I though i'd start this to continue the discussion from here:
There was an interesting debate about immigration as in "we live in canada as a settler poulation, so do the israelis....what's the difference?"
I don't think there is one except the timeline. We're a few hundred years into this occupation while the israelis are pretty recent occupiers by historical standards. Actually it seems the israelis are borrowing tactics from us such as reserves/bantustans, negotiations in bad faith, token political positions etc.
As for the argument jewish people from around the world have not only a right to live in the area, but effectively control it by military force, remove and "delegitimize" the indigenous population, because of a 3000 year old religious connection to the land...
I just can't agree with that. i mean, just because your religion says "this is where you came from" doesn't mean you have a right to take that literally and assume because you practice this religion in the modern era that you have some right to takeover the place and kick out whoever is living there now. Tha tis just such an unethical position. That's why it really bugs me when Israelis rag on the palestinians for rejecting partition.
I mean, who would accept that unless they were given a chance to have input from the beginning. you just can't impose something like that from the outside. They basically said accept this or we will impose it.. And with no compensation or intention of ever giving any, for such a grievous action no less of taking people from their land, no one ever anywhere would ever accept that.