Serbian claims to Kosovo vs. Zionism

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Option 1 obviously, considering there actually has been a continuous Serbian population in Kosovo for centuries (probably not much longer though with how those Albanian mob thugs are acting) while Zionism is based on the view that one group of people has a right to a land because their ancestors lived there 1900 years ago and thus also has a right to abuse the people living there in whatever way they see fit.

Zionism is one of the most idiotic concepts I have ever heard of.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     I actually agree with BRTD here. The Jews were driven out of Israel. They have no more claim to it than the various Native American tribes have to the United States. Notice how no one wants to return all of the country to the Native Americans.

[Хahar 🤔]

Both are idiotic.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I don't see how Zionism is any more idiotic than any other form of nationalism. It's origins are certainly quite unusual, but then the pattern of Jewish history has always been quite strange.

[Хahar 🤔]

I don't see how Zionism is any more idiotic than any other form of nationalism. It's origins are certainly quite unusual, but then the pattern of Jewish history has always been quite strange.

Usually, nationalist irredentists already inhabit the territory in question, or at least have at some point in the previous two millenia.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I don't see how Zionism is any more idiotic than any other form of nationalism.

That's kind of what my point is, though Xahar brings up a valid one as well.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I don't see how Zionism is any more idiotic than any other form of nationalism. It's origins are certainly quite unusual, but then the pattern of Jewish history has always been quite strange.

Usually, nationalist irredentists already inhabit the territory in question, or at least have at some point in the previous two millenia.

     Pretty much. The Jews had absolutely no claim to Israel before they put themselves in power in 1948, & had had no claim ever since the Romans kicked them out.

[Хahar 🤔]

I don't see how Zionism is any more idiotic than any other form of nationalism. It's origins are certainly quite unusual, but then the pattern of Jewish history has always been quite strange.

Usually, nationalist irredentists already inhabit the territory in question, or at least have at some point in the previous two millenia.

     Pretty much. The Jews had absolutely no claim to Israel before they put themselves in power in 1948, & had had no claim ever since the Romans kicked them out.

Actually, they had a claim for some time after, but certainly not after the fall of Rome.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I don't see how Zionism is any more idiotic than any other form of nationalism. It's origins are certainly quite unusual, but then the pattern of Jewish history has always been quite strange.

Usually, nationalist irredentists already inhabit the territory in question, or at least have at some point in the previous two millenia.

     Pretty much. The Jews had absolutely no claim to Israel before they put themselves in power in 1948, & had had no claim ever since the Romans kicked them out.

Actually, they had a claim for some time after, but certainly not after the fall of Rome.

     The point remains that the role they played in taking over the land in 1948 was that of conquerors, not of oppressed refugees returning to their homeland.

[phk]

Both are idiotic.

I do at this point accept the existence of an independent Kosovo without Serbian claims as well as the modern-day Zionist enterprise of Israel. Just out of pragmatism sake.

[Dan the Roman]

I don't see how Zionism is any more idiotic than any other form of nationalism. It's origins are certainly quite unusual, but then the pattern of Jewish history has always been quite strange.

Usually, nationalist irredentists already inhabit the territory in question, or at least have at some point in the previous two millenia.

     Pretty much. The Jews had absolutely no claim to Israel before they put themselves in power in 1948, & had had no claim ever since the Romans kicked them out.

Actually, they had a claim for some time after, but certainly not after the fall of Rome.

     The point remains that the role they played in taking over the land in 1948 was that of conquerors, not of oppressed refugees returning to their homeland.

And what role did the Palestinians' ancestors play in 636 in taking the land. All land is stolen from someone else. The Palestinians stole it from the Byzantines and they are in turn have had it taken. I have never understood the absurd moral approach to the World which recognizes Muslim groups as indigenous no matter how they got the land(ie. Kosovo), but denounces anyone who tries to do the same thing to them.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I don't see how Zionism is any more idiotic than any other form of nationalism. It's origins are certainly quite unusual, but then the pattern of Jewish history has always been quite strange.

Usually, nationalist irredentists already inhabit the territory in question, or at least have at some point in the previous two millenia.

     Pretty much. The Jews had absolutely no claim to Israel before they put themselves in power in 1948, & had had no claim ever since the Romans kicked them out.

Actually, they had a claim for some time after, but certainly not after the fall of Rome.

     The point remains that the role they played in taking over the land in 1948 was that of conquerors, not of oppressed refugees returning to their homeland.

And what role did the Palestinians' ancestors play in 636 in taking the land. All land is stolen from someone else. The Palestinians stole it from the Byzantines and they are in turn have had it taken. I have never understood the absurd moral approach to the World which recognizes Muslim groups as indigenous no matter how they got the land(ie. Kosovo), but denounces anyone who tries to do the same thing to them.

     My point is just that; that the Israelis have no more claim to the land than anyone else. They're conquerors, pure & simple.

     Yet many people assert that the Israelis have a special claim to the land, because the Bible says so. Ideas like that are the basis for Zionism. I certainly don't want the Bible influencing foreign policy (even though it will continue to do so for a long, long time).

     I said that the Serbs' claim to Kosovo made more sense because the Serbs actually ruled the land until recently. Zionism has a lot to do with Israel being the biblical homeland of the Israelis, but they lost it long ago. Nevermind that 148 countries do not recognize Kosovar independence whereas all countries recognize that various countries have owned Israel for the last 2000 years.

[minionofmidas]

...exempting the small Jewish population present in Palestine before ca.1880, of course.

And what role did the Palestinians' ancestors play in 636 in taking the land.

It varies. Mostly, it was "getting conquered and accepting the new rulers because the old ones had been such an epic fail", of course. The Palestinian ethnogenesis, insofar as such things can be pinpointed at all, occurred in Palestine after 636 - which is the closest thing you can come in mankind reality to "living in your own homeland where you have always lived" (which is what most people feel to be doing, even though nobody strictly speaking does. Well, maybe that small Khoisanid remnant group in Tanzania, but nobody else. ).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Usually, nationalist irredentists already inhabit the territory in question, or at least have at some point in the previous two millenia.

There was a large Jewish population in what is now Israel before 1948 and a significant Jewish population before 1917. Of course they'd all (well... almost all) got there by immigration; that's one of the things that makes Zionism unusual amongst nationalisms.

[Torie]

I am a facts on the ground now kind of guy. To do otherwise is unwise: a recipe for more war and ethnic cleansing. North America isn't going to be given back to the Native Americans either. In any event, the Albanians have been a majority in Kosovo for at least 125 years, and probably longer, and are now 90% of the population.  They have nothing in common with the Serbs and were opposed by them, except under Tito. Israel came into being under a rather drastic and hopefully unique historical circumstance. The alternative to a separate Israeli state is not a pretty one, under a far more drastic one than re-appending Kosovo to Serbia.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

All land is stolen from someone else.

If we're talking of "land" as territory, sure. Land as a commodity tends to get stolen from collective groups by rich individuals.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In all fairness, most of those Muslim groups are descendents of people who lived in whateverterritoryweretalkingabout before the Ottomans (or whoever) invaded and who converted to Islam post invasion. Americans who claim that Israel is not "legitimate" (quite what that word means in this sort of context I'm not entirely sure...) are much funnier (but then hypocrisy is often amusing).

[Torie]

In Kosovo the Slavs moved in during the dark ages, and displaced  a Latin people, who in large part decamped to Rumania, believe it or not. I believe they were called the Vlachs or something like that. The Albanians have been around up in the mountains since rocks cooled, and started coming down into the Kosovo valley during the middle ages. By the 17th century, they were a substantial percentage of the population.

[Associate Justice PiT]

All land is stolen from someone else.

If we're talking of "land" as territory, sure. Land as a commodity tends to get stolen from collective groups by rich individuals.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

In all fairness, most of those Muslim groups are descendents of people who lived in whateverterritoryweretalkingabout before the Ottomans (or whoever) invaded and who converted to Islam post invasion. Americans who claim that Israel is not "legitimate" (quite what that word means in this sort of context I'm not entirely sure...) are much funnier (but then hypocrisy is often amusing).

     I've never heard anyone say that. Who do you have in mind in particular?

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

It's not so much Israel being "legitimate" as it is them supposedly having the moral authority to do whatever they want and oppress people with no consequences.