NationStates

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 6:59 pm**

Novus America wrote:
Luziyca wrote:The Russians created the JAO before Israel was even established. If the Jews need a homeland, they got one: it may be a frozen swamp, but at least they aren't taking land of people who have been living there before the Jews returned.

It was designed by Stalin to screw the Jews. W should not do to them what we did to the Native Americans.

It is not an appropriate homeland for anyone.

Not really. There is no evidence to prove it.

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 7:05 pm**

Socialist Tera wrote:
Novus America wrote:
It was designed by Stalin to screw the Jews. W should not do to them what we did to the Native Americans.

It is not an appropriate homeland for anyone.

Not really. There is no evidence to prove it.

It's a frozen wasteland north of Manchuria in fucking Siberia zillions of miles from any semblance of Western civilization. Okay, the chinese have cities nearby built with Western techniques but that's it. And America's closer to Birobidzhan than Moscow is. But...whatever. Doesn't seem to me like the JAO would be much of an okay place until it gets a bit warmer, and even then it might be more like the bayous of Louisiana than Illinois.

Posted: **Wed Apr 27, 2016 7:10 pm**

Given that:

The JAO is landlocked

Located in a frozen swamp

In the middle of a country with a long history of antisemitism

In the middle of a totalitarian dictatorship

And Israel was Jewish land originally before Arab muslim hordes overran it

It's no surprise Jews chose Israel over the JAO.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:31 am**

Imperializt Russia wrote:
SD_Film Artists wrote:
It seems unfair that one offers to donate land which is not one's to give. I mean it's almost as if she was taking a racist "go back to where you came from" mentality instead, but surely not!

The "rad left" doesn't own Tehran.
It's not 1978 anymore.

Novus America wrote:
Imperializt Russia wrote:The "rad left" doesn't own Tehran.
It's not 1978 anymore.

Iran is a kleptocracy ruling as a theocracy. So I would agree it is not "left".

SD_Film Artists wrote:
Olivaero wrote:you see I'd define the Geo-politics of the left and certainly the radical left to be internationalist and pacifist in nature, making a country like say Germany more in the camp of Geo-politically left than Iran which is quite militaristic.

Perhaps I'm focusing too much on Respect Coalition, but it doesn't surprise me that George Galloway sides more with Press TV than with Der Spiegel. As for centre and 'normal' leftists I agree Germany or more probably Scandinavia would be candidates with their non-interventionism. What's Libya? I've never heard of it...

SD_Film Artists wrote:
Novus America wrote:
However the idea we can divide any politics into a simple left right dichotomy is inherently flawed.

In theory, yes. There's no reason on paper why someone who supports socialism would support one country or another, yet there are repeated traits. I think it stems from the polarity of the cold war and a general opposition to imperialism; the part where it goes wrong is that such beliefs don't update themselves to current geo-politics; so you end up having anti-imperialist socialists supporting nations who are neither anti-imperialist nor socialist, but they support said nations regardless as they just can't see the wood through the trees.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:36 am**

I never thought I'd see the day when I'd feel the need to stick up for the British Labour Party - indeed it must be a cold day in hell - but she did not suggest Israel be relocated to the US, she shared a post on Facebook about it - obviously in jest - long before she became an MP.

She also criticised the atrocities committed by the State of Israel, which is not anti-Semitism.

There are anti-Semites in the UK Labour Party, but I do not believe for a second that Naz Shah is one of them.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:42 am**

Crockerland wrote:
SD_Film Artists wrote:
A video blogger? Really?

Yeah it was an in-depth explanation but if you'd rather I type it out than I will.
AJ+ video defending terrorist Usaama Rahim narrated by Imam Abdullah Farooq
Abdullah Farooq is a supporter of Aafia Siddiqui
Aafia Siddiqui of course being an Al-Qaeda terrorist.
Devon explained it better, though.

I wonder if Al Jazeera still stands by this video beyond their non-removal of it, as perhaps he's just an embarrassing mistake of the past (like the CIA with 1970's Bin Laden) rather than someone they identify with. Still, posting a conspiracy vlogger as an argument against bad sources doesn't really stack up.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 3:45 am**

Cetacea wrote:
Unified Gibbons wrote:Labor Party racism? Jeez, color me shocked. (Sarcasm kiddies)
In all seriousness, we are not going to deport every last Israeli to the US just so the radical left(of whom I used to be affiliated with) can let terrorists like Hamas run wild with sharia extremism and antisemitism. Israelis fought long and hard for that nation they can flee antisemitism and return to the land promised to them. While I believe there should be a Palestine I don't think Israel should be removed. We already have a bad refugee crisis in the Middle East and the deportations of middle eastern Jews en masse isn't gonna help.

promised to them by who? the British or some exiled hermit 4000 years ago?

The United Nations.

Danceria wrote:Because essentially, that is how Israel was founded, a pro-ZIonist relocation of European Jews.

While I'm sure many European Jews relocated to the newly formed Israel around 1948, before that there was a cap on Jewish migration as the British wanted Arab support during WW2.

Radiatia wrote:I never thought I'd see the day when I'd feel the need to stick up for the British Labour Party - indeed it must be a cold day in hell - but she did not suggest Israel be relocated to the US, she shared a post on Facebook about it - obviously in jest - long before she became an MP.

She also criticised the atrocities committed by the State of Israel, which is not anti-Semitism.

There are anti-Semites in the UK Labour Party, but I do not believe for a second that Naz Shah is one of them.

If this was 'New' Labour it may have been swept under the rug as just some meme that someone posted before they were an MP, but the Corbynite Labour party is under more pressure to find and remove vestiges of anti-Semitism with all the incidents of it in recent months, not least the anti-Semitism of Corbyn's own brother. As a Brit you may already know this, but just giving my two cents (or pennies rather)

Edit: Oh look- not 14 minutes after writing this post there's yet more alleged anti-semitism! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36160135

As for if Naz Shah is anti-semitic; you could argue that it was more anti-Zionist than anti-semitic, but I think that the overall tone of it- deporting all Isrealis, comes from anti-semitic political schools of thought, and at the very least it's obviously not helping with the two-state solution.

Dinake wrote:Opposing Israel isn't necessarily anti-semitism. While the comment could have been more tactful, it wasn't a particularly anti-semitic one.

There's a difference between criticising Israel and removing all Israelis in place of the Palestinian Übermensch. The former is anti-Zionist, the latter is anti-semitic. If Naz Shah had then clarified saying something like "I only mean the Israeli state, the Jews should still have access to their holy sites" then it would be anti-Zionist.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:53 am**

Luziyca wrote:
Novus America wrote:
Why the heck should the Jews be sent to a frozen swamp in Eastern Russia?! There is a reason why they do not go to the JAO in the first place. It sucks.

The Russians created the JAO before Israel was even established. If the Jews need a homeland, they got one: it may be a frozen swamp, but at least they aren't taking land of people who have been living there before the Jews returned.

Yes a frozen swamp in a country with a long and continued history of anti-Semitism. I'm sure this is definitely ideal.

How about the ideal situation be both Israel and Palestine get to exist?

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:02 am**

Napkiraly wrote:
Luziyca wrote:The Russians created the JAO before Israel was even established. If the Jews need a homeland, they got one: it may be a frozen swamp, but at least they aren't taking land of people who have been living there before the Jews returned.

Yes a frozen swamp in a country with a long and continued history of anti-Semitism. I'm sure this is definitely ideal.

How about the ideal situation be both Israel and Palestine get to exist?

I support that, but let's be real, do you think that it will happen?

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:10 am**

Luziyca wrote:
Napkiraly wrote:Yes a frozen swamp in a country with a long and continued history of anti-Semitism. I'm sure this is definitely ideal.

How about the ideal situation be both Israel and Palestine get to exist?

I support that, but let's be real, do you think that it will happen?

More realistic than deporting 6.3 million people to a frozen swamp who have no connection to the place.

I mean there have been viable plans for peace, but the sticky issues get in the way.
1) East Jerusalem
2) Going to pre-67 borders or not
3) Settlements in the West Bank

Considering the Palestinians position, I'd say they should just drop their oppositions the first two, since those are the redlines for Israel as well as other historical reasons. Figuring out the settlements however is more realistic and I personally support their abandonment. As well as a 1:1 land transfer for border towns perhaps.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:16 am**

I'm not totally sure what to do about it now, but I would rather the Jews had chosen to come here instead of going there before 1948.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:20 am**

I think we're sort of forgetting the basic tenet of Zionism, which is an independent Jewish country. So that Jews would no longer have to rely on the laws and words of others to protect them, which historically swung around. Saying "Oh I wish they had just come here" is forgetting why so many felt like they couldn't. Even the USA at the time still had quite an issue with anti-Semitism.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:22 am**

Napkiraly wrote:I think we're sort of forgetting the basic tenet of Zionism, which is an independent Jewish country. So that Jews would no longer have to rely on the laws and words of others to protect them, which historically swung around. Saying "Oh I wish they had just come here" is forgetting why so many felt like they couldn't. Even the USA at the time still had quite an issue with anti-Semitism.

Post-WW2 East Prussia, which was at that point nearly totally depopulated, would have been a better choice than Palestine.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:26 am**

The Princes of the Universe wrote:
Napkiraly wrote:I think we're sort of forgetting the basic tenet of Zionism, which is an independent Jewish country. So that Jews would no longer have to rely on the laws and words of others to protect them, which historically swung around. Saying "Oh I wish they had just come here" is forgetting why so many felt like they couldn't. Even the USA at the time still had quite an issue with anti-Semitism.

Post-WW2 East Prussia, which was at that point nearly totally depopulated, would have been a better choice than Palestine.

That's not where they wanted to live. Not to mention Stalin had other plans for East Prussia.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:28 am**

I mean, we're talking about a community in exile for nearly two thousand years. The dream being one day returning to what they considered their homeland. Other alternatives were thought of at various times (including Uganda of all places) but none could gain enough support simply due to the emotional, historical, symbolic, and yes, religious, hold of what is now Israel.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:28 am**

The Princes of the Universe wrote:Post-WW2 East Prussia, which was at that point nearly totally depopulated, would have been a better choice than Palestine.

I don't think surviving Jews really wanted to go back to Germany...

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:32 am**

Valaran wrote:
The Princes of the Universe wrote:Post-WW2 East Prussia, which was at that point nearly totally depopulated, would have been a better choice than Palestine.

I don't think surviving Jews really wanted to go back to Germany...

Or to Soviet controlled Poland, given that Stalin wasn't exactly fond of Jews either.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:34 am**

Costa Fierro wrote:
Valaran wrote:
I don't think surviving Jews really wanted to go back to Germany...

Or to Soviet controlled Poland, given that Stalin wasn't exactly fond of Jews either.

This too. My family left Russia due to anti-semitic oppression there, and I know others who have done the same.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:35 am**

Valaran wrote:
Costa Fierro wrote:
Or to Soviet controlled Poland, given that Stalin wasn't exactly fond of Jews either.

This too. My family left Russia due to anti-semitic oppression there, and I know others who have done the same.

You're jewish?

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:36 am**

Costa Fierro wrote:
Valaran wrote:
I don't think surviving Jews really wanted to go back to Germany...

Or to Soviet controlled Poland, given that Stalin wasn't exactly fond of Jews either.

Even if he wasn't fond on the Jews, if was never part of Policy, here was his official stance:
In answer to your inquiry :

National and racial chauvinism is a vestige of the misanthropic customs characteristic of the period of cannibalism. Anti-semitism, as an extreme form of racial chauvinism, is the most dangerous vestige of cannibalism.

Anti-semitism is of advantage to the exploiters as a lightning conductor that deflects the blows aimed by the working people at capitalism. Anti-semitism is dangerous for the working people as being a false path that leads them off the right road and lands them in the jungle. Hence Communists, as consistent internationalists, cannot but be irreconcilable, sworn enemies of anti-semitism.

In the U.S.S.R. anti-semitism is punishable with the utmost severity of the law as a phenomenon deeply hostile to the Soviet system. Under U.S.S.R. law active anti-semites are liable to the death penalty.

J. Stalin
January 12, 1931

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:37 am**

Simple solution. Sack this MP and return Israel to the 1967 post-war borders, all will be well.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:43 am**

Bartilia wrote:
Valaran wrote:
This too. My family left Russia due to anti-semitic oppression there, and I know others who have done the same.

You're jewish?

Half-Jewish (which is something of a meaningless term) - I belong to an exceedingly irreligious strain of Judaism, and by some ordinations I would not be classified as Jewish, but a good half of my family is Jewish, and I'm considered to be such by them. My own view on the matter is complicated.

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:54 am**

Valaran wrote:
Bartilia wrote:
You're jewish?

Half-Jewish (which is something of a meaningless term) - I belong to an exceedingly irreligious strain of Judaism, and by some ordinations I would not be classified as Jewish, but a good half of my family is Jewish, and I'm considered to be such by them. My own view on the matter is complicated.

You're a two state solutionist yes?

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 5:58 am**

Bartilia wrote:
Valaran wrote:
Half-Jewish (which is something of a meaningless term) - I belong to an exceedingly irreligious strain of Judaism, and by some ordinations I would not be classified as Jewish, but a good half of my family is Jewish, and I'm considered to be such by them. My own view on the matter is complicated.

You're a two state solutionist yes?

Very much so. And I heavily disagree with many of Israel's current policies, including ones that undermine this solution (illegal settlements being top of this list).

Posted: **Thu Apr 28, 2016 6:20 am**

Korica wrote:
The Coalition of the Magical unicorns wrote:Palestine is not a country de facto, nor it was ever- But let's *not* get into that.

While I as Israeli would love the change of neighbourhood, considering the ME is a total mess, it is still ethnic cleansing... If that offer was serious, I won't say no- It's win-win for me. Better country, you are not longer drafted by law, and less conflict.
But this offer smells from anti-semitisim. It points that Israel is the source of troubles, while it is incorrect- It is the Palestines who refuse to make peace with Israel.

Ironic because your government has committed ethnic cleansing against Palestinians.

Oh, let's ignore the facts:
The amount of Palestinians only grew- From a million and something to 3 millions. That's not how ethnic cleansing works. Also, that's not ironic.

NationStates

Brittish MP wanted to 'relocate Israel to North America'