Zionism

[Disinterested]

This topic is always good for heated irrational name calling, but in the interests of rational discourse can you make an effort to remain level headed and reasonable? I thank you in advance.

What does Zionism mean to you?

[Nono]

A homeland for the Jews. (The fact that, in practice, they dispossessed the residents to achieve it doesn't alter the definition.)

Any you're so right: this thread's a lightning rod for rant. :)

[Disinterested]

Who is "they?"

[shrike]

A homeland for the Jews.

Agreed.

The fact that, in practice, they dispossessed the residents to achieve it doesn't alter the definition

That's arguable if the most of the residents were left by force or just fled and another issue if those residents have not come recently to seek job opportunities as land was developed.

[Disinterested]

Arabs living in the territory owned by Britain known as Palestine prior to the creation of the state of Israel by the United Nations in 1948 were offered the right to remain in Israel under the partitioning agreement. The ones who took it have done well in Israel for the most part; the ones who didn't chose to become "dispossessed." This created the Palestinian refugee situation that exists today.

[PatrickHenry]

Most people who have an opinion on such matters are biased. There seems to be little in the way of dispassionate analysis on this issue.

In my opinion, Palestinian refugees who fled to avoid being enmeshed in warfare have a right to return and live on their property. Since the Zionist State won't allow this, they engaged in "ethnic cleansing."
http://www.al-awda.org/

[Disinterested]

That's a revisionist historical account of what happened in 1948 and what is happening today.

[icu]

"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism,colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands." - Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.

I dont mind aiding someone to fulfil DUTY

Click

[Mia]

A political group, in a sense, obsessed with not just a homeland for Jews, but ALL of what they think that God promised the Jews, (even though they are athiests), at ANY cost to humanity. Weird bunch. And ruthless. And twisted. Oops....

[Disinterested]

Quote by: icu "It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism,colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands." - Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972. I dont mind aiding someone to fulfil DUTY Click

Is a radical Zionist's quotation representative of what Zionism means to you?

[shrike]

but ALL of what they think that God promised the Jews, (even though they are athiests),

Isnt that oxymoron and shows that you know nothing about Zionism?

[Disinterested]

Quote by: Mia A political group, in a sense, obsessed with not just a homeland for Jews, but ALL of what they think that God promised the Jews, (even though they are athiests), at ANY cost to humanity. Weird bunch. And ruthless. And twisted. Oops....

I believe that represents the ultra-orthodox Zionist movement which is a small extremist faction of Zionism.

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: Disinterested That's a revisionist historical account of what happened in 1948 and what is happening today.

Historical revisionism is important. It allows suppressed and discounted information to inform the future. Without revisionism we might still think the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was unprovoked. This isn't the same as denying the Holocaust...

[Nono]

Quote by: Disinterested (...)the right to remain in Israel under the partitioning agreement(...)

Who ended up with the land? That's the question. You make it sound as if the Israelis wouldn't stoop to a land-grab. But what do you call the illegal settlements built on land occupied for -- what has it been? -- the past 38+ years? That makes all the protesting about Fair-Deal-in-48 sound a trifle disingenuous.

As for how so many Arabs became refugees, it's true that both sides bear heavy responsibility for this.

[Mia]

Quote by: shrike Isnt that oxymoron and shows that you know nothing about Zionism?

It is an oxymoron - part of why they are so twisted, not an indicator I know nothing about them.

[Mia]

Quote by: Disinterested I believe that represents the ultra-orthodox Zionist movement which is a small extremist faction of Zionism.

Are you a Zionist?

[icu]

No but there is an ugly truth in what this "radical" Zionist says. "there is no Zionism,colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands."

Maybe he responded to the main man Herzl

"Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." - Theodore Herzl, World Zionist Organization founder , speaking about Palestine, June 12, 1895

"We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?' Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!'" - Yitzhak Rabin, memoirs, New York Times, 23 Oct 1979

[shrike]

icu
Could you give source to your quotes because I suspect them to be hoax or diverted thank you.

But what do you call the illegal settlements built on land occupied for -- what has it been?

First of all its not occupied but disputed and the illegality of settlements arguable too.
this territories have not been part of any state (Jordanian annexation was never recognized) since the time of the Ottoman Empire so there was no state to occupy it from also according to the Camp David Accords (1978) with Egypt, the 1994 agreement with Jordan and the Oslo Accords with the PLO, the final status of the territories would be decided only when there was a permanent agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.
About the settlements because the territories as i said before they were never part of any stat Geneva doesn't apply also Geneva apply only if there is no agreement between two parties but there is Oslo records that leave the issue of settlements to be negotiated later.
Also don't forget how the land came to Israeli control. Don't you think that aggressor should be punished? Or maybe some of you think that Germany should get its land back that was lost in WW2?

[PatrickHenry]

Quote by: shrike Don't you think that aggressor should be punished?

We obviously see aggression from different sides of the fence. For an Israeli defender of the status quo, the Zionist state can't be the aggressor, by definition. Those with the opposite view think otherwise.

[shrike]

For an Israeli defender of the status quo, the Zionist state can't be the aggressor, by definition. Those with the opposite view think otherwise.

I never said that of course it can be for example Lebanon War we should retreated right away after cleaning the area from terrorists,