|
|
| Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar (1182330) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > OTChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Sat May 10 11:41:31 2014, in response to Re: Palestinian university students’ trip to Auschwitz causes uproar, posted by 3-9 on Fri May 9 17:05:50 2014. Where does it say that a country is obligated to take in a people extremely hostile to it?Irrelevant. You claimed all Arabs not living in Israel want to destroy Israel. That's racist. It's actually seriously related, since you'd probably want to keep the people trying to destroy your new country out of said country... What, so now everyone on the planet wants to destroy Israel except Jews? If someone shows up at the border and says "I'm from Syria and I want to come in to destroy your country," then obviously Israel wouldn't just open the gate. If someone comes to the border and says "I'm from Uganda and I want to come in because you won't kill me for being gay," then your statement is invalid. ...and at least in the beginning want to focus on your original task. "The beginning" was 1948. It is no longer the beginning. And please define "at the expense of any other". By that your implying Israel closed existing doors to emigrants or otherwise took away something from them. The aforementioned Ugandan is a lower priority for entry permission that the person who shows up at their border and says "I'm from Canada (and I'm also Jewish) and I want to come in because it looks like fun or summat." I was commenting on your total lack of empathy and possibly imagination, which explains your overly idealistic views and in your inability to respond to the situation I proposed. How am I supposed to have "empathy" for the hypothetical victims of the 2014 holocaust that isn't happening? You asked whether I'd trust other countries to take me in if I were in the late 1940s and had just watched my friends and relatives killed. I pointed out that it was moot, because Israel was set up for that specific purpose. I know that being told the situation you proposed is moot and irrelevant is not the answer you wanted to hear, but ignoring it and pretending I was "unable" to respond doesn't help your case. Although it's curious that you'd accuse me of lack of empathy when your own empathy stops abruptly at the in-group border. Jews were not the only people to be killed in the Holocaust (and turned away from other countries) so why wasn't Israel just as inclined to welcome them? Since you admit that such attitudes are still a problem, why, again, do you propose torpedoing an existing working solution for one that has much less chance of working, especially in the long term? I wouldn't exactly call the current Israel/Palestine arrangement a "working solution." And that racism and sexism are problematic hardly helps your point— you've dismissed "the Arab race" as evil and I recall hearing that Israel has a pretty big problem with sexism. It's better than trying to change the immigration policies of every country in the world... On the contrary. Trying to make sure there are a few places you can flee to in a pinch is a more robust solution than declaring that you can absolutely rely on one country that may be gone, no longer accepting, or no longer safe when you actually need to flee. ...at the very least a damn sight more achievable. OK, you got me there. Doing nothing and assuming everything will be OK is a damn sight more achievable than actually improving matters. They voted to create a Jewish state primarily for Jews, since none existed, and never said otherwise. I've had to say this before— declaring you intend to discriminate does not justify your discrimination. |
|
|
|