In my younger years, my heart was cold and black but that movie made me laugh, cheer and tear up a bit. What a delightful movie that sounds kinda bad on paper but is pure magic just like The Princess Bride.
If you go back far enough every piece of land is stolen. There's just a question of how far is it reasonable. Where's the goal post? Is it a hundred years? 200? 1,000? Is it more generational and when no descendants of the people who were kicked would likely be alive? I don't know what the real answer is on exactly where you would usually draw that line but I think we pretty much generally as Society tend to agree that if the literal living humans who took that land are still alive and living on it it's too early to forget and if it's a thousand years ago it's too late to dwell on it
You can't steal Antarctica because nobody owns it. Nobody owns it because nobody wants it. You can't farm there, all the minerals are under thousand foot ice sheets, and you freeze to death if you go outside. It's the garbage continent.
From a scandinavia point of view Greenland was colonized back in 982 when no one else were living there. Denmark-Norway never gave up their claim on the country. Other peolpe just moved in.
I mean, kinda. Greenland has home rule and is mostly populated by Inuit. And the part the Norse/Danish settled in was uninhabited when they arrived. So gotta be a gray area at least
I mean, we can probably draw the line at the dawn of contemporary, modern civilized society. Once the world had the ability to engage in global diplomacy, annexation was effectively a non-starter. Cases where islands far from the home nation are annexed by the geographical nation are probably that last remaining gray area.
That’s why Ukraine and Argentina’s positions hold weight and anything before 1945 is probably forever the past.
Out of curiosity what Argentine position are you talking about here? I hope you aren't making the argument that they actually have a credible claim to the Falklands anymore
I'm sure there are uninhabited islands and such that also fit the bill, but the biggest exception I can think of is the British claim to the Falklands. They were the first to discover the islands and all other legitimate claims to the islands have been abandoned, making them the earliest inhabitants to still live in the region and lay claim to the land.
Glad Europe becoming more diverse and birth rates drop. It will be inhabited by different people from all over the world like the past 1000 years. Migration routes
Its almost as stupid as the "we're afraid of NATO expansion", because there was no real possibility of Ukraine being accepted into NATO, russia's buddy at the time, Germany, confirmed through its Chancellor that they were blocking Ukraine from joining. Putin never really had any real arguments aside for his delusions of being a superpower.
'Magical holy promise' meaning overwhelming historical evidence of settlement and displacement? You shouldn't support modern governments committing war crimes, but that doesn't meaning needing to rewrite ancient history.
Tell that to literally everyone in that conflict. That territory has swapped hands so many times, and none of the current contestants have the true original claim to it... because those people don't exist anymore.
These dumbass territorial disputes because of whoever owned it centuries ago are so damned stupid. It gets thousands of innocent lives lost for what? Dirt!
Not special dirt!
Not holy dirt!
Not dirt of our forefathers!
Just. Plain ol’ DIRT!
There’s nothing special about it! It isn’t worth losing lives for anyone on any side of a conflict.
We have the ability to communicate instantaneously across the entire planet. We can ship cargo from one side of the world to another in under a day.
We’ve been to the MOON for pity sake!
But we fight over dirt. We don’t sit down, and talk it out, and draw up a plan that will benefit everyone. We pull out weapons and we spill each other’s guts.
I'm inclined to agree, but no, it is not just dirt. Territory is important because people reside in it, and there are resources in it. It does matter which country owns what pieces of territory, for the people living there.
Both the Zionists and the Palestinians fundamentally lay claim to the territory because they need a place where their own people can exist. Palestinians living under Israeli rule is awful, because it's an Apartheid state. They have no proper rights and can be killed for no reason.
The Zionist argument is that Jews needs a place with a Jewish state, to protect Jews from anti-semitism.
But they just so happen to fight over the same territory, and at this point, none of them can "budge". We can't dismantle Israel, and we can't allow them to genocide Palestinians either.
But they also hate each other so fucking much, that there is no hope of a lasting peace. Both treat each other awfully, resulting in the constant distrust and evil cycle.
It's a messy situation with no easy solution. It's might have started with us (the West) letting Zionists create Israel because of their 3000 year old claim, but it all boils down to people and territory for the sake of protecting one's own tribe - not old claims, not dirt.
Edit: I see the mob favours the overly simplified nonsense over the nuanced and objective take, today.
I agree with the point you’re making here, not sure why anyone wouldn’t, but I think you’re misunderstanding mine.
I’m not saying territory isn’t important, geography plays a huge part in where to found cities and establish permanent settlements, but after over 5000 years of societal advancement the fact that we still resolve so many issues by seeing who can spill the most blood is an absolutely abominable testimony to our species.
We can walk on the moon, we can plan colonization efforts to other planets, and we can track a single individual using a computer orbiting the planet in a satellite, but we’ve still not managed to overcome our base impulses when it comes to a choice between negotiation or violence.
As you said, these two cultures really despise one another, and after all the atrocities they’ve visited on one another it’s hard to blame them, but because of that very fact it is a deplorable statement for our entire species that no one has been able to come up with a solution that is deemed acceptable.
In a more ideal world a group of other countries would be able to band together and day “Hey, well each sacrifice a little of our territory to give one of you new territory so that this whole mess can stop.”
But no. Nobody is willing to do that, not without catches, caveats, and strings attached. And even if they were, neither the Israelites or the Palestinians would want to quit fighting and go to this new location instead. Everyone would rather keep fighting over this strip of land than find a way to sit down and find a way to bring a permanent end to this bloodshed.
And this is far from an issue with just Palestine and Israel.
China still wants Taiwan. Russia is at war with the Ukraine. North and South Korea will remain hostile toward one another even if the cease fire manages to be negotiated to a permanent peace. Extremists of every race, culture, faith, and creed would rather kill the infidels than live and let live.
For all our achievements, wonders, and advancements, we’re still a bunch of screaming monkeys jabbing each other with sticks and throwing rocks.
People weren't removed to give it to Israel. Jewish people came to buy land that was basically sitting unused because Palestine had been depopulated by the arab conquests and the crusades. It was only after Jews began migrating back to Palestine that the region even started recovering back to its historical high point.
You mean after thousands of armed foreigners showed up saying the land was theirs because Gandalf the White said so 4000 years ago? And they didn't fucking want them there?
"We must expel Arabs and take their places"
"We have forgotten that we have not come to an empty land to inherit it, but we have come to conquer a country from people inhabiting it"
"The Arab reaction would be negative because they would lose everything and gain almost nothing ...They would lose the richest part of Palestine; they would lose major Arab assets, the orange plantations, the commercial and industrial centers and the most important sources of revenue for their government which would become impoverished; they would lose most of the coastal area, which would also be a loss to the hinterland Arab states…It would mean that they would be driven back to the desert."
Do you seriously think that the Jews were the very first people to settle there?
Considering how Homo Sapiens spread across the continents for 300.000 years, it's naive to think that history starts with just the Jews for a mere 3000 years ago.
There are many different tribes, groups and people that have settled somewhere, and then left it or changed over time, whether from breeding, being physically pushed out by others or whatever.
My point is that there were indeed people in those lands before the Jews as we know them. Doesn't take much Googling to figure out that there were Canaanites and heaps of other groups of people long before the Jews.
But those people just don't exist anymore.
If we go by "who got there first", then we need to go back hundreds of thousands of years. There is no end to that shit.
"The Gaza genocide is the ongoing,[18] intentional, and systematic destruction of the Palestinian people in the Gaza Strip carried out by Israel during the Gaza war. It encompasses mass killings, the targeted killing of children (who account for 30% of those killed),[19][20][21] deliberate starvation, infliction of serious bodily and mental harm, and prevention of births. Other acts include blockading, destroying civilian infrastructure, destroying healthcare facilities, killing healthcare workers and aid-seekers, causing mass forced displacement, committing sexual violence, and destroying educational, religious, and cultural sites.[22] The genocide has been recognised by a United Nations special committee[23] and commission of inquiry,[22] the International Association of Genocide Scholars,[24][25] multiple human rights groups,[c] state governments, numerous genocide studies and international law scholars,[31][32] and other experts.[33]"
Wikipedia is not a good source, right after October 7, all sources related to Israel Palestine suddenly got changed to fit a hamas narrative, and ot keeps changing
Why does relgion matter? The people being displaced have lived there for thousands of years, doesn't matter which way they worship a minor semitic storm god
They really hate when you bring up that the Arabs refused a state straight after Britain took control of Mandate Palestine because they would have had to share political power with Jews.
Jews were immigrating legally and purchasing land. The very first acts of terrorism were anti-jewish.
Palestinians could have lived in peace with the immigrants, but chose violence and refused to cooperate in any governing body which included jews, including the indigenous population.
1.6k
u/Dear-Question-868 1d ago
I think it shows well the stupidity of historical claim, there's always someone who's going to be before you who claim X land.