Let's discuss Palestinians

>Why don't any Arab countries take them in?
Several have already taken hundreds of thousands.
There are more Syrian refugees in Egypt alone than in all of Europe.

Palestinians, not Syrians.
There are camps in Lebanon where descendants of 1948 refugees still live.

>Palestinians, not Syrians.
>There are camps in Lebanon where descendants of 1948 refugees still live.
You just answered your own question. Refugees have already been taken in.

If they take them in it invalidates their right of return and validates Israels action

They're the inhabitants who were living there in the first half the C20th, that's all that really matters.

Palestine the state never existed until 1948, the same year that the state of Israel first existed.

>their unique customs, culture and fetishes which distinguish them definitively from the neighboring Jordanians
half of Jordan is Palestinian
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Jordan#Arabs
>their dying language
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Arabic
their arabic dialect is spoken around the world, it's not dying
>Or maybe their leaders, those distinguished figures of strictly Palestinian origin who independently ruled the nation known as Palestine
their leaders take all the money given to them for aid for their own families
algemeiner.com/2014/07/28/gazas-millionaires-and-billionaires-how-hamass-leaders-got-rich-quick/

>historic record
no real national feelings until they started fighting with the jews
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Palestinians

>great literary and artistic tradition
The Palestinian Museum has only one exhibit
palmuseum.org/ehxibitions/exhibitions#ad-image-thumb-2010

continue?

But not always given citizenship.

And it's still the result of ethnic cleansing by Israel.

Just like how Jews don't claim a right of return if they have citizenship in any other state?

>half of Jordan is Palestinian

So is half of Israel.

20%
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

I mean that half of the people who live within the borders that Israel controls are Palestinian Arabs; most of them are not citizens of Israel. Subjects of Israel is the nicest term for their situation.

This is a city not a village as he said.

It actually didn't exist untill the Oslo Accords

jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/demograhics.html

Also you might think this site is bias but they do source it.

Also from 1922 to 1945 (23 years) the muslim population almost doubled.

I'm trying to find population census from neighboring countries if they also had a huge population boom as the muslims in palestine. But our friend mordechai seems right.

>Most Palestinians descend from these 20th century migrants.

>"According to Roberto Bachi, head of the Israeli Institute of Statistics from 1949 onwards, between 1922-1945 there was a net Arab migration into Palestine of between 40,000-42,000, excluding 9,700 people who were incorporated after territorial adjustments were made to the borders in the 1920s. Basing himself on these figures, and including those netted by the border alterations, Joseph Melzer calculates an upper boundary of 8.5% for Arab growth in the two decades, and interprets it to mean the local Palestinian community's growth was generated primarily by natural increase."

How the fuck did they all pop 5-6 kids in that region at that time period and still survive?

Untrue. It was founded in the same year as Israel. There was never a Palestine or Israel before 1948.

It wasn't founded in 1948. A day before the British left, Israel declared independence and took control of the jewish areas. Muslim areas had nothing going on until they were conquered by Syrian, Jordanian, Lebanese and Egyptian military.

So...?

Because some of them moved there during the latter half of the C19th and the early half of the C20th, they aren't legitimate residents of the region?

You can look it up if you like.

Israel and Palestine were created on the same day; neighbouring states invaded after this. Palestine was then annexed by Israel and the neighbouring states. The areas of Palestine that were annexed during the first war were also ethnically cleansed. This process was not so rapid or complete in the West Bank or Gaza Strip.

Palestinians from Nablus are definitely arabized Samaritans, who lived in the area much sooner than Ashkeniggers.

They're as legitimate as the jews then who started to come around the same time.

>The areas of Palestine that were annexed during the first war were also ethnically cleansed. This process was not so rapid or complete in the West Bank or Gaza Strip.
>This process was not so rapid or complete in the West Bank or Gaza Strip.

Are you kidding me? Of course they were not ethnically cleansed because they were under Jordanian and Egyptian rule. Also they just fled and reside in refugee camps.

Alternatively can you show me some text or video where palestinians declare independence?

Sorry forgot video.

youtube.com/watch?v=6ZDSBF5xtoo

The parts that Israel annexed were majority Muslim Arab Palestinians before the war, and they were majority Israeli Jewish after the war. This is the 1948 war.

I wonder how this could have happened without ethnic cleansing taking place.

As said before they fled and weren't allowed back for obvious security reasons.

Who would let the enemy back inside your territory behind your strategic defense borders?

Hi Moishe

dear jews, please stop being pathetic, might makes right. Historical claims are only semantics

Hello.

...

I see absolutely no justification for either Israel OR Palestine existing, literally fucking none. Even recreating the Crusader states would make more sense from a historical perspective.

This could be said for 70% of all the countries worldwide, percentage might be even higher in Europe.

This.

Wether by blood and iron or some weird legal jewry if you are conquered then you are conquered. Fuck off and get over it. This is the way of geo politics and the world.

What about 2006? Israel get ejected from Lebanon, their puppet militia the SLA collapsed, and the UN established a demilitarized zone to prevent further Israeli landgrabs, effectively blocking any northern expansion.

I dont care about either of you sandniggers just dont influence our politics and dont come here because your culture is subhuman shit slightly above niggers

Don't you mean the 18 years war?
I don't remember us setting up a puppet in 2006, it was a purely rescue mixed with inflict damage on Hezbollah mission

The SLA collapsed way before the 2006 war.

Would you let civilians return to their homes when the war was over?

If Israel lost a war and all Israelis were expelled in the same way, you'd also support the Palestinians in this policy?

Are you talking about the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah?

If so yes it was a clusterfuck on Israel's side.

>slowly building up your forces instead of going all-in from the minute there's war
>letting soldiers get on the battlefield with phones
>letting reserves fight instead of experienced soldiers
>fighting in muddy conditions in the hills of the levant coast.

I don't think Israel will ever get back into Lebanon before flattening every meter land.

Congratz. Instead of becoming occupied and probably surviving, now every suspected building will be bombarded by mortars, artillery, missiles and bombardments.

And if you don't believe this, remember, you are problematic. And probably full on racist too.

Depends what sort of civilians. If those civilians would support any arab nation against Israel then that's a security risk Israel shouldn't be taking as they would be taking Troje's horse inside.

Sadly there still isn't any peace between Israel and the majority of Arab states so naturally those fleeing civilians can't return.

Israel is still in a state of war.

...

>Also from 1922 to 1945 (23 years) the muslim population almost doubled.

Protip: after the 1800s every culture eventually gets a massive population boom. Europe was first because the industrial revolution started there. Middle east later. Sub-Saharan Africa right now (look at Nigeria's numbers). s

Saudi Arabia did not always have millions of people in it.

>Depends what sort of civilians. If those civilians would support any arab nation against Israel then that's a security risk Israel shouldn't be taking as they would be taking Troje's horse inside.

Hmmm. Sounds like a good argument for preventing Jewish immigration before 1948.

How did the Israelis know that all those who fled the war were opposed to Israel?

And then you'd be equally in support of Palestine ejecting all Israelis from the territory, if they got the chance?

>Israel is still in a state of war.

Partly by choice.

> now every suspected building will be bombarded by mortars, artillery, missiles and bombardments.

par for the course if you happen to neighbour Israel

>falling for Israeli propaganda
Politically motivated revisionist history is not Veeky Forums.

Do you have any census records of MENA region from early 20th century. I tried to look but couldn't find any yet. Population boom in Europe happened simultaneously in many West-European regions. Shouldn't the same trend have happened to all neighboring countries?

>Do you have any census records of MENA region from early 20th century.
No. That would be nice wouldn't it?

>Shouldn't the same trend have happened to all neighboring countries?
I don't think so. Not all middle east countries are created the same. Saudi is going to be pretty desolate before oil trade kicks in. The real place to compare imo would be Lebanon, which is close by and fairly fertile.

But Jews have the might
Palestinians just cry so liberal Americans feel bad

>How did the Israelis know that all those who fled the war were opposed to Israel?

Better be safe than sorry, desu

>How did the Israelis know that all those who fled the war were opposed to Israel?

No, but I get what your trying to say. Israel's goal is to have a jewish state in Israel/Palestine region. As someone else said before, might makes right. Israel acts what's in her best interest in the land that she controls.

I'm not trying to be some sort of egalitarian. In Israel's basic view. Jews = loyal citizens; Arabs = questionable loyal citizens.

Palestinians have destroyed that trust with two intifadas. While the Druze minority have builded over the years that trust and even serve in the Israeli army and Israel even tries to help the Druze in Syria. Because she knows that Druze will be loyal citizens to Israel and not try to backstab her.

algemeiner.com/2015/06/05/israel-is-secretly-protecting-druze-community-in-syria-hints-likud-lawmaker/

>Partly by choice.

Israel is still at war with with all Arab nations except Egypt and Jordan.

Egypt and Jordan don't get bombarded because they signed a peace treaty with Israel. Israel is still in a state of war and can still have war operations in those countries.

Same way N. and S. Korea are still in a state of war but neither side actually attacks the other except for the few bombardments.

So maybe counter argument instead of using /pol/ tactics.

>Better be safe than sorry, desu

So ethnically cleanse land you conquer, as standard practice? Israel ethnically cleanses when they conquer, so would they be ethnically cleansed if they were conquered?

>No, but I get what your trying to say. Israel's goal is to have a jewish state in Israel/Palestine region. As someone else said before, might makes right. Israel acts what's in her best interest in the land that she controls.

Jewish but not democratic? Then you're saying their objective IS to ethnically cleanse all of Israeli controlled territory, eventually?

>I'm not trying to be some sort of egalitarian. In Israel's basic view. Jews = loyal citizens; Arabs = questionable loyal citizens.

Thanks to Israeli policy.

>Palestinians have destroyed that trust with two intifadas. While the Druze minority have builded over the years that trust and even serve in the Israeli army and Israel even tries to help the Druze in Syria. Because she knows that Druze will be loyal citizens to Israel and not try to backstab her.

Two intifadas after the Israelis destroyed the trust of Palestinians by stealing their land during a two-decade long occupation with no end in sight?

>Israel is still at war with with all Arab nations except Egypt and Jordan.

They're 'at war' with their Palestinian subjects by choice. Jordan and Egypt are largely their allies in this conflict.

>The real place to compare imo would be Lebanon

It was the first country I tried to look but could only some site claiming the census of 1933 to be false.

web.macam.ac.il/~arnon/Int-ME/extra/LEBANESE CENSUS 1932.htm

The problem with the census is that the whole Middle east was one big fuckup since the Skyes-Picot treaty which basically divided the Levant province into several states.

Israel is at peace with the majority of its neighbors. It simply wants to disenfranchise the indigenous population because it is afraid of their voting power.

And the argument that they shouldn't reintegrate the displaced people into society because they might be mad doesn't fly. In the United States we desegregated, most people were mad, many still are, but the law is the law and people have rights. Sure black kids beat up white kids every day in public schools, but fear of that isn't going to inform national policy, especially not one as blatantly racist as Israel's.

Two of the most egregious points of contention in my opinion are:

1. Labeling any mention of "Palestinian human rights" as offensive. As far as I know, despite losing their nationality, Palestinians remain human and therefore have human rights. Bullying people into agreeing with you doesn't change that.

2. Only bulldozing the homes of Palestinian attackers, but not Jewish Israelis. What about the guy who killed the 16 year old girl at the pride parade? Why is his house still standing? Was what he did not outrageous in the extreme? If Israelis are peaceful people, then they should have very little to lose from an equal and fair application of this policy, since relatively few would actually be affected by it. I'd argue that if you actually care about your nation's image, a few houses here and there are nothing compared to a reputation for racism.

>So ethnically cleanse land you conquer, as standard practice? Israel ethnically cleanses when they conquer, so would they be ethnically cleansed if they were conquered?

Ethnically cleanse ≠ fleeing from war and still not returning because there's still a war.

And even then. Have you ever played EU IV. There you can change cultures in regions. Which basically means ethnically cleansing the local population. Whatever your early 21th century morals tell you. Genociding was always part of any war and will still be in the future.

If tommorow Arab nations find a way to defeat Israel for good there will be a huge ethnic cleansing of Jews in the area.

>Jewish but not democratic? Then you're saying their objective IS to ethnically cleanse all of Israeli controlled territory, eventually?

No it's to keep a jewish absolute majority. No need for ethnic cleansing for that.

>with no end in sight?

There were the Oslo accords. There was hope for a better future and suddenly came the Intifada? In my book that's pretty much breaking the trust that was recently build.

>by choice

So if Israel would lay down their arms, take away all jews from Westbank like they did in Gaza. There would be no Palestinian attack? There would be no Arab nation to attack Israel as in 1948, 1967, 1973? Even not some random lone wolf saying that this is a retaliation because his cousin's house got destroyed the year before?

>And even then. Have you ever played EU IV. There you can change cultures in regions. Which basically means ethnically cleansing the local population. Whatever your early 21th century morals tell you. Genociding was always part of any war and will still be in the future.

You honestly don't think it's going too far for a victorious warring state to ethnically cleanse an area they have conquered?

>If tommorow Arab nations find a way to defeat Israel for good there will be a huge ethnic cleansing of Jews in the area.

And you'd be as okay with that as you are with the Israelis ethnically cleansing their territory, yes?

>No it's to keep a jewish absolute majority. No need for ethnic cleansing for that.

There already was, the Palestinians who were evicted during the 1948 war. If this ethnic cleansing didn't take place, there wouldn't be a Jewish absolute majority in the territory inside the Green Line.

>There were the Oslo accords. There was hope for a better future and suddenly came the Intifada? In my book that's pretty much breaking the trust that was recently build.

What year? Palestinians were almost entirely peaceful while under occupation and while being ethnically cleansed from their homeland for two decades. Did the Oslo Accords happen in like 1970?

>So if Israel would lay down their arms, take away all jews from Westbank like they did in Gaza. There would be no Palestinian attack? There would be no Arab nation to attack Israel as in 1948, 1967, 1973? Even not some random lone wolf saying that this is a retaliation because his cousin's house got destroyed the year before?

They'd have to actually leave Gaza first, before we can know what it would be like for the Israelis to leave Gaza.

In 1967, the Israelis attacked all of their neighbours.

>random lone wolf

The result of Israeli policy, you'll agree.

>Israel is at peace with the majority of its neighbors

Define peace? For me Israel is in an armistice with most Arab countries. That's still not peace as Belgium and Netherlands have.

>And the argument that they shouldn't reintegrate the displaced people into society because they might be mad doesn't fly.

Is there a chance they might disrupt public order and join the next intifada? If the answer is I don't know, then Israel has every right to deny people in the territory it controls. As said before, Israel is still in a war and shouldn't take any risks. Even though today it does not compare to the likes of the World Wars or the intifada. There's is still a war going on.

>And you'd be as okay with that as you are with the Israelis ethnically cleansing their territory, yes?

Already explained that there is no ethnically cleansing going on.

>evicted

fled from war

>Oslo Accords

Were signed in 1993 and 1995. Second Intifada started in 2000 after the signing. Also not knowing about the Oslo Accords shows how you don't know a lot of about the conflict.

>They'd have to actually leave Gaza first, before we can know what it would be like for the Israelis to leave Gaza.

Israeli's left Gaza in 2005 I believe. There isn't any jew left there.

>In 1967, the Israelis attacked all of their neighbours.

What part of war do you not understand? Sometimes you attack and sometimes you defend? 1967 war was a classic example of 'attack is the best defense'.

>The result of Israeli policy, you'll agree.

So you'd rather have Palestinians break the trust for a better future so that one guy can have his 'little' revenge. If that's the case. Vietnamese, Indians, Blacks, Germans and Mexicans should according to your logic attacks the US as a revenge for US imperialism plunging the world back to war. As would that little lone terrorist would do to the new situation in Israel.

I'm going to bed now. If thread is still up tomorrow. I'll continue to reply.

>Already explained that there is no ethnically cleansing going on.

There is. Any of the property owned by Israelis in the West Bank is on land that was ethnically cleansed. Are you having trouble with it because Israel has only removed most Palestinians from Palestine, and not all Palestinians from Palestine? That's still ethnic cleansing.

>fled from war

Fled from war, after which their property was...? Nothing happened to it and they returned to it?

>Were signed in 1993 and 1995. Second Intifada started in 2000 after the signing. Also not knowing about the Oslo Accords shows how you don't know a lot of about the conflict.

Yes. Palestinians were enduring occupation and ethnic cleansing for two decades before organized violent resistance began; the Oslo Accords were another decade and a half after this.

>Israeli's left Gaza in 2005 I believe. There isn't any jew left there.

They still rule Gaza. What happens if Gaza invites Egyptian soldiers to guard it's border with Israel? An independent country can do things like that without asking permission.

>What part of war do you not understand? Sometimes you attack and sometimes you defend? 1967 war was a classic example of 'attack is the best defense'.

So the Israelis started that war.

Do you think it's fair to say that Arabs also attacked Israel in 'attack is the best defense' mode?

>So you'd rather have Palestinians break the trust for a better future so that one guy can have his 'little' revenge.

They might if the US had, for example, conquered Germany, evicted Germans, and gave their property, their land, to Americans, in an attempt to colonize the entire region. Had the USA only colonized half of Germany, there may be those who wanted to attack America for that policy, even if they had ceased at some point.

while the average persons friday consists of a BBQ or a night out the average pali will throw rocks at passing veichles and riot until they get dispersed by gas and flashbangs

lowest lifeform on the planet after whites honestly

:^)

>Is there a chance they might disrupt public order and join the next intifada? If the answer is I don't know, then Israel has every right to deny people in the territory it controls. As said before, Israel is still in a war and shouldn't take any risks. Even though today it does not compare to the likes of the World Wars or the intifada. There's is still a war going on.

People don't join uprisings for the hell of it. They do it because they are desperate. Being denied basic rights and being deprived of their land and livelihood will do that to a person. Blacks rioted many times in the 60s but the USA responded not by depriving them of rights further, but by giving them more rights. They also heavily infiltrated and criminally prosecuted the worst elements of the black nationalist movement. Carrot and stick.

Israel is all stick and no carrot. Hamas is your big excuse now but it didn't even exist when most of the expulsions took place, nor would it for decades after. You let a wound fester for that long no wonder it gets infected.

There are so many Palestinian refugees are in Jordan that they tried to take over the country once.

They will, eventually. They consider Jordanians to be backward tribe people.

No no, the palestinians should just lay there and take whatever Israel throws at them without anything but a strongly worded letter.

It builds trust.

A long discredited fraud, From Time Immemorial.

During Roman times the area was populated by Jew, Christians, and pagans who spoke related dialects of Aramaic, although Greek would have been the language of administration.