ISRAEL: Most Hated Country in the World?

[padillah]

Originally posted by Spiffor

I read it. You seem to believe the choice was between martyrdom and easiness. That Uganda was easier. And that the Jews chose martyrdom, so we shouldn't feel sorry for them.

I was just pointing out that there was nothing easier with settling in Uganda. As a result, I fail to understand why you bring that point at all.

Then I've miscommunicated my point completely.

I wasn't remarking on the ease of settling in Uganda vs. the "horror" of settling in Palestine. Rather that Uganda wasn't rejected because it would be difficult (by the time it was offered after WWII there was a considerable Jewish settlement and it may not have been half as bad as pre-WWI) but that it was rejected out-of-hand. Simply because it didn't include their owning Jerusalem. In that same mentality they would have rejected any offer, regardless of the ease with which they would be accepted, that didn't involve ownership of Jerusalem. That's not a very realistic outlook.

Tom P.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Spiffor
The full survey

@ Russia's image of itself

China image of itself was even higher than Russia's

[padillah]

@Kidicious: Did you have a point you wanted to state or are you just trying to increase your PC?

Tom P.

[padillah]

Originally posted by Ming


China image of itself was even higher than Russia's

I must admit, seeing the past U.S. sentiment, I would have thought our self-image would have been much more positive.

Maybe I'm just overexposed to mindless followers.

Tom P.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Ming


China image of itself was even higher than Russia's

I think the connection is that the countries with the highest image of themselves tend to have the worst govts.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by padillah


Then I've miscommunicated my point completely.

I wasn't remarking on the ease of settling in Uganda vs. the "horror" of settling in Palestine. Rather that Uganda wasn't rejected because it would be difficult (by the time it was offered after WWII there was a considerable Jewish settlement and it may not have been half as bad as pre-WWI)

WTF? Uganda wasnt offered after WW2, it was offered in 1905. There was never, AFAIK, any considerable Jewish settlement in Uganda.


At the time Uganda WAS rejected, in 1905, there were no Jews in Uganda, whereas there were like 50,000 or more in Palestine, including majorities in the towns of Sefad, Tiberias, and Jerusalem, and several growing agricultural settelements, including Petach Tikva, Rishon LeZion, Netanya, Rehovot, etc.

Nonetheless the proposal was NOT rejected out of hand - Herzl supported it. Mainly Eastern European Jews opposed it, as they thought that the draw of the homeland, in addition to being the basis of their claim, was necessary to mobilize eastern european Jews to face the immediate difficulties of the transition.



Once, again, whats the point of debating without first learning the basic historical facts?

[Arrian]

Rather that Uganda wasn't rejected because it would be difficult (by the time it was offered after WWII there was a considerable Jewish settlement and it may not have been half as bad as pre-WWI) but that it was rejected out-of-hand. Simply because it didn't include their owning Jerusalem. In that same mentality they would have rejected any offer, regardless of the ease with which they would be accepted, that didn't involve ownership of Jerusalem. That's not a very realistic outlook.

According to the information I found in less than 30 seconds with google, that is an inaccurate description of what happened.

It was not rejected out of hand, and was not rejected because they simply wanted Palestine instead (though some clearly did). It was rejected because it was viewed as dangerous (lions and tigers and bears, oh my!) and because the locals didn't want them.

In comparison, Palestine might really have looked like a more practical option. Even if not, add in the historical connection (emotional, I know) as their old homeland, and I can understand why many argued, ultimately successfully, for Palestine.

It helps to have 20/20 hindsight too. Maybe they just misread the likely Arab reaction.

Lots of folks here like to talk about how nice the Muslims were to the Jews in comparison to Christians. Ok, maybe the Jews bought it...

-Arrian

[padillah]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


WTF? Uganda wasnt offered after WW2, it was offered in 1905. There was never, AFAIK, any considerable Jewish settlement in Uganda.

...

Once, again, whats the point of debating without first learning the basic historical facts?

The article several posts back mentions both the 1905 actual offer and the proposed offer by Churchil after WWII. It also mentions the sizable Jewish presence (if not an actual Zionist approved "settlement") and it's irony.

No, after WWII there was no formal offer because the Jewish counsel refused it out-of-hand simply because it wasn't Palestine.

Tom P.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by padillah


Please take your sanctimony and shove it up your... You are just like every other Zealot I've spoken with about this. You have no intention of trying to educate me because to do that you'd end up with an opponent that knew you were picking and choosing facts out of your bum just the same as you claim others do...

.

WTF? Since when do I have an obligation to educate you? Look, ive posted gazillions of historical facts on Israel and Judaism to this board. But frankly even i sometimes get bored with that, and Im certainly not going to do it for the benefit of someone who is hostile to me.

Sounds like YOURE the one with the sense of entitilement. You are NOT entitiled to my time or energy. If you want to be educated, go by a book and learn.

Feh!

[Arrian]

No, after WWII there was no formal offer because the Jewish counsel refused it out-of-hand simply because it wasn't Palestine.

Given what had transpired in 1905, where do you get "rejected out of hand because it wasn't Palestine" from?

They looked into the Uganda offer. It was initially accepted, but upon further review - for reasons other than "it's not Palestine" - it was declined.

When it was brought up again post-WWII, do you think that happened in a vaccuum? No. People remembered it from before, and likely rejected it for a similar mix of reasons.

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by padillah


I live in the U.S. and, unfortunatly, the welfare stqte has left several generations with a bogus sense of entitlement. There are people on welfare that I've heard complain because they couldn't get an HDTV until next month because they're check is too small.

It really gets to me.

Tom P.

Evidently so much so that you view the actions of people who valued physical labor and self help above all through the prism of "entitlement"

[Kidlicious]

This is interesting. Only 40% of USians have a negative view of Venezuela and 34% have a positive view.

[Arrian]

Why would we hate Venezuela? Because of Hugo? He's mostly harmless (to us, anyway).

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian

When it was brought up again post-WWII, do you think that happened in a vaccuum? No. People remembered it from before, and likely rejected it for a similar mix of reasons.

-Arrian

does anyone have a site for it being brought up post WW2? I cant seem to remember reading about the Brits making such an offer. Aside from not being consistent with Brit policy in East Africa, it would have had the further disadvantage of not dealing with what by then was about half a million Jews living in Palestine.

[padillah]

Originally posted by Arrian


According to the information I found in less than 30 seconds with google, that is an inaccurate description of what happened.

Well, according to the article you quoted one page back (post #134 that took less that 1 second to find... since you posted it) the Ugand proposal was revived after WWII.

The Uganda proposal was revived during the Second World War by Winston Churchill...

It was not rejected out of hand, and was not rejected because they simply wanted Palestine instead (though some clearly did). It was rejected because it was viewed as dangerous (lions and tigers and bears, oh my!) and because the locals didn't want them.

Except, as I've pointed out I'm talking about the Churchill revival after WWII.

The Uganda proposal was revived during the Second World War by Winston Churchill, but by this time Zionist organizations were firmly committed to settling in Palestine.

Tom P.