No, Jews were treated as scapegoats by the Machiavellian leaders of the world, and that has to stop. In fact, I suggested:
On the other hand, there have been multiple genocides against Bengalis. Does that entitle us to one free genocide against someone else? Such as, say, the Buddhist minorities that Bangladesh oppresses?rotting bones wrote: ↑Fri Mar 29, 2024 7:21 pm There could be an international army that explicitly violates the sovereignty to protect minorities across the world.
Israelis might not like it, but I honestly think Palestinians would enjoy being a worse Iraq. It would be a step up from their current predicament.Ares Land wrote: ↑Sat Mar 30, 2024 4:11 pm Increasingly less so, as Israeli capacity ramped up -- and for that matter so did the USSR -- but that's neither here nor there. People are generally not happy with Israel being a US ally; but I don't think they'd be terribly happy with Israel and Palestine looking like Iraq in 2005 except worse.
I don't think it's an analogy. I honestly don't understand how it doesn't fit the definition of colonialism: "Colonialism is the pursuing, establishing and maintaining of control and exploitation of people and of resources by a foreign group of people."
My best guess is that you don't think the Jewish settlers are foreign? My definition of native is anyone who was born somewhere. Revanchism isn't usually considered legitimate, which is why I don't think Israeli citizens should be deported. By the same definition, the Zionists who originally came to Palestine were foreigners.