The problem is that this argument can really be made both ways. If someone said Israel shouldn’t exist because Palestinians used to live there before that, that’s just essentially the same argument.
The area has had a population for thousands of years. The original Canaanites are the people who were still living there in 1947 when would be Israelis invited themselves to that land.
Well more like millennia. The Romans called the area Syria-Palestine. The Canaanite thing is really just to demonstrate that the Israelis weren’t the original inhabitants even in ancient history.
Maybe im encroaching on a bit of history i dont know well enough, but isnt tribes of Israelites just a fancy way of saying Egyptian refugees? Deport them - I bet they even came in caravans, didn’t they?
Neither argument hold any merit and is an example of the tyranny of history. Who cares what a bunch of dead assholes thought was theirs? The people who live there (not the politicians who pretend to represent their interests) are the only people that have any legitimate claim to authority on what should be done about the region.
It is especially meritless to equate people who claim the land based on other people sharing their religion having lived there a thousand years ago, with people whose grandparents got kicked out of their houses and who’ve had to live in an open air prison ever since while being subjected to regular attempts at ethnic cleansing.
The problem is that this argument can really be made both ways. If someone said Israel shouldn’t exist because Palestinians used to live there before that, that’s just essentially the same argument.
Israel shouldn’t exist because it’s a colonial apartheid state perpetrating a genocide. That doesn’t mean every non-palestinian has to leave either.
But saying that Israel shouldn’t exist doesn’t mean that the Israelis have to leave
Okay hold on but what about the original Canaanites? Isn’t it their land?
They’ve all been dead for about two millennia
The area has had a population for thousands of years. The original Canaanites are the people who were still living there in 1947 when would be Israelis invited themselves to that land.
By 1947 they had been calling themselves Palestines for centuries
Well more like millennia. The Romans called the area Syria-Palestine. The Canaanite thing is really just to demonstrate that the Israelis weren’t the original inhabitants even in ancient history.
I honestly have no idea who those people are
The people the tribes of Israelites conquered to take ancient Israel.
Maybe im encroaching on a bit of history i dont know well enough, but isnt tribes of Israelites just a fancy way of saying Egyptian refugees? Deport them - I bet they even came in caravans, didn’t they?
Lmao it’s a little more complicated than that, I’m being very unserious.
Neither argument hold any merit and is an example of the tyranny of history. Who cares what a bunch of dead assholes thought was theirs? The people who live there (not the politicians who pretend to represent their interests) are the only people that have any legitimate claim to authority on what should be done about the region.
It is especially meritless to equate people who claim the land based on other people sharing their religion having lived there a thousand years ago, with people whose grandparents got kicked out of their houses and who’ve had to live in an open air prison ever since while being subjected to regular attempts at ethnic cleansing.
Yep, maybe they could have a big fight, winner takes all.