We all know how the most mild criticisms of Israel always gets blasted as anti-semitism, and a common defense is to make a distinction between anti-semitism and anti-zionism (or it would be a common defense if everyone didn't just bend the knee and apologize). That's all well and good, but the thing is, anti-zionism (as I understand it) implies opposition not just to the currently existing state of Israel, but to any Jewish state. And I'm not sure that's what I actually believe. Like, ok, maybe the concept of an ethno-state is not a great idea but I mean Jewish people were and are a vulnerable minority, so maybe it's not the worst idea to make an exception.

So, ok, Germany did the Holocaust and also started and lost WWII, so naturally they should've been the ones to give up a chunk of their territory to form the new state, right? That seems like the most fair. But maybe putting a Jewish state right next to where all the Nazis were is a bad idea (not that the actual location has been particularly peaceful for them). Alright, how about, like, Nebraska? Kansas? South Dakota? There's plenty of fertile, mostly empty land out there, just send in some construction crews, give 'em some development grants, call it a day. I'm sure you can find some big corporate farms that would be willing to sell, you don't have to get like the whole state, just a big continuous area, they've done it before for national parks and such. Hell, it might not be great for the environment (not that all the conflicts are either) but you could honestly just let them have a national park or national forest to develop. Totally doable!

Not only should they have put an Israel in one of those places, but they should also still do it, now, and just move the old one. Free relocation grants to all Israeli citizens, to be paid out of current military aid, same with development grants. Seems to me like everybody wins! I'll be happy to support Israel and to stop doing BDS and all that jazz, the Jewish people get their own state that doesn't have Palestinians to deal with and there's not gonna be anybody firing missiles (unless you think the Kansans are gonna get frisky), and the Palestinians get their land back, a major source of conflict will be removed from the Middle East, like, I'd be willing to trade Kansas for all that. I feel like most people would, honestly.

Obviously it could never happen because the point of Israel isn't to provide a home for the Jewish people, but to serve as the forward base of the West and pursue the ghouls' interests in the region and it would have to go through them. But it's a way to look at the whole narrative differently and might help maintain sanity in the face of all the gaslighting.

I will now open it up to everyone for your best meme answer (or serious answer) to the question: where should Israel be instead?