1. Before Israel, there was a British mandate, not a Palestinian state
2. Before the British Mandate, there was the Ottoman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
3. Before the Ottoman Empire, there was the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, not a Palestinian state.
4. Before the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, there was the Ayubid Arab-Kurdish Empire, not a Palestinian state.
5. Before the Ayubid Empire, there was the Frankish and Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, not a Palestinian state.
6. Before the Kingdom of Jerusalem, there was the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, not a Palestinian state.
7. Before the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, there was the Byzantine empire, not a Palestinian state.
8. Before the Byzantine Empire, there were the Sassanids, not a Palestinian state.
9. Before the Sassanid Empire, there was the Byzantine Empire, not a Palestinian state.
10. Before the Byzantine Empire, there was the Roman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
11. Before the Roman Empire, there was the Hasmonean state, not a Palestinian state.
12. Before the Hasmonean state, there was the Seleucid, not a Palestinian state.
13. Before the Seleucid empire, there was the empire of Alexander the Great, not a Palestinian state.
14. Before the empire of Alexander the Great, there was the Persian empire, not a Palestinian state.
15. Before the Persian Empire, there was the Babylonian Empire, not a Palestinian state.
16. Before the Babylonian Empire, there were the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, not a Palestinian state.
17. Before the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, there was the Kingdom of Israel, not a Palestinian state.
18. Before the kingdom of Israel, there was the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, not a Palestinian state.
19. Before the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, there was an agglomeration of independent Canaanite city-kingdoms, not a Palestinian state.
20. Actually, in this piece of land there has been everything, EXCEPT A PALESTINIAN STATE.
@rajk999 saidThere’s never been a Navajo state.
1. Before Israel, there was a British mandate, not a Palestinian state
2. Before the British Mandate, there was the Ottoman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
3. Before the Ottoman Empire, there was the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, not a Palestinian state.
4. Before the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, there was the Ayubid Arab-Kurdish Empire, not a Pale ...[text shortened]... .
20. Actually, in this piece of land there has been everything, EXCEPT A PALESTINIAN STATE.
Are you telling me Indians have no rights to live on their own land? Or Aboriginals in Australia?
Or are you suggesting that because a 2500 year old book suggests something, we must do it?
Or that, because a certain group of people lived in an area 3000 years ago, they have an undying right to own that land?
So, all non-natives can be expelled from the US?
Which state boundaries do we accept as true? The Mongolian empire? Alexander’s empire? The British empire?
What once was or wasn’t a country is never the issue. What’s written 1200 years or longer ago should never be anything more than myth.
Where people have lived for generations is what must be considered.
Imagine, if you will, that the UN decides that New York, New Jersey, down to Florida and across to Texas should be given to the Iranians, because they say that Israel has been bad for them.
So Iranistan, as it will be called, is snatched from the US and put under Iranian rule.
The Iranians implement Sharia law and start sending Americans, in their new country, to refugee camps. But also grab Alabama (Allah only knows why) and California as well, because the US squealed at them.
How would you feel?
There’s never been a country of Texas or New Jersey. There’s never been a country of California. Oh, well, they fell under the federal mandate of the US, but that just doesn’t count...
@Rajk999
And some Palestinians have Canaanite lineage and have (or had) homes that were built at the time of Christ.
If you LIVE on the land that long, it is your HOME. Meanwhile, the invading Euro Jews with no long history
to the land, have the right to throw these people off their own land based on a religious affiliation?
Please!
@athousandyoung saidThanks but how is that relevant?
Palestine = Philistines who founded Gaza as well as two cities Israel currently occupies
British Mandate for Palestine, Roman province of Palestine - you keep leaving that second part out
1 edit
@shavixmir saidIn 1947, the land was partitioned. The British Empire divided it. Is like the Navajo and Apache Indians keep fighting over the same land, so the US Govt divided that area into two and the Apaches are not happy with the division and believe that there must be no Navajos on that land. Nether the Apache nor the Navajo own the land. Indians in the US in particular spent a lot of time fighting over land. Proper ownership and separation is necessary to avoid conflict.
There’s never been a Navajo state.
Are you telling me Indians have no rights to live on their own land? Or Aboriginals in Australia?
Or are you suggesting that because a 2500 year old book suggests something, we must do it?
Or that, because a certain group of people lived in an area 3000 years ago, they have an undying right to own that land?
So, all non-natives can ...[text shortened]... California. Oh, well, they fell under the federal mandate of the US, but that just doesn’t count...
@earl-of-trumps saidWould you say that that entitles Palestinian Muslims to own all of Palestine. Hamas Charter states that every inch of the land of Palestine is theirs. Do you agree with that?
@Rajk999
And some Palestinians have Canaanite lineage and have (or had) homes that were built at the time of Christ.
If you LIVE on the land that long, it is your HOME. Meanwhile, the invading Euro Jews with no long history
to the land, have the right to throw these people off their own land based on a religious affiliation?
Please!
@rajk999 saidGee, why let the people that have been in Palestine for millenia own the land when you can allow
Would you say that that entitles Palestinian Muslims to own all of Palestine. Hamas Charter states that every inch of the land of Palestine is theirs. Do you agree with that?
European invaders to TAKE the land. Sure makes sense to me.
And these damm invaders have the ballz to prevent the Palestinian people from having *their* own land.
In short, I agree that the Palestinians own the land. And under their rules, that includes Sephardi Jews,
who have a long history in the Levant. The Palestinians never threw the Sephardi Jews out of Palestine.
@earl-of-trumps saidYour opinions are too often based on emotion and popular opinions and not facts. Here are the fact
Gee, why let the people that have been in Palestine for millenia own the land when you can allow
European invaders to TAKE the land. Sure makes sense to me.
And these damm invaders have the ballz to prevent the Palestinian people from having *their* own land.
In short, I agree that the Palestinians own the land. And under their rules, that includes Sephardi Je ...[text shortened]... have a long history in the Levant. The Palestinians never threw the Sephardi Jews out of Palestine.
Overview of Palestine's demographics from the 1st century to the Mandate Era
Year JewsChristians Muslims Total
1st c.Majority––~2,500
4th c.MajorityMinority–>1st c.[1][2]
5th c.MinorityMajority–>1st c.
6th c.MinorityMajority–
7th c.MinorityMajority–
8th c.MinorityMajorityMinority
9th c.MinorityMajorityMinority
10th c.MinorityMajorityMinority
11th c.MinorityMajorityMinority
End 12th c.MinorityMinorityMajority>225
14th c.MinorityMinorityMajority150
1533–153956145157
1690–1691211219232
1800722246275
18904357432532
19149470525689
19228471589752
1931175897601,033
19476301431,1811,970
Its a clear sign of bias when you claim that Palestinians should own the land. The land was fairly partitioned by an impartial group of people.
@rajk999 saidRajk: In 1947, the land was partitioned. The British Empire divided it.
In 1947, the land was partitioned. The British Empire divided it. Is like the Navajo and Apache Indians keep fighting over the same land, so the US Govt divided that area into two and the Apaches are not happy with the division and believe that there must be no Navajos on that land. Nether the Apache nor the Navajo own the land. Indians in the US in particular spent a lot of time fighting over land. Proper ownership and separation is necessary to avoid conflict.
No, they didn't as I have repeatedly shown you. Nor did they have any legitimate power to do so under the Mandate.
So why keep repeating this falsehood?
@rajk999 saidRajk: The land was fairly partitioned by an impartial group of people.
Your opinions are too often based on emotion and popular opinions and not facts. Here are the fact
Overview of Palestine's demographics from the 1st century to the Mandate Era
Year JewsChristians Muslims Total
1st c.Majority––~2,500
4th c.MajorityMinority–>1st c.[1][2]
5th c.MinorityMajority–>1st c.
6th c.MinorityMajority–
7th c.M ...[text shortened]... lestinians should own the land. The land was fairly partitioned by an impartial group of people.[/b]
No, it wasn't. The proposed partition would have left a 1/3 minority in political control of the majority of the land of Palestine. Moreover, it would have left 400,000 Arabs in a declared Jewish State out of population of 900,000; a situation that would have inevitably led to ethnic cleansing given the attitudes of the Zionist leaders.
Moreover, the partition was never implemented due to the opposition of the Palestine People.
@no1marauder saidThe British did the partition together with the UN.
Rajk: In 1947, the land was partitioned. The British Empire divided it.
No, they didn't as I have repeatedly shown you. Nor did they have any legitimate power to do so under the Mandate.
So why keep repeating this falsehood?
1 edit
@no1marauder saidSpeculation. What if.... Well all that is very nice. The point is that the UN and the ruling power the British proposed a partition and the Jews accepted and the Palestinians rejected. They rather war because they wanted all the land, and they fought for the land and they lost. That's it.
Rajk: The land was fairly partitioned by an impartial group of people.
No, it wasn't. The proposed partition would have left a 1/3 minority in political control of the majority of the land of Palestine. Moreover, it would have left 400,000 Arabs in a declared Jewish State out of population of 900,000; a situation that would have inevitably led to ethnic cleansing given ...[text shortened]... ers.
Moreover, the partition was never implemented due to the opposition of the Palestine People.
1 edit
@rajk999 saidNo, it isn't "it". It is a falsehood as you well know by now.
Speculation. What if.... Well all that is very nice. The point is that the UN and the ruling power the British proposed a partition and the Jews accepted and the Palestinians rejected. They rather war because they wanted all the land, and they fought for the land and they lost. That's it.
What the Palestinian People wanted was a unified State. Given the terms of the Mandate, that is what they should have got. It was the Zionists who unilaterally declared a State against the wishes of the majority of the People in Palestine as soon as the British withdrew. That they were militarily strong enough to defeat those wishes doesn't justify the result - might does not equal right.
@no1marauder saidLOL .. you are a true comedian. They wanted peace then?
No, it isn't "it". It is a falsehood as you well know by now.
What the Palestinian People wanted was a unified State. Given the terms of the Mandate, that is what they should have got. It was the Zionists who unilaterally declared a State against the wishes of the majority of the People in Palestine as soon as the British withdrew. That they were militarily strong enough to defeat those wishes doesn't justify the result - might does not equal right.