[Oxymandias]

@Rich

>Saladin
>Iraqi



The conception of Iraq as a country or culture never existed until the 20th century and I'll argue there still isn't any feasible "Iraqi" culture or nationality outside of what has been put into place by colonial borders. Saladin would've thought of himself as either identifying with his home city (as most medieval Islamic people used to do), Tikrit or he would identified himself as a citizen of the Caliphate. He would never identify himself as an "Iraqi". In fact Iraq isn't even the historical name for the region. Mashriq is a better term.

[Zionist Nationalist]

@skinster 300-200 years ago none called himself Palestinian it was just a name of the region and no more

What basis does the Palestinian nationality have except its fight against Israel?

[skinster]

Yeah, it was Palestine that started the "fight" of ethnically cleansing themselves from their land so settlers like you could fly over from a few hours away, and act like you own the place.

Which may be true...for now.

[Zionist Nationalist]

You didn't answered my question....

[skinster]

I didn't answer your question because it was stupid. If you're not completely segregated from the natives of the land you settled in, do a survey.

Or read some books.

[layman]

It has never been a full independent nation state. That is, before the in declared it one.

As for its identity, I think it’s one that is now based on resistance to Israel. Other than that it’s hard to see how it differs from Jordan. In fact Arabs have a more common identity than, say, Europeans, and the politics, language and history support than assertion.

[Zionist Nationalist]

I didn't answer your question because it was stupid. If you're not completely segregated from the natives of the land you settled in, do a survey.

Or read some books.

The thing is that vast majority of them are not natives but immigrants from the region

[skinster]

Ok, dude from Ukraine who settled in Palestine.

I think you're projecting your own lack of indigeneity onto Palestinians.

There, you got a free therapy lesson. You are welcome, ZN.

[danholo]

The thing is that vast majority of them are not natives but immigrants from the region

I've heard conflicting data but there is definitely some truth to this as far as I know. Then again, I find this topic interesting and odd that it should be an issue of contention or a point of argument. From some perspectives you can deny the ingenuousness of anyone to anywhere. This can be certainly done about Jews/Arabs/Circassians/Armenians and all the others who decided that the country is somehow an attractive option of places to settle. (I mean, Finns are not "native" to Finland. The latest information based on DNA-analysis is that the current Finnish population arrived about 1000 years ago here driving the "native" Sami population up North.) None of them are indigenous. Only the Jews, however, have the balls to admit it (Abraham was an immigrant from Sumer) and wrote it down. Palestinians change their story when it fits them. At first they where Philistines, now they are the Canaanites. At least the Arabs have a more physical tradition and direct connection to the land as they are historically mostly farmers. In that sense they are more indigenous.

But what makes them indigenous as a people, as there was very little to unify them as a single "nation"? Arab culture (at least in Palestine) has been clan based, so that is what causes division and determines the power structure.

But seriously, a bulk of the Jews there are only a few generations in the country. Even Palestinians are a mix of populations from all over. Their most notable "clans" the Nashishibis and al-Husayinis come from foreign lands and have been there for centuries. There was massive amounts of internal movement in the Ottoman Empire and people came and went from Palestine. One of my best friends in Israel has ancestors hailing from the same time as the Husaynis arrived in Palestine. Who is more indigenous?

The only thing indigenous to Palestine is immigration, actually. But the country welcomes everyone with open arms and in 10 years you'll be as indigenous as anyone.

We can all bask in the glory of how great our team is but sometimes admitting facts is a path to healing.

[skinster]

A land without a people for a people without a land

The British recorded the figures of the population of Palestine before they gave it to their zionist friends to colonize.

[Rich]

but sometimes admitting facts is a path to healing.

I don't know about healing but its certainly time to face facts. Of course the behaviour of Israel, Assad and Myanmar would not be acceptable, if this was non Muslims, they were dealing with. Muslim rights can not be guaranteed anyway, because nearly always if Muslims are given power they create tyrannies, so the only moral thing to do is to prioritise the rights of the non Muslims. Of the three Israel has been by far the softest. Israel's operations in Gaza are mild compared to Assad's assaults against Rebel areas and western and Iraq assaults against ISIS. However the problem is that Israel is merely containing the problem. Far from being genocided as some hysterical types have claimed, the Muslim population under Israeli control is continuing to expand. Israel needs to find a final solution to the Palestinian problem.

[skinster]

^

[Prue]

So let's get this straight: native Americans, who are more white than their ancestors, have less claim to their land?
And native Australians who are no longer "pure blood" have no claim to their land?
Regardless of how "white" a Jew is does not disinherit them from their own land, which as history tell us is Palestine.

[skinster]

Nope.