quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson So what about the Israelis who were born in Israel after the late 40s? Do they have the right to live there?

Not at he expense of the displaced indigenous population that are still living in refuge camps. They're not "entitled" to the land in any way shape or form. Otherwise I fail to see the problem. But I (in a sense) already addressed that and didn't exactly imply anything as harsh as you're suggesting:

quote:

Originally posted by shaolin_Z Well, if the vast majority of them weren't wiped off the face of the earth, then they might have been able to demand some type of reparations . Let's assume that they were'nt eliminated and this scenario could actually be reality. In that case, the only reason why current Americans/Australians are here (i.e. in America/Australia), is because they inherited the land their forefathers illegitimately conquered and occupied. The implication of that is the following generations have atleast some level of responsibility to ensure the displaced people no longer have to continue to suffer from the injustices and their consequences imposed on them centuries ago. The fact of the matter is that current generations continue to reap the benefits of past injustices. Now since the current generation isn't responsible for something they didn't participare in doesn't change the fact that they continue to reap it's benefits. The reason for this is the fact that the indigenous population are still displaced and experiencing negative consequences the direct resulted from it. Now they can't undo they past, but they can make reperations for it. So they DO have a collective moral responsibilty to accommodate the indigenous population and make sure that they don't continue to feel the after effects of the past. And that doesn't mean they have to pack up their shit and leave, cuz that would be a somewhat similar situation to cause of the problem in the first place. If you ever considered the moral implications such a scenario and the consequent course of action to take, perhaps you would have arrived to a some similar conclusion.

In this case it's quite different as I already pointed out (i.e. this isn't centuries ago where not much can be done to address the plight of the displaced people who're still alive and suffering, and haven't seen justice). So they have a much greater burden of responsibility. Who ever said it's fun or easy?

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson I read the other thread. It looked like a bunch of (paraphrasing here) "Israelis occupied the inhabitants and killed them off" typing.

That's a very misrepresentative oversimplification of what I said. Actually no, it's distorting what I said. I quoted the most relevant part of my post and it isn't hard to conclude what that implies.

quote:

Originally posted by Jake Benson Isn't that what Muslims are doing to everyone else in that araa, North/Central Africa, and moving East of the Middle East?

No, they're not. North/Central Africa and South East asia is already heavily populated by Muslims in the first place. And they certainly aren't militarily occupying, displacing people, and annexing land.

And even if that were the case (which it's not), that doesn't justify anything, and is irrelevant to the Israel/Palestine issue. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Does that clarify things for you?

EDIT: I'm studying for a test rightnow so I won't be responding anytime soon and am forced to keep it short. Hope you don't mind.

___________________
"The Greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." -Stephen Hawking
"First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me— and there was no one left to speak out for me." -Martin Niemöller