Therefore?This is the partition map drawn by the UN in 1947. Russia voted for this partition.
BTW, have you every been to Israel?
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Therefore?This is the partition map drawn by the UN in 1947. Russia voted for this partition.
I edited my post and added a question for you all.Therefore?
BTW, have you every been to Israel?
Except you are "forgetting" to mention they would become israeli residents not because they immigrated to Israel, but rather because their territory was annexed by Israel. This changes everything. We are talking about the loss of self-determination here. The palestinians would be living in the same piece of land as before but israeli citizens would be the ones voting in who would rule over the palestinians.
But they would attain a majority, because it would become THE best way to take over Israel. No need to fight anymore. The current statistics only give a glimpse of the future based on past history. If something so dramatic such as this happened, it would definetely entail a massive change.
Look, I could answer your post point by point, but I think you would remain unsatisfied with my arguments. Which is kind of how peace deals usually work: Both sides have to make certain concessions. Of course, in your case, you're a third party who likely wouldn't have to deal (at least not directly) with the repercussions of these concessions. Presumably smart men will be working on these deals, should any of these (and perhaps none of these) catch the interest of both parties (yes, that's the point of the deal: Both parties will be interested and want it). No deal is perfect, but one deal may sound more promising than the others, and smart men will consider the major obstacles, including border issues.Except you are "forgetting" to mention they would become israeli residents not because they immigrated to Israel, but rather because their territory was annexed by Israel. This changes everything. We are talking about the loss of self-determination here. The palestinians would be living in the same piece of land as before but israeli citizens would be the ones voting in who would rule over the palestinians.
If you reside in the same place as you ever did and suddenly you are no longer able to vote in who governs over you, but others are, you became a second-class citizen.
Just ponder for a moment how absurd this suggestion would sound if it was flipped the other way around: Palestinians voting in who governs over Israel while the current israeli not being able to vote in the same election.
How many landlocked countries do you know that only have borders with one single country? There are only 3, and I am counting the Vatican here. How can this work when the two regions have a recent history of hostilities? What are the odds of Israel effectively locking the emirates in a heartbeat whenever it deems fit because of any kind of threat? Huge. If this is not a prison, what is? Check what happened to Artsakh. That would be the destiny of those emirates.
But they would attain a majority, because it would become THE best way to take over Israel. No need to fight anymore. The current statistics only give a glimpse of the future based on past history. If something so dramatic such as this happened, it would definetely entail a massive change.
Which leads to the other former alternatives, and their problems...