The new National Geographic has an article about the tunnels of Gaza, and it begins with a description of how often it has changed hands throughout the ages. Of course, it always changed hands by force, not by legal sale. So, at what point does might-make-right come into effect? And how much influence should the rest of the world have? I don't know.
I don't know if you are just musing, but those are vital vital questions that people you might call peaceniks at the U.N. and elsewhere keep avoiding. Not to even insult them, because I totally appreciate their desire to not give an inch to warmongers.
I decided those questions needed answering badly in recent years. My answer is 50 years. It may not apply to the world, but it applies to how I debate. Whether land is taken is taken by force or any other dirty means, if you can hold it for 50 years, its yours.
So right now I sharply criticize Israel for its war gains in 1967 and I suggest they move the hell back or be forced back and any Israeli in that area killed is a damn fool who won't get any sympathy from me. But as soon as June 11, 2017 rolls around that's all going to change. And while I will not be singing Israel's praises, I will accept that its their land, and will stay so until the people living there say otherwise or until another power drives them out and holds it for 50 years, priority on the will of the people living there.
---------- Post added at 20:51 ---------- Previous post was at 20:47 ----------
Hah. Well, I suppose paying one hundred years after the theft is better than not paying at all. ;-)
I think its debatable. When you have robbed a people of land you have driven them into poverty. When you give their grandchildren, still living in poverty, nothing but cash, they so often end up with nothing again in short order.
---------- Post added at 21:00 ---------- Previous post was at 20:51 ----------
For Zorro
'Nature' is a journal that is scientific enough for Sagredo, so I hope it's good enough for you.
...
Genetic testing raises an age-old question — are the Jews a people, or a religion? - NYPOST.com
Zero numbers in that article, at least any that matter. Its all about numbers.
Assuming its all true, its interesting. But I refer you back to my 50 year rule. I accept Israel because they have held most of their land for 50 years. The ancient connection is but a sideshow.
I will always maintain that Jews should not have mass migrated to Palestine and stirred up all that trouble in the first place. Of course its all said and done now, and we have to accept that. But I have been down this path, and its not very likely anyone will convince me they did the right or smart thing.
---------- Post added at 21:28 ---------- Previous post was at 21:00 ----------
Abraham's Children: A Review
Only 34 Ashkenazi Jews took part in that study, and all from the same community in New York. That out of a total of 237 total Jews. That is 14 percent. Yet, Ashkenazi Jews make up 80 percent of the total world Jewish population today (heavy sigh). And this is not even getting into how some people (especially in Israel) play fast and loose with definition of Ashkenazi.
The absence of Caucasian and Central Asian Jews may have affected the study's rather resounding, over-confidant statement that it "refutes" the contention that Ashkenazi Jews have little Middle Eastern heritage and rather more of a contribution to their genetics from Khazars and Slavs. The study, like many, seems at pains to prove Middle Eastern connections of Ashkenazi Jews, who are the leading force in present-day Israel.
I was of course earlier speaking of the Ashkenazi, especially the caucasian ones, and 34 handpicked Ashkenazi Jews, labeled Ashkenazi I know not how, and apparently not caucasian, hardly prove anything.
I don't think Albert Einstein would be at all pleased to have his name attached to this study. Old Al, he stayed away from Israel. This is a reason why.
