Thank you, Russian immigrant to Israel, for Nakba Day (Bradley Burston)

[Ken Burch]

9. The Zionist side had been discussing forcible transfer for years.

Last edited Sat May 19, 2012, 04:03 PM - Edit history (2)

Here are some quote from the Wikipedia page on pre-1948 attitudes on both sides of the issue

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_and_Palestinian_Arab_attitudes_before_1948

The cultural Zionist Ahad Ha'am 'saw the historical rights of the Jews as outweighing the Arabs' residential rights in Palestine'[13].
Herzl's companion Max Nordau, a political Zionist, declared that Palestine was the 'legal and historical inheritance' of the Jewish nation, and that the Palestinian Arabs had only 'possession rights'.[14]
David Ben-Gurion, labour Zionism's most important leader, held that the Jewish people had a superior right to Palestine,[15] that Palestine was important to the Jews as a nation and to the Arabs as individuals, and hence the right of the Jewish people to concentrate in Palestine, a right which was not due to the Arabs.[16]
Zeev Jabotinsky, leader of the more radical revisionist Zionists, held that since Palestine was only a very small part of the Land held by the Arab nation, "requisition of an area of land from a nation with large stretches of territory, in order to make a home for a wandering people is an act of justice, and if the land-owning nation does not wish to cede it (and this is completely natural) it must be compelled".[17]

There were some in the Zionist movement who dissented from this mindset, and I'd also like to mention some of them in this passage below from the same Wikipedia page:

The dissident Zionists in Brit Shalom and Ihud thought differently. Hugo Bergmann wrote in 1929: "our opponents [in mainstream Zionism] hold different views. When they speak of Palestine, of our country, they mean 'our country', that is to say 'not their country' [... this belief is based on the concept that in a State] one people, among the people residing there, should be granted the majority right."[18], and Ernst Simon held that the historical right "is binding on us rather than on the Arabs" and therefore an agreement with the Arabs is necesarry.[19]


And once again, shira the State of Israel is not "The Jews". Please stop using rhetoric that implies that anyone who disagrees with you is an antisemitic whackjob.

(on edit) I shouldn't have to say this, but I DO support Israel's right to exist. It's just that I reject the idea that it can only go on existing if it keeps treating Palestinians like this. Can you accept that as a reasonable position?