Hacker News Reader

Comment by stormdennis | Hacker News Reader

To be accurate, Israel also entirely consists of that kind of land.

This is kind of very correct but also very misleading:

Israel is partly bought, partly doled out by UN and partly won in war.

Yes, many Arabs were displaced and with a course enough resolution there was an Arab within x kilometers everywhere in what has become Israel.

Also at the same time even more Jews where chased out from the countries around.

At no point did North American tribes drive out more Europeans (or any at all) than Europeans drove out Native Americans.

There can hardly be peace until we get the facts straight, both ways, so we should strive for that.

I don't know how it is misleading. In 1947, the Jews were 33% of the population and owned just 6% of the land of Palestine, yet a UN of only 46 countries and dominated by the great powers granted them 55% of the land for a Jewish state which zionist offensives quickly expanded to 80% of the land while ethnically cleansing the population. The zionists were the direct cause of the exodus of the worlds' oldest Jewish communities in the other Arab lands both by their treatment of the Palestinians but also by sowing panic in Jews in Iraq and elsewhere by planting bombs in synagogues. Israel, a European colony largely, now needed Mizrahi Jews since the European Jews had been subjected to genocide. Of course some Jews in places like Yemen were zionists also and emigrated for that reason. Anything non-factual in that?

You had a point until you brought up the Yemeni Jews who had been oppressed for generations treated as second class citizens, charged a "protection tax," banned from wearing the traditional Sudra as a form of humiliation, and more recently persecuted by the Houthis. The plight of the Palestinians is very real, but refrain from rewriting the history of Yemeni Jews. Educate yourself.

>Anything non-factual in that?

Nearly all of it (either non factual or so tilted as to be non factual)?

> owned just 6% of the land of Palestine

Absurd criteria - what does wealth have to do with it? Splitting America by 'ownership' would give 100% to rich WASP. By the way, Most local land was owned by families not living in the country or was unowned desert.

>55% of the land for a Jewish state

The big difference being the Negev desert, because it was thought the new state would need somewhere to settle WW2 refugees. The Jewish state got much less of the useful fertile areas.

>The zionists were the direct cause of the exodus of the worlds' oldest Jewish communities in the other Arab lands both by their treatment of the Palestinians

Displacement was caused by the local states and its beginning predated the UN partition (1941 farhud, 1945 Tripolitania massacre, etc.).

> zionist offensives quickly expanded to 80% of the land while ethnically cleansing the population

You mean 'directly caused by the constant attacks by 7 states and the local Arab population', right? Just applying the same standards you apply, but without inverting chronology this time.

>by sowing panic in Jews in Iraq and elsewhere by planting bombs in synagogues

Based on 'confessions' accomplished by torture. The actual actions of the Iraqi government are oddly ignored.

Modern Iraqi history is littered with letting inconvenient populations be displaced (from Assyrians, to Iraqi Persians to Marsh Arabs to Kurds to Yazidis and yes, Jews) and always blaming it on someone else.

> and dominated by the great powers granted them 55% of the land for a Jewish stat

70% of the area that was proposed for the Jewish state was used to create what is today Jordan.

The rest is creative interpretations and framings to make one of the worlds smallest countries - and the only land where Jews can feel safe - to seem like a giant agressor.

>70% of the area that was proposed for the Jewish state was used to create what is today Jordan.

Do you have a reference for that?

Do you know anotherland than Iceland, which does not consist of such land if you look carefully enough?

England

Not sure we can say that.

Recent history (from memory) Roman invasion 55 CE. Saxon invasion 400..500 ? Viking Invasions 900...ish Norman invasion 1066

All of these invaders made big changes to the country including place names, laws and language.

And there is the archeological record of pre-historic gene lines that are extinct in England as well.

Every nation is inhabited by people who displaced someone else, who in turn displaced someone else, who in turn displaced someone else, etc.

We're also all the product of several rapes down the line of our ancestors. That doesn't justify rape when it happens now, does it?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com