Interesting video I stumbled across today. It's a great take on the history of the seemingly never-ending conflict in the Land of Canaan/Israel/Palestine http://vimeo.com/50531435 <iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/50531435" width="500" height="281" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>
I assume the video was showing Moses as the first to appear there(the first character)? Thus my question.
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/4FspfOI_YRU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Nevermind, I apologize. OP didn't put the link for the characters. Here it is: http://themindunleashed.org/2014/07/ive-never-seen-israelpalestine-conflict-illustrated-uniquely.html
Thanks for the information. So the land was populated by Canaanite,Egyptian and Assyrian before God gave it to Israelite? So I am guessing the descendants of those people could claim the land as theirs as well? Well guess it all comes down to who have the might and power again, isn't that always the case? Who have the bigger swords and guns have the say. I really have no problem with Jews taking Israel, and they only took a small land really. However, just kicking out the people who lived there and force them to leave was not right. All the powers in the world should have compensated the Palestinians with land else where and money at least, I blame those stupid Brits of course. I suppose one day down the road Jews could be kicked out again if the world power decide to do it. The cycle could start again.
Would probably be easier to eliminate the conflict if the just inflicted mass genocide on the indigenous people and take those that are left and put them on 'reservations' Rocket River
There aren't really "indigenous" people in that region anymore, all truly indigenous peoples were killed off or displaced many thousands of years ago.
Pretty much. S Land Balla posted this video in another thread that gives more history about the shift of power on that strip of dirt: <iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/0FHGlTqTjIY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> There's an argument that contends that the ability of any Israeli to trace his or her lineage to the original Israelites is impossible. Probably can say the same about any modern person trying to trace blood back to ancient civilizations.
Not sure how accurate this is. The Israelis did not have a universal policy to kick out Palestinian residents when they were given this land. When outside Arab forces wanted to invade Israel after the UN decision, the Palestinians left on their own accord. Currently in Israel, there are Arab Jews, Arab Christians, Arab Muslims all living inside the 67 border. None of them are being ordered to move out.
Even before the first war, how did the Jews get their initial state and land? Given to them by the Brits I am pretty sure, but those land have people living on them, but they were never properly compensated, especially since those were Palestinian holy land as well.
There has never been a Palestinian state governed by Arab Palestinians in history, nor was there ever a serious Arab-Palestinian national movement until 1964... three years BEFORE the Arabs of "Palestine" lost the "West Bank" and Gaza as a result of losing the 1967 Six-Day War. When the Israelis were given this land, they were inhabited by 80% Arabs. When everything became official, everybody living on the land were citizens of Israel regardless of your religious beliefs or ethinicity. There were no divisions at the time. The Arabs were the ones who created the division which we now see as the 67 border and has been referred to as Palestine.
A lot of the land was purchased from the large Arab land owners....most of which didn't live on those lands instead having others living there working the lands for them. When the Jews bought the land, they kicked those people off of it and brought in their own people.
I admit I do not know the details, but how did the first Jews get their land after they took over from the Brits? You are saying the everything stayed the same as before, the only change was the government in the beginning?
That makes sense. In that case, it is properly done in the legal sense. However, they did not think about the practical implications in the long term. Might have been much easier at that time to relocate them to say Australia or some other land that have sparse population and give them good monetary compensation on top of that.
Obviously, a different government means different set of laws. The Israeli constitution used the US constitution as template for most of their laws with exception to some. As far as I understand, there were no official "get the Arabs out of the land" movement from that initial government.