New homeland should have been shared by anyone living there, not ancient homeland through inherited birthright bs from thousands of years ago.

ok what is your point with this?

Israel isn’t going anywhere. The river to the sea isn’t going to happen. Let’s give Palestine a state and ensure the security/ welfare of both countries.

homelands don't exist, how can they be shared?

the no borders thing doesn't work in general obviously, but it especially doesn't work with hamas.

this is because hamas see it as their number one godly duty to rape and murder jews, such that even if you put a big wall on the boader they will spend all their aid money on going through it/over it to rape and murder jews

Your terminology, and a figment of your imagination as a fixed entity.

And before Hamas?

before hamas it was egypt, jordan, syria, lebanon, saudi arabia, yemen, iraq, and affiliates

It's extremely lucky to be privileged enough to think that you don't need a homeland because your homeland protects you enough that you think you would never feel insecure without it. What this mindset shows is how much some people take a homeland for granted. Having such security is not true for all groups: I highly doubt Jews wanted to return to Poland after WW2.

As far as specific locations: I personally am not strongly tied to any place, but I can absolutely understand why some people would be and would not disparage them for it. Belittling people for wanting their ancestral homeland and the security of having a homeland, especially in the aftermath of having millions of their people slaughtered while no one helped, is the epitome of being judgmental.

And if you're not willing to tell Native Americans, or Gazans, to shut up and stop crying about their stolen land and move on then you should probably ask why you're willing to demand it of Israelis.

Sounds like the sort of unwelcoming place I wouldn't personally move to but then I don't have entitlement based on some idée fixe about a thousands year old ancestral line supported by Western guilt.

probably bc the Native Americans and Gazans arent doing a genocide like the Zionists.

Nearly a million people starved to death while the British government exported Irish beef, it was quite horrible. Surely the Celtic people have the right to defend themselves by bombing a couple of French schools and hospitals.

BTW, remember months ago when these guys swore this wasn't a pretext to sieze more Palestinian land? lol

If you/re not willing to support people of Celtic origin "reclaiming" land from people in Eastern France then you should probably ask why you're on an internet forum vociferously supporting likewise for Israelis.

Off by 50 years to make it into the century we were discussing, but ok. In 1850 if people were outraged by that I would absolutely support them. If in 1850 people were discussing moving to a country where that wouldn't happen I would absolutely support them. If people in 2024 decided they were going to use that as a justification... yeah that's not quite as strong an argument. No statute of limitations, it's just a much weaker argument.

Because the Celts aren't God's chosen people as written in the Bible. Try and keep up

No one drew a border around the century and anyway in this analogy we aren't in 1850 when it happened, we are in 1920 about 80 years later.

Does you being not bovvered about Celtic rights in 2024 means you think people should shut up about Israeli rights in 2120 if not earlier?

What’s up with the absolute morality tests ???


Arguing if Israel should exist or not it’s a waste of time rn imo. There’s much more important and more pressing issues.

The whole “is it fair , this is fair, this isn’t fair”, that’s not how the world works. The strong exploit the weak and the weak try survive.

Sometimes the strong protect the weak but not often.

I did ask you what the statue of limitations was, did I not? I take it it's less than 80 years and not more than 180 years? It seems a tad arbitrary.

At least the Welsh have been granted the right to ceremonially murder their English overlords at rugby tournaments. Fair compensation for the loss of their little ethnology-kingodm.

Celtic isn't a ethnic group fwiw it's a linguistic one.

If that helps any.

Are Jews and Palestinians ethnically distinct groups? duckduckgo tells me no.

No one tells Native Americans in the US they don't get a homeland. They get to keep some of the land they were corralled into and a nice pat on the head that people call a "land acknowledgement ceremony" or something, but no one is handing them out parcels in San Francisco. What they do have now is they get to be full citizens of the United States who can vote, buy and sell property, work, and don't need a passport/permission to travel around the US and that is what the Zionists should have gotten in Palestine and also what the Palestinians should get in Israel.

Your "modern day" example of why Celts should be allowed to take over Europe (false equivalency) in 2024 is from 1850. Israel "set up" 3 years after the Holocaust. Yes that makes a gigantic difference.

If your example were 80 years old it would be stronger than if it was 180. If it was 8 days ago it would be far stronger than both. As I said there's no statute of limitations, but the more recent you're coming off your entire community getting slaughtered, it makes a stronger argument for wanting to ensure there's a safe place for your community. Don't confuse my remarking that you couldn't even find an example from the last century as saying that the sweet spot was between 80 and 180 years ago.

People are mixed and it's complicated and it's all bs, people are people.

https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/...1116x1468.jpeg

https://www.razibkhan.com/p/more-tha...than-kind-jews

This is correct.