) could've brought prosperity to this land? No. Am I saying they're the only ones who did? Yeah. They've worked hard to completely change the face of this land and make it a much better place to live.

Considering how the water resources of the area are being unsustainably used, I'd reserve judgment on whether it's been made better, even if one believes that man is greater than nature.

Also, since Jews were there even before the Mandate, does that not make Ottoman misgovernance at minimum an equal if not superior explanation for the changes since? Democracy and the rule of law do much to explain what's happened in the area without recourse to any explanations depending upon ethnicity. The West Bank hasn't known those under either Jordanian or Israeli occupation, tho the Jordanian occupation was far less harsh and arbitrary since the occupiers were trying to integrate the population, not exclude it.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Jordan once tried to integrate the Palestinians?  How'd that go?

Not well since the Hashemite Kings aren't really from the area but further south.  But they weren't treated any worse than the peasants on the East Bank.