Israel/Hamas conflict

[DrGriz]

Mosquito abatement was a side note, of minor consequence to the argument - was trying to add a supplemental historical fact.


Certainly innumerable tragedies throughout history not confined exclusively to one group. One of the many main points, however was that Jews were not tribes, but rather a classical age kingdom with established full statehood and with the details mentioned without any historical parallel.

The act of the Jews resettling their ancestral land was the greatest decolonialization project the world has known. Justice as usual not without any collateral tragedy. One of a few and largest tragedies is that colonialists and their descendants are predominantly the most active against this now historical project.

Jews were not tribes? 12 comes to mind?

Anyway, it is beside the point. I totally respect the right for Modern Israel to exist and to do so in safety. But I think rights come by treaty, not genetics or religion, and every time someone confuses that, irrational conflict occurs.

 

[iPlug]

Jews were not tribes? 12 comes to mind?

If that biblical history is largely correct, that was markedly earlier in their history. But they advanced far beyond stone age/tribal stage by the time colonial powers finally forced their most recent exile.

All people alive today are descendants of one or more tribes. Many historical tribes met the end of their line in the tribal stage, typically by other tribes and later by colonial powers.

Anyway, it is beside the point. I totally respect the right for Modern Israel to exist and to do so in safety. But I think rights come by treaty, not genetics or religion, and every time someone confuses that, irrational conflict occurs.

Treaties can be useful but often do not suffice and a few powers today are the result of religious colonialism, particularly those who want the destruction of Israel which was re-founded as a secular State.

Today, for example, we have Russia 10 years into its invasion of Ukraine. Russia violated numerous treaties such as the Budapest Memorandum where they did precisely the opposite of when they guaranteed to protect the sovereignty of Ukraine.

In the case of Israel, the land most recently to again become Israel/Judea was owned by Britain. Britain wanted a 2-state solution that included giving the Jews back a large portion of their ancestral homeland. The 1947 UN resolution recommended partition of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states. Jewish leaders accepted the plan, Arab states rejected it. Israel declared independence and Arab states, following their proximal decades of proxy attacks on Jews in that land, now directly went to war on Israel and lost.

 

[madodel]

A former Israeli hostage recalls the brutality of Hamas captivity

 

[DrGriz]

If that biblical history is largely correct, that was markedly earlier in their history. But they advanced far beyond stone age/tribal stage by the time colonial powers finally forced their most recent exile.

All people alive today are descendants of one or more tribes. Many historical tribes met the end of their line in the tribal stage, typically by other tribes and later by colonial powers.


Treaties can be useful but often do not suffice and a few powers today are the result of religious colonialism, particularly those who want the destruction of Israel which was re-founded as a secular State.

Today, for example, we have Russia 10 years into its invasion of Ukraine. Russia violated numerous treaties such as the Budapest Memorandum where they did precisely the opposite of when they guaranteed to protect the sovereignty of Ukraine.

In the case of Israel, the land most recently to again become Israel/Judea was owned by Britain. Britain wanted a 2-state solution that included giving the Jews back a large portion of their ancestral homeland. The 1947 UN resolution recommended partition of Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states. Jewish leaders accepted the plan, Arab states rejected it. Israel declared independence and Arab states, following their proximal decades of proxy attacks on Jews in that land, now directly went to war on Israel and lost.

Of course, we agree, treaties are only as good as those agreeing to them, and history is all about breaking them.

And you don't need to remind me of the recent history of Israel. I am quite aware.

However, you keep going back to things like ancestral homelands (along with property improvements) as if that somehow satisfies something.

Around 3000 years ago (according to them) the Israelites escaped slavery in Egypt and invaded and took over Canaan where the Canaanites lived in City-States (NOT nomadic tribes).

Does your point about ancestral homes extend to Canaanites, whose genetic makeup is now being tracked down, and were there before the Israelis? Let's say I have middle eastern genetics (I do) and it turned out to be largely Canaanite? Would you argue that I have the right to boot some upstart Israeli off of his land that his family might have owned for mere generations, because it was my family's "ancestral" home? I suspect not.

So again, we agree on Israel's right to exist. Let's not go down the path of religious and ancestral rights unless we are willing to accept the natural consequences of that argument, which might not support what we want.

Who were the Canaanites? New insight from 73 ancient genomes

The people who lived in the area known as the Southern Levant -- which is now recognized as Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan, Lebanon, and parts of Syria -- during the Bronze Age (circa 3500-1150 BCE) are referred to in ancient biblical texts as the Canaanites. Now, researchers...

www.eurekalert.org

 

[iPlug]

...property improvements) as if that somehow satisfies something.

Not sure why property improvements keeps coming up, mentioned prior it was a minor part of the argument. Would reiterate several main points from my post.

Around 3000 years ago (according to them) the Israelites escaped slavery in Egypt and invaded and took over Canaan where the Canaanites lived in City-States (NOT nomadic tribes).

Hope no one claimed otherwise that Canaanites made it into the Bronze Age as a people, that we know from archeology. Humans have rendered destruction on each others' civilizations at many stages of civilization development.

Does your point about ancestral homes extend to Canaanites, whose genetic makeup is now being tracked down, and were there before the Israelis?

Yes, this is an important topic, except Canaanites no longer exist as a people and left no surviving written records when they disappeared. There is a common misconception that they dwelled only in the land of ancient Israel, but they were present throughout the Near East (including what is now Lebanon, Jordan, and part of Syria).

Biblical suggestions that Canaanites were wiped out as a people/culture is correct, but their genes never were. In fact, most Jews and Arabs today have a strong genetic linkage to these ancient extinct peoples (>50% in Jews is common). Some of us humans around the world have Neanderthal DNA, and that is not meant as a negative connotation, but part of our ancestry/evolution. Jews, Arabs, and Canaanites are all related more closely on the evolutionary tree than they are to most others.

Let's say I have middle eastern genetics (I do) and it turned out to be largely Canaanite? Would you argue that I have the right to boot some upstart Israeli off of his land that his family might have owned for mere generations, because it was my family's "ancestral" home? I suspect not.

There are valid reasons to have claims to a land and why, for example a 2 state solution is relevant in this thread. This example, however, does not pan out. As noted, Canaanites no longer exist as a people, and this is setting aside that it would not matter that Jews have more Canaanite genetic ancestry.

So again, we agree on Israel's right to exist. Let's not go down the path of religious and ancestral rights unless we are willing to accept the natural consequences of that argument, which might not support what we want.

It was not I who brought up religious rights, and in fact strongly suggested that was not one of the reasons I gave for Israel's claim to reestablishment. I did point out that one should be concerned that Israel instead was threatened by ultra-religious forces. Ancestral rights were one of the main points mentioned. But there were several others that are also rather consequential, again would reference my post.


Not trying to be difficult here. Suspect we are ultimately on the same page of wanting a 2 State solution and peaceful relations with those States and the region at large. Was pointing out the details more so to others on the extremes of the Israel can do no wrong vs. anti-Israel spectrum, because many do not know or care to know the history, but that is crucial in coming to the most just resolution.