Those are the people who were allowed to stay, ruled under military law (not unlike the modern West Bank) for 20 years and only then got anything resembling human rights. I say anything resembling because they are still second class citizens.
Removing 80% of a land’s people (which is what Israel did in 1948-1949) is ethnic cleansing.
Ah ok. Sure, that’s true. But it’s still something, right? I’ve lived in Haifa and Akko (which is predominantly an Arab community) and I’ve seen that coexistence is possible. Arabs have businesses, families, pay the same taxes as Israelis and run their lives. So the whole ethnic cleansing thing is hard for me to swallow. Are the Likud opportunists exploiting a crisis to farm more land for Israel? Absolutely and it’s despicable.
Nobody is saying otherwise, not even Hamas (they dropped that in 2017).
Arabs have businesses, families, pay the same taxes as Israelis and run their lives. So the whole ethnic cleansing thing is hard for me to swallow
Do you see Native Americans having businesses, families and paying the same taxes as white Americans and find the idea that they were victims of genocide as soon as 150 years ago hard to swallow?
You need to remember something: Israel’s UN-assigned borders (to say nothing of the territory they took in 1949) used to contain 55% of all Palestinians. The Palestinians who were driven from their homes during the Nakba were about half the total population. If there was no ethnic cleansing there wouldn’t be Arab communities, because Arabs would be everywhere.
Yes, I don’t disagree with what you’re saying here, but we’re reverting to historical context once again. I’m going to check out of this thread since I see the downvote brigade is here and I’m tired but I appreciate the discussion. Have a good one.
Those are the people who were allowed to stay, ruled under military law (not unlike the modern West Bank) for 20 years and only then got anything resembling human rights. I say anything resembling because they are still second class citizens.
Removing 80% of a land’s people (which is what Israel did in 1948-1949) is ethnic cleansing.
Nope. You are confused. I’m talking about Israeli citizens with full rights. I’m not talking about the residents of areas B & C.
Yes, and I’m saying that they only gained those “full” (they’re not) rights after 20 years of what is going on in the West Bank now.
Ah ok. Sure, that’s true. But it’s still something, right? I’ve lived in Haifa and Akko (which is predominantly an Arab community) and I’ve seen that coexistence is possible. Arabs have businesses, families, pay the same taxes as Israelis and run their lives. So the whole ethnic cleansing thing is hard for me to swallow. Are the Likud opportunists exploiting a crisis to farm more land for Israel? Absolutely and it’s despicable.
Nobody is saying otherwise, not even Hamas (they dropped that in 2017).
Do you see Native Americans having businesses, families and paying the same taxes as white Americans and find the idea that they were victims of genocide as soon as 150 years ago hard to swallow?
You need to remember something: Israel’s UN-assigned borders (to say nothing of the territory they took in 1949) used to contain 55% of all Palestinians. The Palestinians who were driven from their homes during the Nakba were about half the total population. If there was no ethnic cleansing there wouldn’t be Arab communities, because Arabs would be everywhere.
Yes, I don’t disagree with what you’re saying here, but we’re reverting to historical context once again. I’m going to check out of this thread since I see the downvote brigade is here and I’m tired but I appreciate the discussion. Have a good one.