Duke_Leto
Active Member
Why would they launch war after war? I mean, I'm trying to be fair to both sides here, but let's face it: The land in question has had many occupiers over the centuries. The British managed to acquire it after WW1 because the Ottoman Empire was among the losers in that war. It didn't really belong to the British except by force of arms; they're not indigenous to that territory. Did the British or the French or the UN have any right to declare who should get what land? Or was it just a case of might makes right?
Of course, I guess one could make the case that the Arabs were terribly outmatched and had no chance at winning. If they were smart, they would have made a deal, but maybe they're stupid. But that doesn't mean they're wrong for fighting over land they genuinely believed was theirs. One might make the case that Geronimo and his followers were equally stupid to wage a war they had no chance of winning.
What, so since Israel was once ruled by Turks, it belongs to the Arabs now? To use your analogy, this would be as if Geronimo ruled an independent state in the southwest U.S. before deciding to invade Alabama. Oh, and as if the U.S. never began any war with Native Americans.
Last edited: