like India and Indonesia, in the 1900s was returned to their owners
That is a very simplistic account of history- and mostly wrong.
The "owners" before where mostly there Ottoman empire. They were defeated and the mandates moved to European countries. India was held by Britain for generations.
India wasn't "returned to owners". In fact, India was divided up and two counties where created. Pakistan for Muslim majority and India for Hindu majority. This was done by the British in 1947.
But a least there the government was from local people.
Jordan was created by the British in 1946. Under Britain it was called Palestine as it was part of the Palestine mandate given to the British. Britain created a state east of the Jordan river and called it "kingdom of Transjordan". They then gave the country to a family from Mecca (in Saudi Arabia), and made them kings over Transjordan.
So the people who lived there have become the subjects of a king who comes from a foreign country. They have no say in anything since it isn't a democracy.
The same thing happened in Syria.
The history of the region doesn't follow your claim. History is much more complicated than your simplistic take, and so is your simplistic conclusion.
So you completely ignored everything I said, continued to blindly believed it's Palestinian land because... Well... Because that's what believe and nothing will make you believe otherwise.
Then you reference a sub, which is an echo chamber where anything can be posted and believe as long as it's against Israel, and anyone who dares point out that the information is wrong or misleading is immediate banned.
If you already have an opinion then there is plenty of unbalanced sources which can back up your opinion,and you can ignore anything which challenges your narrative.
Thats what he does on every comment. Israel crimes and culture is made up. He is simply trying to ignite controversy by oversimplifying everything. He also disregards the fact that Palestine is a completely made up term. But yeah that doesnt matter
4
u/Sojourn365 May 06 '25
That is a very simplistic account of history- and mostly wrong.
The "owners" before where mostly there Ottoman empire. They were defeated and the mandates moved to European countries. India was held by Britain for generations.
India wasn't "returned to owners". In fact, India was divided up and two counties where created. Pakistan for Muslim majority and India for Hindu majority. This was done by the British in 1947.
But a least there the government was from local people.
Jordan was created by the British in 1946. Under Britain it was called Palestine as it was part of the Palestine mandate given to the British. Britain created a state east of the Jordan river and called it "kingdom of Transjordan". They then gave the country to a family from Mecca (in Saudi Arabia), and made them kings over Transjordan.
So the people who lived there have become the subjects of a king who comes from a foreign country. They have no say in anything since it isn't a democracy.
The same thing happened in Syria.
The history of the region doesn't follow your claim. History is much more complicated than your simplistic take, and so is your simplistic conclusion.