« on: July 15, 2005, 08:09:52 AM »
Well, that's the problem with painting an entire group of people with the same brush. How can you say that ALL Palestinians have blood on their hands? Certainly there are plenty of Palestinian families who lost their land and property and have never participated in terrorism. Why should they not be granted reparations solely because someone of their ethnic group committed a crime? Just as it's unfair to say that ALL Israelis want to take over Palestinian land and 'remove' the residents, it's unfair to say that ALL Palestinians participate or have participated in terrorism.QuoteWell, remember, they were victims of the Germans 60 years ago, so in return, they get someone else's land and unlimited endorsement by the US to do whatever they want to the native population. Seems fair.
I think you are forgetting about the many wars of extermination waged against Israel by Arabs. You remember, the one's where the Israelis kicked their assholes up around the eyes?
That was after the whole land-taking thing, remember? And if the Israelis kicked their asses, how are they victims?
the arabs are the ones who moved in the first place, expecting the jews to lose the resulting war. palestinians can have their land back when jews get their land back in baghdad, tehran, cairo, damascus, tunis and everywhere else they were forced to leave
Unfortunately, that's just not true. There were some Palestinians who left voluntarily, but a lot of them were forced off the land violently. Those supposed radio broadcasts urging Palestinians to leave? No one has yet provided any evidence that they actually happened. It's a myth.
Jews have been granted extensive reparations from land and property they lost in Germany in the 30s and 40s. Why should Palestinians not be granted the same?
The problem I have with this -- and I kind of have an ambivalent attitude toward Israel myself -- is I don't think, despite how much Palestinians as a whole have suffered, they should ever receive reparations. Why? Because they have blood on their hands, just like the Israelis. Comparing the Palestinians to German Jews in the 30s and 40s is a bit disingenuous -- what crimes did the Jews commit? They were innocent victims entirely, and that just isn't the case with the Palestinians. Granted, what happened to them in the immediate aftermath of the war of independence was horrible, but their decision to embrace terror and murder innocent Israelis doesn't exactly leave them guiltless.
But at the same time I realize the Israeli state was founded, in part, on acts of terror (notice no one ever talks about Begin's Stern Group or the King David Hotel bombing). So that's what makes it so intractable in my view. When neither parties' hands are clean, what do you do?
I agree that it's not an exact analogy - they were entirely different situations - but the principle, I believe, remains the same.
I agree with you that in principle, it's not a bad idea. But practically I'm just not sure how it could work (I'm not sure what critera one could use -- it could get quite complex...but I know that wasn't your point and I should have clarified), and I definitely didn't mean to imply that all Palestinians commit acts of terror....but rather to say that the level of culpability, in the aggregate, is greater than that of other groups which have received reparations in the past. Certainly many Palestinians got the short end of the stick and have never resorted to terrorism. I just don't see how reparations could work though.
But I think we're basically in agreement -- you were talking about the logical force of an idea, and I was griping about the possible implementation of that idea -- two very different things. Certainly I have no problem with the idea in the abstract...