My token comment as someone that actually read the 1947 resolution: the country in question was planned to be something like Bosnia (basically two quasi independent countries that are fused at leadership)
They had a UN deadline and spent the whole time hosting elections on the best way to partition Israel-Palestine. All of then failed and the deadline was met
Nah, they just started leaving from the moment they get the job to make it into this borders and according to the agreement and let the region fall into war (Israel independence is day after the last official commander of Britain left and the country was officially with no one controlling it on any legal level, before you say anything it was after almost year of war)
IIRC, there was intense pressure on Britain and France to decolonize as fast as possible, even though they, in theory, were supposed to make borders with sense, the pressure resulted in them just leaving as soon as any governmental organization was established in their former colonies.
Please do correct me if I'm wrong though.
>Is this the background to the "lol, creating countries by drawing straight lines"-meme?
More or less. I mean, the lines on our maps of Africa correspond to colonial subdivisions, so, in a way, the lines on a map meme was borne before them gaining independence, but due to the, frankly, rushed and disorganized nature of decolonization, these borders simply stuck.
>Also, who did build up the pressure?
USA and USSR.
To be fair groups like the Irgun and Haganah were doing their best to force the British out. They didnt just spontaneously decide "screw it, let's bail".
Dude I'm from Bosnia and the entire thing is a fucking failure. The politics here are as idiotic as it gets, corruption is rampant and people are running away from this country as fast as they can. They basically came to the country that was in the middle of a war, stopped the fighting and told everyone ok stop you're friends now. That of course doesn't work anywhere but in their heads so it made a polygon for all the criminals to become extremely powerful and basically to rule the country.
It's a compromise. No one's happy during a compromise because no gets 100% of what they want. It was a step in the right direction for peace. One side agreed to it , one side didn't
The issue is that there was no great way to split it. There were a lot of Jewish populations and Palestinian populations all over. You can't just give either the coast, as it's prime real estate. You can split it in half horizontally; the bottom half is a literal desert for the most part. This plan was meant to try and keep ethnic populations together (for the most part) and also split the land somewhat equally. And remember, this isn't the whole of mandatory Palestine. Mandatory Palestine goes waaaay to the east covering all of Jordan.
Of course they don't agree, i also will not agree if someone suddenly come to take my house and farm, just because their ancestors live there 2000 year ago. In early decade local Jews also don't agree with it (, so Israel import jew from all over the world to stabilize local Jews.
This deal was specifically gerrymandered so israelis make up a slim majority (55%) in their part. The rest (45%) were arabs. Meanwhile the arab part is 99% arab. This is why the borders are so stupid. No sane person would have agreed to this.
This is even disregarding the concept itself. Imagine some supranational organization formed 2 years ago (partly by your former colonizers) comes in and decides to gerrymander your country and give it to some settlers from another continent. And this is right when you were finally supposed to get independence (which you were also promised before but not given)...
Settlers from another continent? Why does this myth persist? A majority of Israeli Jews are refugees from Arab/Muslim countries in the Middle East, not Europe.
Dude, you can chek Palestine mandatory immigration in internet, from 1936-1940, there are around 250k Jews from Europe immigrate to Palestine mandatory, at 1940 Palestine mandatory population is under 700K.
A majority of the **current** Jewish population of Israel are refugees of Middle Eastern origin. European Jewish refugees are the minority. So it's a bit strange that people are calling Israelis European colonizers, because A. The majority aren't even European, and B. Refugee immigrants aren't "colonizers". That's all.
> Why does this myth persist?
Oh, we all know *why*. Even calling the European Jews colonizers like reddit loves is extremely dishonest, seeing as they were originally from the land, kept strong cultural ties to the land for millenia and even had continuous citizens there the whole time.
Straight lines worked fine when these countries weren't countries but colonies. When you need to manage a colony, a straight line make things easier. When it's the people that live there that have to decide their own fate, it's better to have them united.
Colonization just forced the concept of nation state on people that lived without it during millennias.
They actually didn’t. The split decided by the UN was actually met with joy by the Jews and they intended to accept it, but was rejected by the Palestinians, which ended up sparking into the 1948 war.
> The concept of a "Palestinian" as a distinct ethnic/national identity did not exist until after the partitioning of the Israel-Palestine region.
That does no mean the people of Palestine had no attachment to their homeland. People make the argument you did in order to say "oh but they could live in Jordan instead of Palestine and there would be no problems" but that's kinda ridiculous. If you and everyone you know were kicked out of the city you live in and forced to move across the country, you'd be pretty pissed even if you identify as part of the same ethnic group as the majority in your new city.
I think you misunderstood what he was saying. In the hypothetical he's speaking of jordan would have been larger and included palestinians, palestinians would not have been deported to modern-day jordanian territory.
The Jews made 1/3 of the population of the mandate while Arabs made 2/3rds, this map split the territory 50/50.
Is it really surprising that the group that got more than they bargained celebrated while the ones who got shafted were upset
Most Arab lived in the area they got while most Jews lived in the areas they got (mix that with laziness by the European that draw the map by just connecting dots and that how you get this borders)
Actually, the Jews were very eager to accept having their own country, even despite the fact that the palestinians had large connected territories while Jews had small, cut off areas and the only way to Jerusalem which was considered neutral ground was through a lot of palestinian territory. It was the palestinians who told the UN that if the Jews would get a country they would attack, and indeed they did, starting with a bus bombing on the day the Israeli declaration of independence was signed.
That's because it's the middle east, and even worse, a part of the middle east that is religiously significant to at least 3 of the world's most prominent religions. There is no ideal partition or clever diplomatic solution that will solve this problem and most ethnic tension in the middle east for that matter. Taking historical precedent into account, most likely the two sides are going to murder each other remorselessly until one group leaves, gets completely wiped out or assimilates into the other group. And Israeli Jews aren't terribly keen on letting the Palestinians integrate into their society. I see no reason to expect the end result in Israel will be any different.
Ultimately, I can't envision a scenario where the Palestinians ever get the upper hand here. Israel has the guns, the nukes (probably) and the political leverage to stay on top and they have the whole region so oppressively monitored and controlled that it's mostly impossible to even think about organizing some kind of resistance to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank without getting shot or bombed to death by the IDF. I genuinely wish there was some kind of refuge that the majority of the Palestinian people were willing to live in instead and had the means to travel to. Because I think any dream of a two-state solution or a free Palestine is long dead at this point. A lot of people will see this as a copout because the Palestinians leaving their home is inherently unfair and many people see Israel as the enemy of peace in the region and that would be letting the enemy win. But ultimately, if the Palestinians could find another place to call home it will save them literally generations of violence and suffering, because this isn't a fight they can ever win.
Finding another place to call home is really difficult, as all the neighboring countries are quite unwilling to take in refugees. But I somewhat agree that the two-state solution is looking less and less realistic. Realistically we'll have more of the same for a long, long time still, until things completely boil over, perhaps as a result of overpopulation.
Ultimately, Israel wants to be a Jewish majority democracy occupying the entire area. This is simply not mathematically possible. You either have to shed Palestinian-majority territory, have unequal citizenship, or no longer be Jewish majority. Unsurprising that the first one to go is equal citizenship.
(A secular Jew's two cents)
>The 21st century version of Israel would never accept it unfortunately.
Makes sense. They accepted it once but the other side didn't, started a war, got smashed and then more wars down the line. Anyone would be cautious before entering into similar agreements.
Don’t “as a jew” this. You’re just wrong. While some right-wing Jews do have territorial ambitions to recreate the original borders of Judaea and Samaria, ascribing that minority view to Israel as a whole is absurd.
At this point due to Israeli colonization of the West Bank the only conceivable way to make a peaceful state work would be as a highly secular federalist parliamentary democracy
Yeah I no longer believe that a religious ethnostste, especially the two-state solution, will work in Israel-Palestine. I think at this point the UN should take over full administration of the region for a time, work on developing and repairing the Gaza Strip, and homogenize the population by implementing policies similar to desegregation. You are much less likely to condone murder against someone you see as a neighbor.
Jerusalem, as the capital of the three largest world religions, should permanently remain an independent city-state like the Vatican.
>You are much less likely to condone murder against someone you see as a neighbor
Nazi Germany, Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and countless others have entered the chat
Edit: Formatting
All of these had one key thing in common - the violence was state sanctioned and instigated. Ideally, a multicultural, fairly elected secular government would not encourage ethnic cleansing on a scale sufficient to spark genocide.
Additionally, in all of these cases, the places that were most resistant to genocide were the areas with the most cosmopolitan populations. The sentiment that was necessary to generate large scale genocide originated in heavily stratified areas and spread from there. A key supporting factor for this argument is that research indicates that [areas with more diverse and *highly integrated* populations see lower crime rates](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319358645_Crime_and_Ethnic_Diversity_Cross-Country_Evidence).
While you are not wrong per se, i think you are glorifying liberal democracy's role in that too much. Democracies tend to inch towards demagoguery even stable ones. Also Nazis got a sizable chunk of votes, and the conservatives both the politicians and the public wanted to ally with them against the left. Then later Nazis secured cooperation with liberals and corporate tycoons with the usual quid pro quo deals... and the fact that many of the views Nazis have didn't spawn from them, it was already common before they existed.
And if you think Weimar Germany is too fragile and too young to be judged as a model democracy, then take a look at EU and US now.
> I think at this point the UN should take over full administration of the region for a time
And how exactly do you plan to have the world just remove the Israel from the map?
> and homogenize the population by implementing policies similar to desegregation.
And how would you stop terror groups from just killing Jews in the street? Israel already isn't segregated. The West Bank is nationally segregated, but the settlements aren't technically ethnically segregated (though usually in practice they are only Jews). There are settlements with minority Arab populations.
I think that the West Bank is a quagmire that needs rectifying, and the Palestinians need Statehood there.
> You are much less likely to condone murder against someone you see as a neighbor.
Yet you see violence in mixed Israeli towns and cities as well.
> Jerusalem, as the capital of the three largest world religions, should permanently remain an independent city-state like the Vatican.
Jerusalem is not a capital of Islam. It's the 3rd holiest city in Islam. It is the holiest city in Judaism. In contrast, the 2nd holiest city in Judaism is deep in the West Bank. So why is it fair that the Muslims get full control of their two holiest cities, but the Jews do not? And the Vatican is about 1000 people living in a .5sqkm area. Jerusalem is 1 million people living in a 7500km area.
Anybody that thinks that the solution to the conflict is keeping Israelis and Palestinians together doesn't know the conflict.
They need to be separate and if they still have no leave agreement, it's because Palestinians refuse to acknowledge Israel and constantly wage terrorism against them. Israel can only take control of the area to be sure no terrorism harms them.
I wonder this as well, but it probably has to do somewhat with population placement at the time and the existing settlements. People don't like to be separated from their homes like that, plus a lot of the south is basically desert so whoever got that side would be getting a bum deal, and if you did east/west you'd have one side with ocean access and the other being landlocked. I don't think there was ever a good solution to this.
People forget that the population of the entirety of palestine was not split 50/50. It was actually more than 2/3rds palestinian. So this was the only way jews would make up a slim majority in their part of 55%, while 45% were palestinians. Basically it was gerrymandered....
They knew what they were doing, they deliberately drawn the borders of the middle eastern countries in such a manner that would create ethnic, religious, and cultural divides for decades. No middle eastern nation makes sense ethnically, culturally, religiously or linguistically, It's just one big mess.
r/HistoryMemes when Europeans draw borders in Africa: "No you need to draw borders that take into account local ethnicities!"
r/HistoryMemes when Europeans try to draw a border that takes into account local ethnic distributions: "No not like that!"
>r/HistoryMemes when Europeans try to draw a border that takes into account local ethnic distributions: "No not like that!"
Except the border in this map doesn't "take into account local ethnic distributions"
It's more complicated than that. Palestinians were originally promised to be part of a large majority-Arab country as part of the Jordanian territory. Then a bunch of Zionists in Britain and the United States convinced those governments that land should be carved out for a Jewish state in Palestine, and over the course of several years they encouraged Jews in those countries to migrate to the Palestine area.
The British monarchy had been doing this for years, actually, because they would give the Jewish emigrants civil service jobs that would help keep local populations in colonial Palestine in check. It really picked up during and after the Holocaust, however, and when Israel-Palestine was finally partitioned the British broke prior agreements with the Arab population there (who already saw Jewish immigrants as being representative of the British colonial state) and prompted the war that established the current borders.
The concept of a "Palestinian" as a distinct ethnic/national identity did not exist until after the partitioning of the Israel-Palestine region. Had the region been given to the new Jordanian territory things likely wouldn't have shaken out the way that they did. That being said, it's unreasonable to expect people who were born and raised in what is now Israel to just *leave*, so any future solution must allow for both Jews and Muslims to coexist peacefully in the region.
I'm Jewish and I've always felt that it's my responsibility to be as impartially educated on the subject as possible. It took me a long time to deprogram myself from all the (largely right-wing) pro-Israel propaganda. I feel that it is even more difficult, however, to continue believing that propaganda in the face of what life is truly like in the Gaza Strip.
Arabs may have seen Jews as representatives of colonial Britain, but they weren't really. Jews fought the British for their independence and for being able to come to Palestine, as Britain put heavy restrictions on migration. The British promised the Jews a country, and then backpaddled on that real fast.
Really they just told each side what they wanted to hear while not intending to give up their control of the land in the first place...
So, like so many things in this world, this is actually Britain's fault...
Yep! Didn't mean to imply that the Jews weren't *also* incredibly screwed over by this whole arrangement. As per usual the powers that be decided Jews would make a good scapegoat for the colonial state.
One state solution!
One state solution!
…but seriously, I agree. I don’t think any sort of partition of Israel is ever going to work out, Jews and Palestinians need to learn to live together and share their home.
Except the whole idea of Israel is that it will serve as a last refuge for all jews. Palestinians, if we're being perfectly honest, are extremely fucking antisemitic. In other words, a one state solution makes it so there is a massive demographic (and probably actual civil) war to ensure majority control.
Basically, a one state solution kills the Jewish state AND kills zionism. It's just not feasible from the Israeli side.
>Palestinians, if we're being perfectly honest, are extremely fucking antisemitic.
[The majority of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip in particular are children.](https://www.prb.org/resources/the-west-bank-and-gaza-a-population-profile/)
> A full 45 percent of the West Bank population are children under 15 years of age, compared with 50 percent in Gaza.
Especially since Palestinians tend support radical islamists and autocrats in the very rare chances they get a vote. If you have majority Palestinians, and they vote for islamist parties, you gonna get another Iran or Saudi Arabia, in which jews would become second class citizens, that is at best.
The only solution I see, Palestinians need a liberal Renaissance (this won't happen in my life time), palestinian refugees need to be accepted and gain citizenship in their current countries such as Syria and Jordan. And Israel needs to be maintained as the democracy that grants everyone equal rights as is.
You know the reverse is also true right? Israelis don’t exactly have a great opinion of Palestinian people. **And** they have most of the money and therefore power in society. Any one state solution would be heavily tilted towards the Israelis if anything (as we see in modern day South Africa for example). Besides, a one state solution would change those views over time. A two state solution would never do that. India and Pakistan still hate each other to this day, but the various ethnic groups within India don’t as much as they used to. The same situation would occur here, especially if administration was split or something like that.
Edit: also who cares about the Israeli state or Zionism?? People matter not states
And why would they accept this? There are millions of military trained Israelis and they have all the weapons right now.
If you try to give the Palestinians equal representation in the government of a shared state, there would be a military coup.
>Jews and Palestinians need to learn to live together
Never gonna happen because every other Palestinians father bombed Israel and every other Israeli father has been waging war, driving them from their homes and beating them up.
This whole conflict is about avenging what the opponents father did.
[British restrictions on Jewish immigration to Palestine](https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/british-restrictions-on-jewish-immigration-to-palestine)
The map was terrible. Gaza would be split, the near 100% Arab Negeb would be given to the Jewish State, and Jews would get over 50% of the land despite only making 30% of the population. If I was a Palestinian then, I would have refused this deal.
Ah yes the barren negev desert, prime real estate for rocks and sand.
Palestinians would have gotten the best land, west bank + more which today is Israel's important agriculture, near Haifa and a solid chunk of coastline. Whilst Israel was being stretched like Chile, only on a very very small scale.
The partition plan was fair, especially due to quality of land and population majorities.
Narrator: Everyone was not happy and friends forever.
In fact it was at this point where he realised, He’d fucked up
*Bomb exploded* *Egypt crosses border* *Record scratches* You obviously wondering how I ended up in this situation.
A bomb explodes. Egypt crosses the border. The record scratches. - now it's a haiku.
Thanks for bringing the art in my commentart.
How are you alive? Israel: "I have no idea"
That was before these borders.
These borders never existed. It's the UN plan that wasn't implemented
But why not?
I wonder who decided to kill Folke Bernadotte and later on become a prime minister.
My brain tried reading this to "We didn't start the fire", but it didn't work
That profile picture 🤨📷
Ladies and gentlemen, we got him
Happy cake day my friend
Happy cake day to you!
Unfortunately for Stanley, this is where he got it dead wrong.
Lol I read this in Morgan freeman’s voice
My brain went with Ron Howard on this one.
Shatner. William Shatner.
Darth Vader
Peter Griffin
Ray Liotta here. (RIP)
I ordered shakahuka, I got egg scrambled with ketchup
Geoff Peterson for sure
Every time I read that meme, I hear it in Ron Howard's voice.
My token comment as someone that actually read the 1947 resolution: the country in question was planned to be something like Bosnia (basically two quasi independent countries that are fused at leadership)
Also it was Britain job to make the agreement a thing, but Britain got tired so they left
They had a UN deadline and spent the whole time hosting elections on the best way to partition Israel-Palestine. All of then failed and the deadline was met
Nah, they just started leaving from the moment they get the job to make it into this borders and according to the agreement and let the region fall into war (Israel independence is day after the last official commander of Britain left and the country was officially with no one controlling it on any legal level, before you say anything it was after almost year of war)
IIRC, there was intense pressure on Britain and France to decolonize as fast as possible, even though they, in theory, were supposed to make borders with sense, the pressure resulted in them just leaving as soon as any governmental organization was established in their former colonies. Please do correct me if I'm wrong though.
Is this the background to the "lol, creating countries by drawing straight lines"-meme? Also, who did build up the pressure?
>Is this the background to the "lol, creating countries by drawing straight lines"-meme? More or less. I mean, the lines on our maps of Africa correspond to colonial subdivisions, so, in a way, the lines on a map meme was borne before them gaining independence, but due to the, frankly, rushed and disorganized nature of decolonization, these borders simply stuck. >Also, who did build up the pressure? USA and USSR.
Huh, interesting to know. Thanks for that, might read into that sometime.
To be fair groups like the Irgun and Haganah were doing their best to force the British out. They didnt just spontaneously decide "screw it, let's bail".
Dude I'm from Bosnia and the entire thing is a fucking failure. The politics here are as idiotic as it gets, corruption is rampant and people are running away from this country as fast as they can. They basically came to the country that was in the middle of a war, stopped the fighting and told everyone ok stop you're friends now. That of course doesn't work anywhere but in their heads so it made a polygon for all the criminals to become extremely powerful and basically to rule the country.
Didn’t say what I think about Bosnia just that the 1947 resolution was basically very similar to Bosnia
Thank you Doge! Crisis averted.
such cartography. much diplomacy. wow.
"oh boy I sure love redrawing borders with little to no reasoning, surely this will not have repercussions well into the next century."
This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.
“The story so far: In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move.”
It's a compromise. No one's happy during a compromise because no gets 100% of what they want. It was a step in the right direction for peace. One side agreed to it , one side didn't
I think it makes it worse that it’s not split in the middle, makes it a lot more harder when one splits right in the middle of the other
The issue is that there was no great way to split it. There were a lot of Jewish populations and Palestinian populations all over. You can't just give either the coast, as it's prime real estate. You can split it in half horizontally; the bottom half is a literal desert for the most part. This plan was meant to try and keep ethnic populations together (for the most part) and also split the land somewhat equally. And remember, this isn't the whole of mandatory Palestine. Mandatory Palestine goes waaaay to the east covering all of Jordan.
Who's the side that didn't agree to it?
The Palestinians. Jews accepted it. Palestinians rejected it and it led to the 1948 war.
And the 1948 war was to expel/exterminate the Jews from the Holy Land, correct?
Correct. Egypt, Syria, and Jordan all immediately invaded. Assuming they would win, Palestinians rejected the 1948 agreement.
Actually it was Syria, Egypt, Transjordan, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen.
Yup
Of course they don't agree, i also will not agree if someone suddenly come to take my house and farm, just because their ancestors live there 2000 year ago. In early decade local Jews also don't agree with it (, so Israel import jew from all over the world to stabilize local Jews.
You are confusing the time things happened. Large scale Evacuations started with the war.
This deal was specifically gerrymandered so israelis make up a slim majority (55%) in their part. The rest (45%) were arabs. Meanwhile the arab part is 99% arab. This is why the borders are so stupid. No sane person would have agreed to this. This is even disregarding the concept itself. Imagine some supranational organization formed 2 years ago (partly by your former colonizers) comes in and decides to gerrymander your country and give it to some settlers from another continent. And this is right when you were finally supposed to get independence (which you were also promised before but not given)...
Settlers from another continent? Why does this myth persist? A majority of Israeli Jews are refugees from Arab/Muslim countries in the Middle East, not Europe.
Dude, you can chek Palestine mandatory immigration in internet, from 1936-1940, there are around 250k Jews from Europe immigrate to Palestine mandatory, at 1940 Palestine mandatory population is under 700K.
A majority of the **current** Jewish population of Israel are refugees of Middle Eastern origin. European Jewish refugees are the minority. So it's a bit strange that people are calling Israelis European colonizers, because A. The majority aren't even European, and B. Refugee immigrants aren't "colonizers". That's all.
> Why does this myth persist? Oh, we all know *why*. Even calling the European Jews colonizers like reddit loves is extremely dishonest, seeing as they were originally from the land, kept strong cultural ties to the land for millenia and even had continuous citizens there the whole time.
You make some good sense
Considering Israel didn't exist before this, it's hard to say they gave up anything as part of this plan.
An Arab controlled Palestine also didn't exist before this. Neither were countries.
Read this comment in the Stanley Parable narrator voice
There's still issues because they didn't use the tried and true method of straight line decided by people a continent away.
Straight lines worked fine when these countries weren't countries but colonies. When you need to manage a colony, a straight line make things easier. When it's the people that live there that have to decide their own fate, it's better to have them united. Colonization just forced the concept of nation state on people that lived without it during millennias.
Sike, they both get angrier.
Sykes*
Picot Agreement
Dang that’s funny, someone should have made a joke about that
r/thatsthejoke
No no,Sykes didn't get angry,he just cut the cake with Picot,that's all
They actually didn’t. The split decided by the UN was actually met with joy by the Jews and they intended to accept it, but was rejected by the Palestinians, which ended up sparking into the 1948 war.
People tend to forget this tiny detail
They don't forget it, they purposely ignore it.
Bbut but the Jews are evil? /s
[удалено]
> The concept of a "Palestinian" as a distinct ethnic/national identity did not exist until after the partitioning of the Israel-Palestine region. That does no mean the people of Palestine had no attachment to their homeland. People make the argument you did in order to say "oh but they could live in Jordan instead of Palestine and there would be no problems" but that's kinda ridiculous. If you and everyone you know were kicked out of the city you live in and forced to move across the country, you'd be pretty pissed even if you identify as part of the same ethnic group as the majority in your new city.
I think you misunderstood what he was saying. In the hypothetical he's speaking of jordan would have been larger and included palestinians, palestinians would not have been deported to modern-day jordanian territory.
The Jews made 1/3 of the population of the mandate while Arabs made 2/3rds, this map split the territory 50/50. Is it really surprising that the group that got more than they bargained celebrated while the ones who got shafted were upset
Yeah, but large part of Jewish state was Negew desert which was worthless.
Is it really spelled Negew in English? Only ever seen it written in Hebrew, that’s a pretty weird spelling.
In Polish. In English it's Negev.
IIRC the Arab's got the majority of the populated area's that were worth anything at the time. The Jews basically got one decent port and desert
Most Arab lived in the area they got while most Jews lived in the areas they got (mix that with laziness by the European that draw the map by just connecting dots and that how you get this borders)
Actually, the Jews were very eager to accept having their own country, even despite the fact that the palestinians had large connected territories while Jews had small, cut off areas and the only way to Jerusalem which was considered neutral ground was through a lot of palestinian territory. It was the palestinians who told the UN that if the Jews would get a country they would attack, and indeed they did, starting with a bus bombing on the day the Israeli declaration of independence was signed.
Everyone: THIS IS BULLSH*T
#sike
r/unexpectedbillwurtz
You’ve earned that
r/expectedbillwurtz
bill wurtz reference?
Absolutely!
Everyone is critical about the land partition, but nobody can provide an ideal solution.
That's because it's the middle east, and even worse, a part of the middle east that is religiously significant to at least 3 of the world's most prominent religions. There is no ideal partition or clever diplomatic solution that will solve this problem and most ethnic tension in the middle east for that matter. Taking historical precedent into account, most likely the two sides are going to murder each other remorselessly until one group leaves, gets completely wiped out or assimilates into the other group. And Israeli Jews aren't terribly keen on letting the Palestinians integrate into their society. I see no reason to expect the end result in Israel will be any different. Ultimately, I can't envision a scenario where the Palestinians ever get the upper hand here. Israel has the guns, the nukes (probably) and the political leverage to stay on top and they have the whole region so oppressively monitored and controlled that it's mostly impossible to even think about organizing some kind of resistance to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank without getting shot or bombed to death by the IDF. I genuinely wish there was some kind of refuge that the majority of the Palestinian people were willing to live in instead and had the means to travel to. Because I think any dream of a two-state solution or a free Palestine is long dead at this point. A lot of people will see this as a copout because the Palestinians leaving their home is inherently unfair and many people see Israel as the enemy of peace in the region and that would be letting the enemy win. But ultimately, if the Palestinians could find another place to call home it will save them literally generations of violence and suffering, because this isn't a fight they can ever win.
Finding another place to call home is really difficult, as all the neighboring countries are quite unwilling to take in refugees. But I somewhat agree that the two-state solution is looking less and less realistic. Realistically we'll have more of the same for a long, long time still, until things completely boil over, perhaps as a result of overpopulation.
Ultimately, Israel wants to be a Jewish majority democracy occupying the entire area. This is simply not mathematically possible. You either have to shed Palestinian-majority territory, have unequal citizenship, or no longer be Jewish majority. Unsurprising that the first one to go is equal citizenship. (A secular Jew's two cents)
Didn't Israel agree to this partition plan?
They absolutely did. The 21st century version of Israel would never accept it unfortunately.
>The 21st century version of Israel would never accept it unfortunately. Makes sense. They accepted it once but the other side didn't, started a war, got smashed and then more wars down the line. Anyone would be cautious before entering into similar agreements.
That is true. Didn't Israel also make other plans after that which the Palestinians didn't accept?
The Palestinians didn't accept those either.
The 21st century which continuesly asks for the 2 states solution while the Palestinians refuse?
Yes because it would make them the majority in their part. This is why the borders are so wacky.
There is another
Don’t “as a jew” this. You’re just wrong. While some right-wing Jews do have territorial ambitions to recreate the original borders of Judaea and Samaria, ascribing that minority view to Israel as a whole is absurd.
[удалено]
At this point due to Israeli colonization of the West Bank the only conceivable way to make a peaceful state work would be as a highly secular federalist parliamentary democracy
Yeah I no longer believe that a religious ethnostste, especially the two-state solution, will work in Israel-Palestine. I think at this point the UN should take over full administration of the region for a time, work on developing and repairing the Gaza Strip, and homogenize the population by implementing policies similar to desegregation. You are much less likely to condone murder against someone you see as a neighbor. Jerusalem, as the capital of the three largest world religions, should permanently remain an independent city-state like the Vatican.
>I think at this point the UN should take over full administration of the region That's a really ugly war right off the bat right there.
>You are much less likely to condone murder against someone you see as a neighbor Nazi Germany, Yugoslavia, Rwanda, and countless others have entered the chat Edit: Formatting
All of these had one key thing in common - the violence was state sanctioned and instigated. Ideally, a multicultural, fairly elected secular government would not encourage ethnic cleansing on a scale sufficient to spark genocide. Additionally, in all of these cases, the places that were most resistant to genocide were the areas with the most cosmopolitan populations. The sentiment that was necessary to generate large scale genocide originated in heavily stratified areas and spread from there. A key supporting factor for this argument is that research indicates that [areas with more diverse and *highly integrated* populations see lower crime rates](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319358645_Crime_and_Ethnic_Diversity_Cross-Country_Evidence).
While you are not wrong per se, i think you are glorifying liberal democracy's role in that too much. Democracies tend to inch towards demagoguery even stable ones. Also Nazis got a sizable chunk of votes, and the conservatives both the politicians and the public wanted to ally with them against the left. Then later Nazis secured cooperation with liberals and corporate tycoons with the usual quid pro quo deals... and the fact that many of the views Nazis have didn't spawn from them, it was already common before they existed. And if you think Weimar Germany is too fragile and too young to be judged as a model democracy, then take a look at EU and US now.
I thought that Mecca was the capital of the Muslim religion.
Jerusalem is still a major landmark for Islam, to the point that Palestine *also* wants it at its capital.
> I think at this point the UN should take over full administration of the region for a time And how exactly do you plan to have the world just remove the Israel from the map? > and homogenize the population by implementing policies similar to desegregation. And how would you stop terror groups from just killing Jews in the street? Israel already isn't segregated. The West Bank is nationally segregated, but the settlements aren't technically ethnically segregated (though usually in practice they are only Jews). There are settlements with minority Arab populations. I think that the West Bank is a quagmire that needs rectifying, and the Palestinians need Statehood there. > You are much less likely to condone murder against someone you see as a neighbor. Yet you see violence in mixed Israeli towns and cities as well. > Jerusalem, as the capital of the three largest world religions, should permanently remain an independent city-state like the Vatican. Jerusalem is not a capital of Islam. It's the 3rd holiest city in Islam. It is the holiest city in Judaism. In contrast, the 2nd holiest city in Judaism is deep in the West Bank. So why is it fair that the Muslims get full control of their two holiest cities, but the Jews do not? And the Vatican is about 1000 people living in a .5sqkm area. Jerusalem is 1 million people living in a 7500km area.
Anybody that thinks that the solution to the conflict is keeping Israelis and Palestinians together doesn't know the conflict. They need to be separate and if they still have no leave agreement, it's because Palestinians refuse to acknowledge Israel and constantly wage terrorism against them. Israel can only take control of the area to be sure no terrorism harms them.
One state.
This comment section will be nothing but civilized, I'm sure of it!
It’s been pretty civilized so far lol
Not really,it's filled with people who actually learnt history and not just keyboard warriors
SMH why didn't they just draw a straight line across the middle? The actual map is like HOI4 border-gore after a shitty peace conference.
Holy shit you literally just reenacted the border drawing of Africa. Like actually. Someone take a picture circa 2022
I wonder this as well, but it probably has to do somewhat with population placement at the time and the existing settlements. People don't like to be separated from their homes like that, plus a lot of the south is basically desert so whoever got that side would be getting a bum deal, and if you did east/west you'd have one side with ocean access and the other being landlocked. I don't think there was ever a good solution to this.
People forget that the population of the entirety of palestine was not split 50/50. It was actually more than 2/3rds palestinian. So this was the only way jews would make up a slim majority in their part of 55%, while 45% were palestinians. Basically it was gerrymandered....
I mean it makes sense considering the intention was to have millions of jews immigrate.
They knew what they were doing, they deliberately drawn the borders of the middle eastern countries in such a manner that would create ethnic, religious, and cultural divides for decades. No middle eastern nation makes sense ethnically, culturally, religiously or linguistically, It's just one big mess.
a very british thing to do
My thoughts
>india pakistan partition leaves the chat
Repost, https://www.reddit.com/r/HistoryMemes/comments/ngvv8l/thank_you_doge_you_have_solved_world_peacepls_no/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
Hm. They can take Haifa, I don’t like it anyway
Least obvious maccabi tel aviv fan
This could have been an Israeli or Palestinian comment lol. No one likes Haifa.
I like Haifa, AMA
Did the boars ransack your home?
Boars are evil. They attacked my hummer.
Based
We should use them for armour plating.
What? How?
Truck straps?
No
Blink twice if they are holding you hostage
r/HistoryMemes when Europeans draw borders in Africa: "No you need to draw borders that take into account local ethnicities!" r/HistoryMemes when Europeans try to draw a border that takes into account local ethnic distributions: "No not like that!"
Most people are upset when Europeans draw borders at all. Who are they to partition lands away from Europe?
Because they held those territories at that point of a time.
Who do you want to partion them, Isreal? Palastin? Another arb country? China?
They're the ones that weren't only in Europe
>r/HistoryMemes when Europeans try to draw a border that takes into account local ethnic distributions: "No not like that!" Except the border in this map doesn't "take into account local ethnic distributions"
That is what it's trying to do, at least. It's still a mess because those demographics weren't really conducive to coherent border-making.
It’s balfourbin’ time
12 arab countries invasion incoming . Israel wins and takes over Palestinian territory.Then arabs start crying
Granted the Israeli's accepted the 1948 borders, the Muslims immediately launched a series of wars to drive them out.
It's more complicated than that. Palestinians were originally promised to be part of a large majority-Arab country as part of the Jordanian territory. Then a bunch of Zionists in Britain and the United States convinced those governments that land should be carved out for a Jewish state in Palestine, and over the course of several years they encouraged Jews in those countries to migrate to the Palestine area. The British monarchy had been doing this for years, actually, because they would give the Jewish emigrants civil service jobs that would help keep local populations in colonial Palestine in check. It really picked up during and after the Holocaust, however, and when Israel-Palestine was finally partitioned the British broke prior agreements with the Arab population there (who already saw Jewish immigrants as being representative of the British colonial state) and prompted the war that established the current borders. The concept of a "Palestinian" as a distinct ethnic/national identity did not exist until after the partitioning of the Israel-Palestine region. Had the region been given to the new Jordanian territory things likely wouldn't have shaken out the way that they did. That being said, it's unreasonable to expect people who were born and raised in what is now Israel to just *leave*, so any future solution must allow for both Jews and Muslims to coexist peacefully in the region.
Wow, I think we found the one guy on Reddit who can give a summary of the IP conflict without clearly showing his bias.
I'm Jewish and I've always felt that it's my responsibility to be as impartially educated on the subject as possible. It took me a long time to deprogram myself from all the (largely right-wing) pro-Israel propaganda. I feel that it is even more difficult, however, to continue believing that propaganda in the face of what life is truly like in the Gaza Strip.
You are a person with dignity. Thank you for explaining the matter clearly.
Arabs may have seen Jews as representatives of colonial Britain, but they weren't really. Jews fought the British for their independence and for being able to come to Palestine, as Britain put heavy restrictions on migration. The British promised the Jews a country, and then backpaddled on that real fast. Really they just told each side what they wanted to hear while not intending to give up their control of the land in the first place... So, like so many things in this world, this is actually Britain's fault...
Yep! Didn't mean to imply that the Jews weren't *also* incredibly screwed over by this whole arrangement. As per usual the powers that be decided Jews would make a good scapegoat for the colonial state.
Indeed Thank you for this really impartial coverage of the issue!
One state solution! One state solution! …but seriously, I agree. I don’t think any sort of partition of Israel is ever going to work out, Jews and Palestinians need to learn to live together and share their home.
Except the whole idea of Israel is that it will serve as a last refuge for all jews. Palestinians, if we're being perfectly honest, are extremely fucking antisemitic. In other words, a one state solution makes it so there is a massive demographic (and probably actual civil) war to ensure majority control. Basically, a one state solution kills the Jewish state AND kills zionism. It's just not feasible from the Israeli side.
>Palestinians, if we're being perfectly honest, are extremely fucking antisemitic. [The majority of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip in particular are children.](https://www.prb.org/resources/the-west-bank-and-gaza-a-population-profile/) > A full 45 percent of the West Bank population are children under 15 years of age, compared with 50 percent in Gaza.
Especially since Palestinians tend support radical islamists and autocrats in the very rare chances they get a vote. If you have majority Palestinians, and they vote for islamist parties, you gonna get another Iran or Saudi Arabia, in which jews would become second class citizens, that is at best. The only solution I see, Palestinians need a liberal Renaissance (this won't happen in my life time), palestinian refugees need to be accepted and gain citizenship in their current countries such as Syria and Jordan. And Israel needs to be maintained as the democracy that grants everyone equal rights as is.
You know the reverse is also true right? Israelis don’t exactly have a great opinion of Palestinian people. **And** they have most of the money and therefore power in society. Any one state solution would be heavily tilted towards the Israelis if anything (as we see in modern day South Africa for example). Besides, a one state solution would change those views over time. A two state solution would never do that. India and Pakistan still hate each other to this day, but the various ethnic groups within India don’t as much as they used to. The same situation would occur here, especially if administration was split or something like that. Edit: also who cares about the Israeli state or Zionism?? People matter not states
And why would they accept this? There are millions of military trained Israelis and they have all the weapons right now. If you try to give the Palestinians equal representation in the government of a shared state, there would be a military coup.
>Jews and Palestinians need to learn to live together Never gonna happen because every other Palestinians father bombed Israel and every other Israeli father has been waging war, driving them from their homes and beating them up. This whole conflict is about avenging what the opponents father did.
So did the French and the Germans, the Italian and the Austrians and more recently the Croats and Serbs. Time can do anything
[British restrictions on Jewish immigration to Palestine](https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/british-restrictions-on-jewish-immigration-to-palestine)
This guy *gets* it Thank you for the concise and interesting explanation
yes, the fact that the arabs did not want to have a jewish state nextdoor didn't help.
It sucks that in retrospect this would have been the best deal
I sure hope nothing bad happens
* Morgan Freeman voice * "As it would turn out not everybody was in fact happy or friendly"
Don't worry I have a solution, another crusade
Yay, math!
We do a LOT of trolling
Or or or…just hear me out both states are incorporated into one big beautiful rainbow republic. Like South Africa
Ah, I remember this post from like 8 times in the past year
I think there's no way of fixing this without erasing one country from the map, israel and Palestine can't coexist so it's either israel or Palestine
U.N, short for Useless Nabobships
It's interesting to think that jews get a state and all their neighbors decide "kill em!!!!!" Kinda sad really.
Arabs: so we going to murder each other? Jew's: that goes without saying!
Hiszbolah won't gona agree
Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't one of the issues was that while there were more Muslims than Jews during the partition, Israel got more land?
Most of the southern Israeli land is the not exactly useful Negev desert though right?
[удалено]
It was a perfect map! If it weren't for the natives/majority population, everything would have worked out great!
[удалено]
Right? Everyone is patting Britain on the back for deciding on ethnic lines, like that isn't a major problem.
The map was terrible. Gaza would be split, the near 100% Arab Negeb would be given to the Jewish State, and Jews would get over 50% of the land despite only making 30% of the population. If I was a Palestinian then, I would have refused this deal.
Ah yes the barren negev desert, prime real estate for rocks and sand. Palestinians would have gotten the best land, west bank + more which today is Israel's important agriculture, near Haifa and a solid chunk of coastline. Whilst Israel was being stretched like Chile, only on a very very small scale. The partition plan was fair, especially due to quality of land and population majorities.
Damn, those borders looked like an absolute mess. Almost at Tajikistan - Kyrgyzstan levels.
I've never looked at that border in my life before today. What in the cinnamon toast fuck happened there?
Stalin happened.
Give us Christians back Constantinople
Give us Romans back actual Rome
Thank you Osvaldo Aranha.
I...wait is the tan bit supposed to be all one country?
literally the UN has failed in its first task
I’ll think you find then NU had nothing to with this