Dear Special Delivery,

«a mere three thousand years as claimed by the Jews in claiming their entitlement to be based on.»

1) There is no such body as "the Jews". Jews are extremely diverse and as the saying goes, "wherever there are two Jews there are three opinions"!
2) Such silly claims, which archaeology refutes, are only made by SOME silly Jews who don't know their history.

«On the present rationale used to justify the subjugation of the Palestinians because of prior claim by the so called Israelis»

The subjugation of the "Palestinians" is not by the Israelis, but rather by certain Jews who now try to steal away Israel from the Israelis.

As opposed to the above-mentioned Jewish claim, the claim of the Israelis to their land (which does not include the West-Bank) is based on:

1) purchasing the land, which the local Arabs were too happy to sell them.
2) making the land inhabitable, where it was previously mostly swamps and desert.
3) building and modernizing the land.
4) defending the land from invading foreign armies.

---

Dear Alan B.,

«Here's the thing, the Palestinas are the ethnic cousins of the Jews and are also the sons and daughters of Abraham. And unlike the wandering Jew stayed on THEIR LAND!»

Not merely cousins - BROTHERS AND SISTERS, part and parcel of the original Jewish people (not that the legendary biblical Abraham actually existed).

---

Dear David F.,

«Many of the Jews who went into exile were deported by the Romans, Persians and other occupying powers.»

Many perhaps, but not the majority who left Israel on their own for economic reasons.
The Persians did not exile Jews - quite the contrary, they resettled [some of] them in Israel, while the Romans only exiled the residents of Jerusalem, not the rest of the country.

«We can only strive to be more democratic.»

Yes we can, but that's not my cup of tea, I rather strive for freedom, with or without bombastic names.

Dear Yuyutsu,

You want freedom without a bombastic name. Humans are a social animal and organise in groups. Some humans stay outside of groups and are hermits. They are a small minority. Those are the choices. Either be part of a social group or be a hermit. Social groups have names. Democracy is one of the names. Bombastic means high sounding but with little meaning. What social organisation with a non-bombastic name can you suggest?

Any discussion on Israel by casual yappers is a complete waste of time. Nothing changes in Israel, where the main concern is defence against lunatic Islamists, the United Nations, its own Leftist Fifth Volumn and, increasingly, a Marxist West. A back-and-forth by a couple of old codgers with nothing better to do is absurd.

Still agree with David f.

Ok YUYU, so the Palestinians were and remain brothers and sisters with undeniable claims to territory they never left! I bow to your superior knowledge.

So, what is the rational that allows the occupier to annex their land a displace them. Might is right perhaps? And because we can?
Alan B.

Dear David F.,

«Humans are a social animal and organise in groups.»

I do not deny this - I only insist that humans ought be able to organise themselves in groups of their own choice.

«Some humans stay outside of groups and are hermits. They are a small minority. Those are the choices. Either be part of a social group or be a hermit.»

Being a classical hermit is one end of the spectrum, there were historically also hermit couples, families, hamlets and tribes - and speaking of choices, even classical hermits are not permitted by the modern state, the modern state neither permits you to form your own smaller social group nor to remain hermit undisturbed.

«Bombastic means high sounding but with little meaning.»

Indeed. That big democracy, the United States of America, took over the peaceful people of the islands of Hawaii, out of sheer greed, they forced their own culture (including their Christian sexual "morality") over the natives, outlawed their culture and language and even forbade parents to teach their language to their children.

But it was completely democratic because the vast majority of the people of America elected representatives which approved that disgusting behaviour.

Thus "bombastic" is a fairly decent description of democracy.

---

Dear Alan B.,

«So, what is the rational that allows the occupier to annex their land a displace them. Might is right perhaps? And because we can?»

You really care for their rationale?
Well, what they claim is that God ordered them to do it.

Do you also care for their real reasons?

Their real reasons (which they wouldn't admit) are political and are not even related to the Arabs or to this or that land - they want to overthrow the Israelis who started and built Israel and take it over for their own mob!

Dear Yuyutsu,

I agree with your description of the takeover of Hawaii. The Philippine-American War was even worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philippine%E2%80%93American_War

My family benefited greatly from coming to the United States. Many people haven't. The US was far better than Czarist Russia. The US is free enough so that people can protest its wrongs.

https://www.loc.gov/rr/hispanic/1898/league.html

"On June 15, 1898, the Anti-imperialist league formed to fight U.S. annexation of the Philippines, citing a variety of reasons ranging from the economic to the legal to the racial to the moral. It included among its members such notables as Andrew Carnegie, Mark Twain, William James, David Starr Jordan, and Samuel Gompers with George S. Boutwell, former secretary of the Treasury and Massachusetts, as its president. Following the signing of the Treaty of Paris, the league began to decline and eventually disappeared."

The US has committed wrongs, but it has mechanisms whereby people can protest and sometimes redress those wrongs. Protest is not allowed in many other countries.