Middle East Conflict

Yes, most people that are bothered to read and understand Zionist issue know what you say is correct.

I don't know if it's been answered on here, but let me ask anyway; does anybody know why the US turned away the Jews from setting up in their land, at first and why Germany wasn't chosen as a place of resettlement after defeat?

As far as I know the European Ashkenazis are only related by religion the land in Israel, whilst the actual 'indigenous' Jews in the Arab region lived in relative peace with other religious denominations before the settlers came in.
The US started restricting immigration in the 1920s. By then around 3m Jews had come to the USA fleeing pogroms in Eastern Europe. There were around 5m Jews in the USA by the start of WW2. Few had wanted to go to Israel, and there was an active anti-Zionist* movement from the 19th century, and it's a very small number now thinking of Aliyah and emigrating to Israel. *Anti-Zionist in the sense of arguing against a Jewish homeland, believing Jews should assimilate (as in make any other country their home, though assimilation can come to mean ceasing to be observant Jews). It's Jeremiah's advice during the Exile (or rather, Yahweh's command):"Seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare". See the Pittsburgh Platform of 1885: "We consider ourselves no longer a nation, but a religious community, and therefore expect neither a return to Palestine, nor a sacrificial worship under the sons of Aaron, nor the restoration of any of the laws concerning the Jewish state."

I'm not sure there was any serious suggestion of resettling Jews in the land that had perpetrated the Holocaust (the Jewish pre-war population of Germany was about half a million, of whom about a third died).

The actual genetic makeup of Jewish populations is problematic, two thousand years after the expulsion from Judea (while the vast majority of Diaspora Jews from the Exile never went back to Judea / Israel). Some say the Jews and Arabs in Palestine in the 19th century were genetically indistinguishable. If you really want bedtime reading:


 
Last edited:
Now we've established what you meant, that the winners in a war often claim territory, we can turn to the alternative.

UN charter Aims, Article 1: To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace"

So should Israel continue to try and gain territory by war and displacing other people (which you say you were not advocating), or abide by UN resolutions saying they shouldn't? .
I don’t find the UN to be nearly the effective instrument it was envisaged to be when created. It has become a liberal political tool of coercion that often seeks to place nation states in vulnerable political positions.

That said, I think that every ceasefire to allow the sides (and their proxies!) to talk is an advancement towards ultimate peace, in whatever form that presents.

There is no “cookie cutter” approach to complicated geopolitical issues and only a fool would start planting place markers on what EITHER side should or should not want, or demand.

History has shown that war redraws boundaries. Whether that occurs this time, I don’t know given the animosity and global outrage at the circumstances on the ground.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.