Why didn't the Roma get their own country after the holocaust?

[AntiCentrist]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Yah that's a good idea. Take the survivors of the Hollocaust and make them live on the land whose people murdered them.

Yes, its a very good idea. Why should they be given the land of someone who didn't commit crimes against them, as opposed to someone who did? The Germans, of course, would have to have been required to leave that part of their then-former territory, much as the Germans were expelled from East Prussia, the Sudetenland, and other places. For that matter, perhaps we should have given East Prussia to the Jews, instead of the Poles?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by AntiCentrist

Yes, its a very good idea. Why should they be given the land of someone who didn't commit crimes against them, as opposed to someone who did? The Germans, of course, would have to have been required to leave that part of their then-former territory, much as the Germans were expelled from East Prussia, the Sudetenland, and other places. For that matter, perhaps we should have given East Prussia to the Jews, instead of the Poles?

I don't understand how it's a good idea to force them to live somewhere they don't want to live.

[AntiCentrist]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I don't understand how it's a good idea to force them to live somewhere they don't want to live.

No one forced them to go to Israel either, it was offered to them. They should have been offered German land instead, since the Arabs weren't responsible for what happened to the Jews. If they didn't want it (just like most Jews today don't want Israel, as demonstrated by the fact most don't live there), then they didn't have to go. But it makes no sense at all to just designate Palestinian lands will now belong to the Jews from Europe, and its caused 60 years of headaches ever since we did it.

[7960]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

With what weapons and support? They could barely hold up against Hezbollah with our support...

Huh? Are you talking about their run-in with hezbollah over the past year?

Israel's biggest problem is that they're beginning to fight political wars, like we did in vietnam. Israel listened to US and didn't attack like they would have 20 years ago. Do you honestly believe israel was "beaten" by hezbollah? Politics is the reason hezbollah still exists. If it wasn't for "world opinion" then israel would have flattened anything that pulled a trigger in their general direction.

[7960]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Times are much different now than they were then

Right, both sides are better armed..........BOTH sides. As long as politics (and the US) didn't get in the way, israel would beat the snot out of any number of arab countries in a war today.

[7960]

Originally Posted by AntiCentrist

(just like most Jews today don't want Israel, as demonstrated by the fact most don't live there),

They "don't want israel" because "most don't live there" ??

Does that mean most catholics don't want the vatican because most don't live there?

But it makes no sense at all to just designate Palestinian lands will now belong to the Jews from Europe, and its caused 60 years of headaches ever since we did it.

1,000 years ago there were 300,000 jews there and arabs started slaughtering them so they left (or died). Now the jews are winning and staying.

So I'm confused... a long time ago the arabs beat the jews and they left so it became arab land. But now the jews are beating the arabs but the jews should leave?

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by AntiCentrist

Yes, its a very good idea. Why should they be given the land of someone who didn't commit crimes against them, as opposed to someone who did?

The British owned the land.



They gave half of it to the Arabs(Jordan) and half of it to the Jews(Israel and the West Bank). The Arabs bitched about that much land given to the Jews and the UN split the Jewish section in half again.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

1,000 years ago there were 300,000 jews there and arabs started slaughtering them so they left (or died). Now the jews are winning and staying.

What happened 100 years ago bears no relevance, other than historical context, to what should have happened in recent history.

An attempt to link the situations as being similar or to hold event in that time period to modern viewpoints is unreal

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

What happened 100 years ago bears no relevance, other than historical context, to what should have happened in recent history.

An attempt to link the situations as being similar or to hold event in that time period to modern viewpoints is unreal

Just as what happened in 1910 or 1920 or 1930 doesn't matter. What matter is they're there now. Any attempt to remove them in some misguided attempt to appease the muslim nations is unreal.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 7960

Just as what happened in 1910 or 1920 or 1930 doesn't matter. What matter is they're there now. Any attempt to remove them in some misguided attempt to appease the muslim nations is unreal.

I'm not advocating removing them in any way, merely that the formation was a bad idea. Considering attitudes at the time however it was to be expected

[Pro Street]

Originally Posted by Kytro

I'm not advocating removing them in any way, merely that the formation was a bad idea. Considering attitudes at the time however it was to be expected

We can look back at the formation of the United States as a bad idea also, however it would never form the cause of an argument against dissolving the nation.

[7960]

why didn't the roma get their own country?

nobody has answered my question......... did they ask for one?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Kytro

I'm not advocating removing them in any way, merely that the formation was a bad idea.

maybe it was a bad idea for the arabs but it was a fantastic idea as far as the jews were concerned.