So it's a "yes"?
Uhm, I'm agreeing with the fact that the declaration of the State of Israel was the loss of the majority of land to a Jewish minority. Look closely to spot the differences in both images:
[qimg]http://250kb.de/u/090203/j/535a320d.jpg[/qimg]
Palestine for and after Israel's declaration of independence
Israel could have been created somewhere else which didn't need to involve them pushing out 800,000 people and then 61 years of persecuting them.
What do you mean by "current Zionist agenda"? How do you differentiate with the other one, the "past Zionist agenda"?I'll ignore the current Zionist agenda to drag Iran into it.
I agree that Israel has a right to exist.
Well it's there now, how do you consolidate this statement of yours with the one I just quoted above?Israel could have been created somewhere else which didn't need to involve them pushing out 800,000 people and then 61 years of persecuting them.
Neither of you have understood my post.
For Hamas and regimes like Iran, Israel itself is stolen land (again, pay attention, I'm not talking about the illegal settlements in the West Bank, but the entire Israel where it stands now), so therefore for them Israel has no right to exist.
Do you agree with that assessment?
Looks like the Jews got the Negev. Good for them.
But, Oliver, what is wrong with this picture?
http://academickids.com/encyclopedia/images/9/97/UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png
Is it unreasonable?
I don't doubt that, but Israel can't justify theft that way. It's basic ethics.
Incredible, it's like we're having two simultaneous and unrelated conversations, one of which I absolutely don't care for.
If you have nothing to add to what I actually wrote, then stop hopping in conversations you are not concerned with.
800,000 refugees displaced due to conflict, or were they ethnically cleansed?
Well, what's your point then, Goury?
What do you mean by "current Zionist agenda"? How do you differentiate with the other one, the "past Zionist agenda"?
How would you describe your arguments in favor of its existence?
Incredible, it's like we're having two simultaneous and unrelated conversations, one of which I absolutely don't care for.
If you have nothing to add to what I actually wrote, then stop hopping in conversations you are not concerned with.
Surely you don't think Zionism has completely switched agendas following some kind of watershed. go away and research the Zionist view on Iran.
Could you elaborate?Humanitarian
Now personally I have absolutely no problem in the existence of the State of Israel as an entity which allows the Jewish ethnicity/race to have a homeland.
You said you agreed Jews should have their homeland.
Isn't that called "Zionism"? Aren't you contradicting yourself?
You said you agreed Jews should have their homeland.
Isn't that called "Zionism"? Aren't you contradicting yourself?
Not necessarily:
"Zionism is a political movement and an ideology that supports a homeland for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel," Source![]()
Remember? zionist v. Zionism ????
What I keep telling you is that organizations like Hamas and countries like Iran (for example) don't want Jews to have their homeland in Israel, this is what this is all about.Oliver is correct. You really don't have much of a core understanding of what this is all about do you?
Not necessarily:
"Zionism is a political movement and an ideology that supports a homeland for the Jewish people in the Land of Israel," Source![]()