You are negotiating morals on thin ice to get your reasoning across.
The etymology of palestine has been much discussed and more deeply assessed than you or me and it has never been conclusive. There are greek, roman and biblical references to the phillistines, district of Syria, called Palaistinê which have been quoted to include places as well as people. And when referred to people it has almost always included the jewish population.
The first instance of a palestine was an area of land the british took from the Ottomans after WW1 and comprised modern Israel + gaza + west bank. It had a significant jewish population. In 1921/22 a civilian leadership under a jewish high commissioner was setup for palestine. His attempts at an inclusive civilian rule by members of the christian, jewish and arab communities were openly thwarted by the...... guess what.... THE ARABS (muslim arabs). In 1922 when the grand mufti of jerusalem died, his brother who took his place (an appointment carried out by this jewish high commissioner) openly declared the refusal of the muslim arabs to any joint mechanism that involves the jews and christians. He was a jihadi who believed in violence and the kill the jews when they hide behind the trees garbage. In fact the first civilian council setup in this piece of land contained 8 muslims, 2 jews and 2 christian and not surprisingly the muslims revolted.
A few years later arab militias were formed with anti-zionists and anti-british agendas and so started the violent terrorism that continues to this day. Up until this time all the jews asked was for participatory political systems which intrinsically included the muslim arabs, but all they got in return was the violence, hate and terrorism.
The word "Palestine" is merely the English transliteration! You don't have to find the exact word to believe that the country by that name existed! It's like saying that before the Greeks coined the word "India", the area known by various other civilizations as "Hodu", "Hind", or "Aryavarta" did not exist!
There is no serious academic debate on this subject whatsoever-the region known as Palestine has existed since ancient times, and there can be no argument made about the non-existence of any "country" called Palestine, because "countries", i.e. "nation-states" themselves are a modern invention of just the past couple of centuries.
Hence "Palestine"
did exist before the creation of the modern state of Israel.
Now, here is the history of Jewish migration to Palestine:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aliyah
Large-scale immigration to Palestine began in 1882.[2] Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, more than 3 million Jews from over 90 countries have 'made Aliyah' and arrived in Israel.[3]
Throughout much of Jewish history, most Jews have lived in the Diaspora. Today, the world's Jewish population is concentrated in two countries: the United States and Israel
The Jews that were migrating to Palestine were European converts to Judaism. Essentially, they were foreigners to the region-they shared neither a common language nor a common ethnicity or culture with the existing Arab population. Demanding that a governing body be formed with equal share to the Jews is ridiculous. Imagine for a moment that the Roma, who have existed in Europe for over 2 millennia, but had originally immigrated from India, were settled back in India at the time of partition in 1947. Just like the Jews, the Roma had been subject to the Holocaust. So if the departing British had partitioned India not into 2, but three pieces, and set aside 1/3rd of the "country" of India to establish a Roma state, would you have supported it?
Well, the jewish migration to israel did not begin with the holocaust, it started in relatively small numbers way before that. Like I stated earlier, the jews were hated, harmed and turned out of every imaginable place in Europe and their ancestral home is all they could turn back to.
The splitting of Palestine to give justice to the Jews would have been like partitioning India a 2nd time to settle the Roma. Do you know what the word "externality" means?
See the above replies from me. When you say that the british wanting a puppet state is a fact, and you may be right, do you have any paperwork or proof where the british have specifically stated the establishment of isreal as a puppet state??
Do you think the British are going to publish the most sensitive foreign policy documents for the whole world to see? What kind of a lalaland are you living in? If everything was so transparent and open, what was the need for Wikileaks?
Do you know that when the British left India, they spent the last few weeks and months doing nothing but destroying any and all paperwork and government files related to the administration during the Raj?
And remember, there was never an intention of getting rid of the muslim arabs in the region when the jews were allowed in, i the arabs vehemently denied including jews when for the first time since 1BC they were given the right to self govern that land (and continue to do so)
Oh, so I guess the Palestinians should be grateful that they were not to be subjected to genocide like the Jews?!! Again, why should the Arabs share their land with European Jewish converts who shared neither a common language nor a culture nor a religion nor even the same ethnicity!
If South Africans tomorrow decide in a democratic vote to kick out all the whites from that country, I will support them, will you? The whites have historically settled there by force, just like whites have settled in Israel by force!
It is not a fight between ethnic groups, it is a struggle between muslims and jews. In simple words - a barren piece of land (the only piece of desert that does not have oil) is freed by the british, they allow the muslims, jews and christians to rule it, muslims want it all or nothing, jews stand up and take up on the offer and setup a multicultural, progressive state while the arabs are trying to figure out means to carry out the next holocaust. This is the crux of the entire matter.
There you go with your lalaland history again. The British did not free a "barren piece of land"-are you implying that the holiest sites of the Abrahamic religions including Jerusalem were all "barren"? It was not up to the British to "allow" the natives of Palestine to rule their own land, nor to decide for them what kind of state it would be-this argument is totally nonsensical, and I'd really like to know what sources you're getting your points from.
Lastly, let me remind you-among all this Israeli and US propaganda-that the 1st and only Holocaust took place in Europe. That throughout their history, the Jews were never persecuted in Muslim lands the way they have been persecuted in Europe, that even the very first expulsion of Jews from Palestine was carried out by the Romans (modern day Italians), and not the Muslim Arabs. Christians throughout the ages have hated Jews and persecuted them far more than the Muslims because Christians hold the Jews directly responsible for the crucifixion of Christ. Jews were the religious enemies of the Christians, but for the Muslims, the Jews were never in that special category.
