@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:But of course, "who the rightful owners are" is not an easy thing to determine...and is currently a huge bone of contention between many disparate parties. My concern is not whether or not you are of that opinion, Oralloy...but how you reasonably arrive at it.
It is easy enough to determine. The Jews are the indigenous population of the West Bank area. As such, they are the rightful owners.
The Palestinians are indigenous to a neighboring area. As such, it would be reasonable to divide the land in a negotiated two-state solution. But enough is enough; Israel has offered peace more than enough times.
Frank Apisa wrote:Whether or not the Jews were treated as "third-class citizens at best" whatever that is supposed to mean) is incidental. The area WAS relatively peaceful between the parties.
You are not "disputing" that...you are simply introducing a red herring...a gratuitous red herring, at that.
I do not find that to be an acceptable form of peace, more an Orwellian mockery of what peace should be.
The Jews may have been unable to resist their abusive treatment, and the Muslims may have been content to let Jews live under a system where the Muslims were allowed to steal their homeland and treat them as third-class citizens, but such a society was only a nice place to be if you were a Muslim.
Frank Apisa wrote:Fact is, the two occasions where Jews were treated relatively kindly by non-Jew neighbors both occurred with Muslims being the neighbors. One was the situation with Jews and Muslims in that area living in relative peace and fraternity for thousands of years...and the other being in Muslim occupied southern Spain for almost a thousand years.
I'm sure it was preferable to being massacred by anti-Semitic Xians. But that doesn't mean it was an acceptable situation.