Remind me again, how well did that work out for Germany and Russia? They held on to all that land? No? Oh but what about World War 1? Oh that all devolved to local rule or was handled after World War 2? Your best argument here is Poland’s radical shift in territory but it was a nebulous concept at best for several hundred years and the territory they shifted onto was literally right next to them, not across an ocean with an entirely different culture already there. So maybe not the comparison you want to make unless you like the idea of inviting Egypt, Syria, and Iran to part out Israel.
The actual issue is whether, contrary to Iran’s slur, Israel is a legitimate nation with a legal right to exist. It is and does, as it was created by the highest international authority.
Cherry-picking historical partitions (thus avoiding India/Pakistan) is a dishonest change of topic.
Gish galloping? What in there was a lie? Words have meaning sir. We live in a society.
And if you want to bring in the British then fine, they did that without consulting anyone, it was not the preferred solution by anyone except extremists and it resulted in wars and ethnic cleansing. Oh hey look it’s just like Palestine! There’s a pattern here…
And clearly the people Israel is currently genociding do not care what the Un said about Israel 70 years ago. They aren’t going to see an apartheid state oppressing them as legitimate. Nor should they. After all Germany was a country too and I’m pretty sure the German Jews didn’t consider Hitler taking power in a river of blood as legitimate either. Legitimacy is something you can lose, especially if it was tenuous in the first place. Like say, if someone was to keep fighting you for 70 years over it.
Gish galloping is more than just lying, it’s generating falsehoods faster than they can be refuted, which entails responding to refutations by changing the subject. Like you just did. Again.
New rule: Don’t argue with antisemites. Just block them.
Remind me again, how well did that work out for Germany and Russia? They held on to all that land? No? Oh but what about World War 1? Oh that all devolved to local rule or was handled after World War 2? Your best argument here is Poland’s radical shift in territory but it was a nebulous concept at best for several hundred years and the territory they shifted onto was literally right next to them, not across an ocean with an entirely different culture already there. So maybe not the comparison you want to make unless you like the idea of inviting Egypt, Syria, and Iran to part out Israel.
@Maggoty
You’re Gish galloping.
The actual issue is whether, contrary to Iran’s slur, Israel is a legitimate nation with a legal right to exist. It is and does, as it was created by the highest international authority.
Cherry-picking historical partitions (thus avoiding India/Pakistan) is a dishonest change of topic.
Gish galloping? What in there was a lie? Words have meaning sir. We live in a society.
And if you want to bring in the British then fine, they did that without consulting anyone, it was not the preferred solution by anyone except extremists and it resulted in wars and ethnic cleansing. Oh hey look it’s just like Palestine! There’s a pattern here…
And clearly the people Israel is currently genociding do not care what the Un said about Israel 70 years ago. They aren’t going to see an apartheid state oppressing them as legitimate. Nor should they. After all Germany was a country too and I’m pretty sure the German Jews didn’t consider Hitler taking power in a river of blood as legitimate either. Legitimacy is something you can lose, especially if it was tenuous in the first place. Like say, if someone was to keep fighting you for 70 years over it.
@Maggoty
Gish galloping is more than just lying, it’s generating falsehoods faster than they can be refuted, which entails responding to refutations by changing the subject. Like you just did. Again.
New rule: Don’t argue with antisemites. Just block them.
I ask again which part was a lie?