Yes, opposing the establishment of a new state with a new population where someone else already lived would have been appropriate in the late 1940s.
Unfortunately it’s 2024 now, Israel does exist and time is linear.
So the only thing that can be done now is to recognize neither Israel nor Palestine should be erased.
(Though pointing out that the latter doesn’t seem to get mentioned here would be appropriate.)
It was always a contentious issue, there was just a lot of sympathy for the jewish people given the circumstances. Right being right, a portion of Germany should have been given. Instead the issue was exported to be dealt with remotely to the detriment of a different people who were wholly uninvolved.
At the moment, any defense of Israel’s right to exist is used to excuse a very clear land grab. Israel has the right to eist within is Israel only.
Yes, opposing the establishment of a new state with a new population where someone else already lived would have been appropriate in the late 1940s.
Unfortunately it’s 2024 now, Israel does exist and time is linear.
That means that if you commit a crime and wait long enough, it’s legitimized. No way in hell.
Unfortunately that’s exactly how it works.
Look at any country’s border and tell me which ones weren’t established by violence.
The actual question is, what alternative to accepting Israel’s existence would you propose. Because forcefully removing them would just be one more crime.
Forcefully drawing a border less encouraging of violence against native population. Also forcefully stopping all their meddling in the form of military occupation, blockade, block posts and so on. Arming their neighbors so that Israel doesn’t have such a military advantage.
