[YZF]

Sure you can hold any position or opinion.

John Lennon sang:

"Imagine there's no countries It isn't hard to do Nothing to kill or die for And no religion too Imagine all the people Living life in peace"

Nobody has banned John Lennon from the radio last time I checked.

Until a position is backed up with some rational arguments it's sort of just your opinion. Why should we care? If you are going public with a certain position and advocating for action the burden of proof is on you. Especially if there are consequences. There's plenty of nonsense going around that doesn't stand the slightest scrutiny. But you can "hold" any of those positions wrt/ Israel or any other topic.

[luffapi]

This is a non sequitur and a straw man. I don’t agree with the Balfour Declaration because it was strongly opposed by the Palestinians, 90% of the population at the time.

I have no idea why you are quoting John Lennon. It has nothing to do with the topic.

[YZF]

It's good that you are backing your opinion with facts. That's a great start to a rational debate. I don't think the muslims in the region were referred to as Palestinians at the time but it is a fact that they were the majority (I could nitpick specific regions and numbers but sure, as a rule I'd agree). Do you have any reference to their strong opposition? (it sounds reasonable though, so quite likely, but let's differentiate facts from opinions). My counter is that the reason the Jewish population was a minority at the time was that Jews were expelled from the area and prevented from returning. I do support the Balfour Declaration. There are other reasons for my support, such as the persecution of Jews in other countries.

Let's say we have this debate and you convince me, and I agree with you, that the Balfour Declaration was "wrong"(?) because it's not "right" to say people X should take location Y as their country while the locals are not consulted with. Not sure that really gets us anywhere. Lots of countries "exist" without Britain bothering to have declared that they should be countries and lots of countries exist because Britain and France arbitrarily made them so. Saudi Arabia pretty much owns its existence to similar circumstances, the British war on the Ottoman empire. But sure it is part of the long and relevant history of the region.

You can also say the UN should not have passed resolution 181. Again, not sure where that's gonna lead us.

If anyone is still reading this thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration for reference.

If you have issues with the Balfour Declaration presumably those should be taken up with Britain?

Anyhow, at the end of the day, I think you're saying that despite the long and documented history of the Jewish people to the land of Israel the fact that the Jewish people were a minority in the area for a lengthy amount of time means that they have no right to that area at all. My counter would be that pretty much any country anywhere in the world doesn't actually satisfy your requirements and that if anything the Jewish people have a stronger "right" to that land than most other people living in other countries. And then you'll disagree. And we'll agree to disagree. And the question of how to resolve the situation today remains.

[luffapi]

My source on that number is from the Wikipedia article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Balfour_Declarati...

That other countries have also engaged in colonialism, doesn’t mean we have to support it, especially modern day colonialism.

We won’t agree on a solution or even the problem, but my point in this particular case is you can be against Israel as a geopolitical entity and not be anti-Semitic.

[YZF]

I agree. You stated your case, you supported it, you're making good arguments. There's no problem.