I have to disagree with you here Zi·on·ism - an international movement originally for the establishment of a Jewish national or religious community in Palestine and later for the support of modern Israel Just because the Waels of the world want it to be a bad word, does not mean it is.
You mean your tribe invaded the land of Israel 2000 years ago as Crusaders' mercenaries. And your tribe did not even live in Israel, having helped the crusaders wipe out local population your tribe settled in Syria, not in Israel. Isn't that so wael? Wael, why don't you take your tribe back to Yemen, maybe they'll call you the Yemeni Moses.
That's kind of like criticising South Africa for its problems, whilst ignoring that the rest of the continent is going down the tubes. Or complaining about democracy whilst ignoring the record of fascism, monarchy, anarchy etc. Whatever Israel's flaws it is a better place to live than the vast majority of the countries surrounding it. I would rather be an Arab in Israel than an Arab in any Arab country. In Israel you can vote, criticise the government, visit a brothel, practise any sexuality, set up your own media organisations, choose your religion or lack therefore and practise openly, marry or live with anyone from any background, have sex outside of marriage, share hotel rooms or apartments with women who you are not married to, drink booze all year round, criticise religion/God etc. In all the Arab countries you can't legally do these things, and many of them are punishable by death or long imprisonment.
Realistically, though.. no matter what the reason for anybody's tribe having arrived in Israel/Palestine hundreds of years ago the descendants of those immigrants would only naturally come to know the land as their one and only homeland. Even the descendants of those who arrived, as you point out, to take advantage of the higher standard of living resulting from the influx of Jews during the 1917-1948 period have been there long enough that they can reasonably regard the land as their homeland.
ddooo: >You mean your tribe invaded the land of Israel >2000 years ago as Crusaders' mercenaries Sort of like the forefathers here in the US ddooo? I hate how quickly people who consider the US their homeland, forget how the US was "won". Shameful. JB
no matter what the reason for anybody's tribe having arrived in Israel/Palestine hundreds of years ago the descendants of those immigrants would only naturally come to know the land as their one and only homeland. Fair enough but don't you think that it equally applies to the descendants of those jews who migrated to British Mandate Palestine during the previous century and who know Israel as their only homeland. The homeland that the Waels of the world don't want them to have. Even the descendants of those who arrived, as you point out, to take advantage of the higher standard of living resulting from the influx of Jews during the 1917-1948 period have been there long enough that they can reasonably regard the land as their homeland. In your previous post you said that " huge influx of Jews from Europe displaced the local Arabs". The point I was making was that there was an equally huge influx of Arabs from neighboring arab countries and therefore claiming that Jews displaced the local Arabs is historically inaccurate. Both groups migrated there, the land was eventually divided more or less equally into a jewish and arab state, no arab landowner was supposed to lose his private property even if it was on the Jewish side of the partition and vice versa. Of course the rest is also known, the Jews accepted the compromise, the Arabs tried repeatedly to drive the jews into the sea.
Many of the advantages you list ( boozing, visiting brothels, adultery, etc. ) are anathema to Muslims.
The Middle East was invaded and occupied by Arabic hordes but no one questions Syria's or Jordan's or Lebanon's right to exist. North America was invaded by Europeans and no one questions this country's or Canada's right to exist. No one questions Australia's right to exist, or New Zealand's or the entire South America's right to exist. What's ironic is that the state of Israel has more legitimacy than any one of these countries as jews did live there at the time of the partition and they were there legally in accordance with the law of the land at that time. Moreover Israel unlike all those countries was created by an international body in accordance with international law, in essence by the will of the humanity. Yet Israel is the only country on the planet which right to exist is questioned on a daily basis.