Search results for query: *

Not quite sure what youre trying to say, please clarify!?

Well, its either that or...climate change is actually real 😮

I always wondered, if climate change is all a hoax, then why do they want us all to have to eat crickets, its pointless and must just be for jokes...but then i remembered our overlords are secretly lizards and it makes perfect sense!!

Well im talking about the people who have lived in the area for the last 2000 years up until the 20th century. As per my first reply, of course the 1947 solution was going to be accepted by the jewish side, they had come from nothing and been a small percentage of the people living there for...

Well no again, it changed because the indiginous people there converted to islam, one of the saddest things is that many of those were likely directly desended from original jews in the area who first converted to christianity before muslim.

Well no, they were muslims and christians who were living in the mandate of palestine, by the same logic those jews living there were ottomans.

In 1910 they made up less than 10 percent of the population of palestine.

What evidence is there for this?

You think 1947 was extremely unfavourable... granted they were offered the less favourable land on the whole but having gone from being a small percentage of the population and having no land, to being offered a state, was pretty favourable, of course they were going to accept, and as zionist...

"Accidently left his foot on the gas" yeah, ok the willfully gullible.

Peta tikva was still european jews... "The first significant clash between European Jewish agricultural colonists and Arab peasants in Palestine, a conflict over peasant grazing rights in Petah Tikva"

I think you will find that the intention among some of the zionist faction was always to gain all the land, you know some even believed it was their historical god given right?

And youve misunderstood, i didnt make the original comparison and it was pointing out that the same 'reactionary' justification for the organisations development could be applied to both if one wants to make that argument...

They came to the conclusion all the land should be theirs because they didnt believe the arabs would understand negotiation? hmmm ok.

Im quoting in the context of a conversation about their aims being purely reactionary to the arabs. Wouldnt personally agree it was fair game for terrorist acts but hey ho.

Differing from other types of Zionism, Revisionists insisted upon the Jewish right to sovereignty over the whole of Eretz Yisrael, which they equated to Mandatory Palestine and Transjordan. It was the chief ideological competitor to the dominant socialist Labor Zionism. Revisionist Zionism...

I gave it to you several posts ago, you could always, and this might shock you, use google. Also this definately doesnt sound reactionary: In the 1988 charter, Hamas' declared objectives were to wage an armed struggle against Israel, liberate Palestine from Israeli occupation... As i said, the...

And again you would do well to read the revisionist zionism link i gave you and understand their aims, they werent reactionary to arab actions, and then the exact same argument can be made. And whats your point, i didnt say they do?

Youve jumped in on the middle of a discussion and misunderstood the premise and context of the comment, thats not the argument being made.

Not quite sure what you mean by your first question, please elaborate? And yes, they were incoroporated into the IDF.