That doesn’t change the fact they are now people who identify themselves that way and have for multiple generations. Their situation is unique and their humanity cannot be taken away because you fail to recognize them. The point of the thread
So if I recognize my home and yard and self-identify it as “uhlaw97istan,” with my nationality as “uhlaw97istani,” should I automatically expect legitimacy and recognition as a separate nationality?
What if I had decedents for a few generations who did the same? Same question. Follow your logic.
Did you read the article? Or are you talking about how the neighboring Arab states that refuse to recognize the State of Israel and seek it’s destruction?
Yes, because my identity as a “uhlaw97istani” would be a made-up and invalid identity; pure delusion and fantasy.
No, but if I attacked them or threatened them (even under the guise or with the justification of my invalid/made-up identity), they could certainly fight back against me, and would have every right to in self-defense.
They could even come onto my property which I regard as a separate nation to hunt me down.
That’s what Israel is doing to the Arabs that attacked on 10/7.
No such country on the map.
If you mean to say that is what is going on in Gaza, let me correct you. Israel is fighting back in self-defense against the terrorist entities, and their leadership, that exist in Gaza. Sadly, there has been collateral damage as a result, which occurs in every war.
But the mere fact that there was or would be collateral damage in Germany and Japan in WW2 wouldn’t be a good argument to make against the countries that Germany and Japan first aggressed when they in turn fight back in self-defense and counter-attack to prevent further death and destruction and Germany and Japan’s hands. Those countries that Germany and Japan first attacked/aggressed could certainly fight back against them in self-defense, attack them and even invade them and overthrow the people/entities in those countries responsible for the first aggression, all the while destroying their forces and military capability, which they did.
The fact that collateral damage will occur at that time is not, by itself, a reason for not fighting back against the first aggressors, nor would it be a good basis for criticizing those that did.
Interesting that you chose these 3 images. None of them show that there was an Arab nation called Palestine. During the British Mandate of Palestine, people were referred to as Jewish Palestinians or Arab Palestinians. Jews made up the majority, but it was a British controlled land.
The middle picture actually says “Israel” in Hebrew. My Hebrew is rusty, so I’m not sure what the first 3 letters are (reading right to left), but the rest of the word is definitely Israel.
Referring to a region in the Middle East as it existed in ancient times or long in the past as “Palestine” on a map and saying that there’s a COUNTRY called “Palestine” currently depicted on today’s maps are two totally different things.
As I said, there is (present tense) NO SUCH COUNTRY as Palestine on the map. Arguably the Levant may have been called “Palestine” at different points in history. That’s a REGION, not a country. Two of those maps refer to a REGION as “Palestine” with several different nations depicted; one even showing Biblical nations that existed in that region in ancient times. But neither map shows a country or nation named Palestine.
Times have changed. Today, that region isn’t really referred to as Palestine, except by separatist belligerents.
But even so…
As far as COUNTRIES go, there is no such COUNTRY as Palestine on the map today.
There’s Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon. All have widely recognized borders.
And there are some areas like the West Bank and Gaza that could, in theory, be thought of as Palestinian territory, but you generally don’t see a map showing a COUNTRY called “Palestine.”
If you do, it was most likely drawn up by an entity like Hamas, and might not even show the COUNTRY of Israel, because the person making such a map likely rejects the notion that Israel even exists and/or denies Israel’s right to exist.
That would be BIGOTED, just so you know, and just because you like to throw around that term.
If there’s no such country as “Palestine,” then of course we can ignore anti-Palestinianism, whatever that might be, because it’s hard to be “anti” something, logically speaking that doesn’t exist in the first place.
