Anti Semitism to increase after the government sides with Islamists

[mids2019]

https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-16115899/Miliband-accused-Jews-UK-danger-Chief-Rabbi-Tory-leader-react-Labour-sanctions-Israeli.OrlaNdo memorial

The government's decision to sanction Israel, a democratic ally in the ME, surely is a reward to all those that have spouted Jew hate on our city streets. If the government is willing to distance itself from Israel won't this be seen as further motivation for the radical Islmist left to continue their campaigns in the UK. It's a shameful moment and it will take a lot to rebuild relations with Israel.

They argue whether Russia should exist in Crimea.

Why would France and Canada care if Burnham 'clawed back the Islamo left vote from the Greens'? What's their motivation for joining in?

Thanks for clarifying.

I don’t think @Martymcfly24 was saying these numbers aren’t significant, but that you were both at cross purposes about who you were referring to.

No one is questioning their right to exist

Not true.

Yeah. I was just making a pedantic point of order. That is all.

My point is, that if the State of Israel was located in Nebraska, and Nebraska was now the Country of Israel , formally known as the US state etc, then the 29 countries that do not recognize Israel just now, most likely would IMO.

And that is important thought experiment I think, because it might remove accusations of antisemitism.

God forbid anyone links those not wanting the one Jewish state in the world to exist with antisemitism.

Nothing to see here...

Thank you @StopMeStopMeStopMe .
Yes it was cross purposes and being deliberately muddies.. And of all the marches I have been on the focus has never been on Israel as a state but instead their current actions of state extinction. I am sure there are those who agree with Hamas and Hezbollah but just like the extremists within the Pro Israel movement who believe all Palestinian children should be slaughtered their voices thankfully are not the majority and can be ignored.

And yes it is state extinction what Israel are doing because the country I am in recognizes Palestine as a state. Because if other posters think that a requirement is for all countries to recognize a state for it to exist as I think they implied then it does muddy the argument quite a lot about Israel.

Questioning whether Crimea should be Russian is not the same as saying the whole of Russia shouldn’t exist.

Just to clarify your position, are you arguing that Palestine should never be able to achieve statehood under any circumstances?

Where did pp say Palestine should never be a state, under no circumstances?

This debate often goes in circles because of how the phrase is used, but from a perspective of international law, countries themselves do not have an inherent right to exist, they either exist or they do not. Israel is a universally recognized country that exists. Rights belong to people, not to state structures or lines on a map. For example, Czechoslovakia was a recognized country that existed for decades. It no longer exists today, but the people who lived there still exist on the same land, safely and with full human rights, within two new countries, Czechia and Slovakia. From the perspective of Israel, it is the people, both Israelis and Palestinians, who have an absolute, unconditional right to exist, to have safety, and to live in dignity.

I think this question of ‘right to exist’ is a bit of a strange one. The Italy or Russia analogy is quite good here. All countries (except maybe islands) came into being by fighting and one religion/race/ethnicity triumphing over others. And no one questions America/Australia/Peru etc.

However, Israel was formed more recently and in some people’s parents’ generation and in many people’s grandparents’ generation. If I were a Palestinian whose grandparents had been hounded from their home, I would question Israel’s right to exist. There is a genuine grievance there that any civilised nation should address.

OTOH, if you aren’t a Palestinian or know any, then I would question why you would question Israel’s right to exist, other than antisemitism. There are far too many white South Africans etc (may sound bizarre but I know a few) who have massively benefited from historical apartheid in SA and, rather than addressing the ongoing effects of this, for some reason transfer their guilt into constantly attacking Israel.

To me it's what is implied by "There has to be an existing state for the possibility of state extinction".

However, I accept that I might have misunderstood, hence the request for clarification.

I find it's easier to understand what people mean if I ask them.

Just because the country you are in "recognises Palestine as a state" that does not make Palestine - in actual fact - a state.

It isn't a state at the moment. Fact.

No.

I'm not implying Palestine can never become a state. Just being factual that you can't have state extinction before the state exists.

Thank you for explaining.

I'll engage so in this but why not?

Is it because it is an illegally occupied territory or what is the reason.

wow the country you're from must be incredibly powerful if it can transform Palestine into a state just by saying so.

And people have made it sound so difficult over the years.

It's a thought experiment. And in a way, it matters.

Because we can expand on the thought experiment. Lets say Britain had kept Palestine. And it was still under UK control. And the UK had done all those wars. And lets say the Jewish folk had been given another area. Nebraska for example.

It might seem daft and all "what ifs", but it matters because is there some sort of theological anti Jewish thing going on, or is it mostly to do with the location ?

And this is sort of made clear with why Iran objects to Israel. Because it is a secular state, that they call a US puppet, in the middle east. With a city considered holy. It is secularism in what they consider their area that the Iranian clerics seem to object to.

I think the thought experiment helps to remove possible conflation.

It's a funny one though because the vast majority of people I've seen talking about Israels right to exist call themselves pro Israel?! I remember the first time someone, on here actually, asked me, do you think Israel has the right to exist, I thought it was the dumbest question going because it does exist. It's this weird thing that's thrown out to try and make Israel seem like they are the victimised ones as they take over land in Syria and Lebanon and of course Palestine. Israel is getting bigger and bigger and people are crying about it right to exist and acting like it's about to get wiped off the map if we don't all rally behind it.

I file this whole 'debate' under Israeli propaganda, something that is said to try and distract from the fact that Israel is an expansionist state not some poor country clinging onto the hope of existence. That's Palestine.

I think it means that recognised countries have a right to defend their borders and to sovereignty within their boundaries.

It is of course also possible to change a country's borders through agreement e.g. America bought Alaska, there is a mechanism for Northern Ireland to leave the UK; so borders are not set in stone.

Even the UN don't recognise it as a full member state. It has no internationally agreed boundaries, no capital and no army.

Calling it a state is symbolic only. It could become a real state one day, but not while Hamas are there.

@RedTagAlan ,

You can’t separate the religion and the location, as you would like to in your thought experiment.

For religious Jews, the religion is intimately connected to the land. A Jewish toast is next year in Jerusalem. Jewish schooling (even reform) centres around how Israel is interwoven with Judaism, including the fleeing from Egypt etc.

Also, though, Nebraska is a poor example. What about if the Jewish state had been formed between Kenya and Tanzania (as was mooted at one point). I imagine the tribes from that area who would have been pushed out would be pretty unhappy about it, especially if that area had become very wealthy.

And the same dilemmas would exist as do in Israel.

I think it's parroting anti West propaganda to refer to a country as a US puppet.