Again, which of the countries you named was formed though the dispossetion and ethnic cleansing of the majority ethnic community, who had lived on the land as a majority community for millennia past. It is not a remotely analogous situation. Moreover, unlike in this case, few people seem to justify and rationalize the actions of the Nazis and the Soviets, who were responsible for most of those deportations in Poland.
Another laughable example. Pakistan was carved only out of those areas of the Indian Subcontinent that had large Muslim majorities for centuries. It was also only created after most of the population in those areas were given the opportunity to vote on the issue, and overwhelmingly demonstrated their support for the formation of Pakistan at the polls. Horrific sassacres and poplation transfers did occur as a result of the breakdown of law and order, but unlike in Israel (which basically needed to disenfranchise and/or ethnically cleanse the Palestinians to form a “Jewish state”), they were not vital to the creation of either state - Pakistan would have had an overwhelming majority of pro-Pakistan Muslims, and Indian would have had an overwhelming majority of pro-India Hindus regardless of whether any population transfer had occured.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the past massacres of history do not justify modern day war crimes. That is an arguement of moral bankrupcy.
That’s an outright, gratuitous** lie**, and nothing more.
Official census data from as late as 1945 shows that Jerusalem was 60% Arab. At this point, it appears that you’re not just manipulating data, rather you (or whoever taught you this rubbish) are just lying through your teeth.
Uhhh…was any effort undertaken to ensure that only Jews who were legally present in Jerusalem before the war were “returning”? I think we both know that the answer to that is no. With the exception of those select people, all the other subsequent Jewish settlers (who at this point, likely comprise the overwhelming majority) are illegal settlers as far as international law and the world community is concerned.
No, actually it’s called trusting impartial third party sources over the propaganda-laced anecdotes of a biased party with a clear vested interest, as posted on an anonymous internet forum. There’s a big difference.
The Zionist state was actually given 2/3 of the coastline, exclusive access to the Red Sea, and most of the fertile land (including the Sharon Plains, and the Jezreel and Jordan Valleys in their entirety).
It’s absolutely hilarious to see that you have the audacity to bring up the idea of compliance with UN resolutions, when Israel has made it abundantly clear that it will trample over any resolution that remotely goes against its territorial aspirations. Tell me, how much significance does Israel accord to Resolution 194, guaranteeing the right of return for Palestinian refugees, and monetary compensation for those who are unable to return.
The hypocrisy is utterly amazing.
Who started what is a matter of debate (there are Israeli Zionist historians who believe that the Irgun and the Lehi would engage in a pattern of provocatory acts of terrorism, sparking an Arab reprisal, and subsequent, generally disproportionate severe response from the Irgun/Lehi) - what is undisputed is that the Zionists were not above engaging in gratuitous acts of terrorism - blowing up hotels, restaurants, cafes, marketplaces, and trains, to accomplish their goals.
As for the remainder of your argument, I don’t think it makes much of a difference whether people fled because the Israeli govenment officially ordered them to leave, or if they fled in fear for their lives after hearing of Zionist death squads massacring entire villages, and seeing their marketplaces and civillian neighborhoods deliberately mortared by the IDF. I agree, not all the Palestinian refugees were directly expelled by the IDF (though hundreds of thousands were, including the Death March of Lydda), but Israel is no less responsible for the campaign of psychological warfare that drove hundreds of thousands of others to flee their homes.
What are you babbling about?
Please show me the statements I have made in support of any attempts to massacre or exile Zionists. Unlike you with your morally bankrupt thought processes, I don’t seek to justify any war crimes, regardless of who committed them, and I certainly don’t believe that any historic war crimes justify similar behavior today (something you clearly do believe). Every time you’ve asked me what I think about the Jewish refugees of the '48 war, I’ve made it clear that I believe they were entitled to the very same rights as guaranteed by the UN. It is you, and your Zionist compatriots, who seek to justify the sub-human treatment meted out to the Palestinians by your government, and apparently believe that they can be dispossesed and moved around like cattle.
I question the legality (and the morality) of claiming a ethnoreligious nation by illegally immigrating to an area to form a demographically significant population, then accomplishing the rest through a campaign of ethnic cleansing. But although Israel was born out of neo-fascism, and the systematic dispossestion and expulsion of an entire people, I do not believe that gives anyone the right to massacre or disenfrancise anyone today.