I am Israel

[Bismillah]

What power do the Palestinians have?

Threatening a one state solution is always met with positive alarm. If Fatah gives up on peace the onus is then on Israel to solve the problem and the entirety of its consequences rests on its shoulders.

Aside from that there is also U.N recognition by the General Assembly though if I understand it correctly the U.S will, as always, veto it before the concept can be passed by the Security Council. If they do attain state recognition then Israel's colonization attempts will be thrown in even graver doubt as the status will change from P.O.T to full fledged state.

As for civil war they obviously want the same thing. Hamas and Fatah are battling for political power and Israel and the U.S wholeheartedly support Fatah in their endeavor to widen the split.

 

[kai]

What power do the Palestinians have?

Threatening a one state solution is always met with positive alarm. If Fatah gives up on peace the onus is then on Israel to solve the problem and the entirety of its consequences rests on its shoulders. Israel cannot solve the problem, it could however just build a wall around itself and keep security measures in place for ever.

Aside from that there is also U.N recognition by the General Assembly though if I understand it correctly the U.S will, as always, veto it before the concept can be passed by the Security Council. If they do attain state recognition then Israel's colonization attempts will be thrown in even graver doubt as the status will change from P.O.T to full fledged state. Israel would not baulk from dismantling the settlements if they had too . I think the settlements are bargaining chips.

As for civil war they obviously want the same thing. Hamas and Fatah are battling for political power and Israel and the U.S wholeheartedly support Fatah in their endeavor to widen the split.

What are the differences they fight over then?

 

[Poisonshady313]

I think of the land in disputed territory (i.e. West Bank and Gaza) like a tip at a restaurant.

The more satisfied you are with the service, the bigger the tip. If the waiter starts giving you attitude, bringing the wrong things, neglecting to refill your glass of water, he gets less of a tip, and rightfully so.

The West Bank and Gaza were not considered a sovereign Palestinian state before 1948... they were not considered a sovereign Palestinian state as of 1948, when Egypt had Gaza and Jordan had the West Bank... and neither Egypt nor Jordan did anything to create/establish an independent Palestinian state.... so the land is disputed territory. Territory which might eventually be part of a Palestinian state, if the Palestinians could ever decide they desire peace instead of the destruction of Israel.

And so... for every suicide bomber that explodes... for every qassam and katyusha... for every Israeli casualty, more Israeli houses should go up in the West Bank. The amount of land left over for a potential Palestinian nation will dwindle, and rightfully so, until the Palestinians figure out that peace is the way to statehood, rather than the other way around.

Until Palestinians recognize the existence of Israel, why should Israel retreat behind borders that the Palestinians don't accept anyhow?

If Israel settles the West Bank until there is no more West Bank left over for a Palestinian state, it will be the Palestinians' fault. They could have had a state at any time since UN partition, even though, according to some, Jordan IS the Palestinian state.


Until the Palestinians unconditionally recognize the existence of the Jewish state of Israel and accept living side by side peacefully as neighbors, the demand for Palestinian statehood should only be regarded as a tactic in the armed struggle to "liquidate the Zionist Entity". After all, that's how the Palestinian leadership sees it.

 

[7he4uthor]

Injustice should not be met with injustice.

injustice is an illusion if you believe in god

 

[Witch9]

. . . unconditionally recognize the existence of the Jewish state of Israel and accept living side by side peacefully . . .

Except for the unconditional part, I would love to see this happen, the condition being that Israel simultaneously recognize the existence of a Palestinian homeland and accept living side by side peacefully. In other words, that both sides agree to stop fighting their grandparents' war and accept the already rejected two-state solution as the only basis for peace. Polls have consistently showed respectable Israeli and Palestinian majorities in favor of a negotiated two-state settlement.

I have no delusion, however, that this will happen in my lifetime. The two sides are like the Hatfields and the McKoys, obsessed with accepting nothing short of the total annihilation of the other side.

Reminds me of a comment in Joseph Campbell's farewell interviews with Bill Moyers about how sad it is that so many people can be committed to eternal warfare "just because they have different names for God."

:sw:

 

[Poisonshady313]

Except for the unconditional part, I would love to see this happen, the condition being that Israel simultaneously recognize the existence of a Palestinian homeland and accept living side by side peacefully. In other words, that both sides agree to stop fighting their grandparents' war and accept the already rejected two-state solution as the only basis for peace. Polls have consistently showed respectable Israeli and Palestinian majorities in favor of a negotiated two-state settlement.

I have a small problem with that.

And that is, Israel has been ready and willing to do this all along, but the Arab world insisted on trying to snuff out an infant State of Israel, and has yet to show signs of willingness to let Israel be, whereas Israel's very declaration of establishment shows its willingness and desire to live at peace with its Arab inhabitants and neighbors.

Israel shouldn't have to accept anything until there is peace first.

Only after the Palestinians abandon their desire to "liquidate the Zionist Entity" is when Israel should come to terms with the establishment of a Palestinian state.


At this stage in the game, unconditionally recognizing Palestinian statehood would be a mistake, because the West Bank would just become an enormous launchpad for missiles, rockets, mortars, etc... against Israel, just like what happened with Gaza.

Palestinian statehood shouldn't come until the Palestinians can DEMONSTRATE (and not just "promise") an actual ability and willingness to live peacefully and cooperatively with Israel.

When it comes to jumpstarting a Palestinian nation, Israel will be the best friend you could ever have... in matters including but not limited to agricultural, medical, communication technology... and they could probably give a few pointers on how to have one of the most secure airlines in the world.

But not as long as they consider Israelis to be "the enemy" or "Zionist pigs".

 

[Poisonshady313]

The two sides are like the Hatfields and the McKoys, obsessed with accepting nothing short of the total annihilation of the other side.

I don't believe for a moment that the Israeli side is interested, let alone obsessed, with the total annihilation of the other side.

It is the Palestinian obsession with the total annihilation of Israel that gives Israel a reason not to trust empty promises of land for peace.

Israel is like Mr. Miyagi from the Karate Kid. It doesn't want to fight, but there comes a time when it must fight. "Fighting not good. But if must fight, win."

Leave him alone, he leaves you alone. Better than that, he can be a great friend who will teach you, train you, get along famously... But when you war with him, you can expect to lose. And then to turn around and call him a bully and a thug because he successfully defended himself? Foolishness is too kind a word for that sort of thing.

 

[Witch9]

Israel has been ready and willing to do this all along ... When it comes to jumpstarting a Palestinian nation, Israel will be the best friend you could ever have . . .

Adil E. Shamoo wrote last fall, for the Foreign Policy in Focus think tank:
"The current right-wing government of Israel wants to negotiate with the Palestinians for their independent state as much as China wants to negotiate with Taiwan for its independent state.
. . .
If Israel really wants peace, why have they not negotiated a two-state solution with the most ardent peacemaker, pro-American and anti-Hamas leader – Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), the president of the Palestinian Authority? If Israel really wants peace, they should deal with a man who is willing to do it. For all of his life, and especially in the last six years, President Abbas has demonstrated his willingness to be a peacemaker. He will accept any semblance of a state for Palestinians. When Abbas came to power in 2004, he immediately declared that war with Israel was over and denounced terrorism. He not only made pronouncements but followed up with actions. He fired anyone who disagreed with him. He accepted training of his security forces by the United States. During Israel’s conflicts with Hamas, he used his security forces to clamp down on any pro-Hamas demonstration by West Bank residents.

If Israel wants peace, it should demonstrate good intentions by approaching Abbas with a peace agreement for the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. If Israel truly wants peace and not hegemony over the Palestinians, it should work with this known partner to set the stage for a two-state solution."

 

[Poisonshady313]

Adil E. Shamoo wrote last fall, for the Foreign Policy in Focus think tank:
"The current right-wing government of Israel wants to negotiate with the Palestinians for their independent state as much as China wants to negotiate with Taiwan for its independent state.

The operative word being "current". They don't trust the Palestinians, nor should they given the past six decades. I imagine some on the Israeli left still think "land for peace" is a good idea. The Israeli right knows better.

Like Charlie Brown telling Lucy "I will not try to kick the football, because I know you're going to pull it away".

. . .
If Israel really wants peace, why have they not negotiated a two-state solution with the most ardent peacemaker, pro-American and anti-Hamas leader – Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), the president of the Palestinian Authority?

It's not as if they haven't tried. They wanted a settlement freeze, so Israel agreed to a ten month settlement freeze. And the Palestinians stalled for 8 months, showing up when there were two months left in the freeze, threatening to pull out of peace talks if the settlement freeze wasn't extended.

The Palestinians are playing games, designed to make people like you think they're trying so hard and that the Israelis are the obstacle to peace. I'm sorry that you fell for it.

I don't know if you know this, but the Fatah charter still calls for the eradication of Israel. No coexistence.... no "pushing them behind the 67 lines".. instead, it's still "pushing them into the sea".

If he wants statehood, he needs to indicate that the attitude of the PA is not the unending armed struggle with the goal of the liquidation of the Zionist Entity, but peaceful coexistence with their Israeli neighbors.

Making demands for lands and drawing up borders on maps as preconditions for talking about peace is the wrong way to go.

If Israel wants peace, it should demonstrate good intentions by approaching Abbas with a peace agreement for the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank. If Israel truly wants peace and not hegemony over the Palestinians, it should work with this known partner to set the stage for a two-state solution."

Israel has been trying, but the Palestinians are playing games as I've described.

You don't say "settlements must stop before we come to the table"... and then waste 8 months of a settlement freeze only to come back planning to walk out of peace talks if Israel doesn't extend what was already clearly defined as a temporary settlement freeze.

When you are the side who has been missing opportunities and sabotaging peace agreements for the past 60 years, you don't get to call the shots.

It's not about what Israel needs to do. It's about what the Palestinians need to do.

Step one is to cease regarding Israel as the enemy.

 

[Rakhel]

Can someone explain to me how they intend to make these two states contiguous? As most of you know(I hope), Israel separates Gaza from the West Bank. Are we planning of taking land from Israel to connect these two minor states? Or are we talking roads, bridges or tunnels?

I mean, to me, a two-state is not a viable, realistic solution. It would seem that it could cause more problems than it would solve.

 

[Bismillah]

Can someone explain to me how they intend to make these two states contiguous? As most of you know(I hope), Israel separates Gaza from the West Bank. Are we planning of taking land from Israel to connect these two minor states? Or are we talking roads, bridges or tunnels?

A strip of land connecting the two, though the passage would remain under Israeli sovereignty.

The West Bank and Gaza were not considered a sovereign Palestinian state before 1948... they were not considered a sovereign Palestinian state as of 1948, when Egypt had Gaza and Jordan had the West Bank... and neither Egypt nor Jordan did anything to create/establish an independent Palestinian state.... so the land is disputed territory. Territory which might eventually be part of a Palestinian state, if the Palestinians could ever decide they desire peace instead of the destruction of Israel.

I am Israel and I talk about collective punishment easily and with forthcoming. I ignore the fact that the West Bank has committed itself to peace, so much so that it has committed itself to war against those who are against peace I am Israel and taking historic land, evicting its occupants, and destroying their livelihoods comes second nature to me. I am Israel and I am not for a two state solution nor a one state solution, I am for no solution as I depend on the status quo. I am Israel and I will be remembered for what I have done.

 

[Witch9]

The Israeli right knows better.

The right always knows best, doesn't it?

 

[Flankerl]

If i were like you i could do the same for the arabs.
Perhaps starting with the kever yosef.

Considering its after pesach i wont even start.

 

[Poisonshady313]

The right always knows best, doesn't it?

Not always. It's a case by case sort of thing. And in this case, the right is right.

 

[Rakhel]

A strip of land connecting the two, though the passage would remain under Israeli sovereignty.

How is that creating a continuous state? We are still talking bridges connecting two separate pieces of land.

 

[Bismillah]

How is that creating a continuous state? We are still talking bridges connecting two separate pieces of land.

When people talk of a contiguous state, they refer to the W.B and the fact that annexation of some colonies within it will isolate parts of the W.B, seize control of vital waterways, major highways and means of travel, and form "enclaves" such as the concern of annexing the outlying colonies outside of Jerusalem which would effectively cut it off from the rest of the W.B.

 

[Rakhel]

I'm not too sure if you've noticed, but I'm not most people.
I am not isolating W.B.. I am talking about connecting Gaza and W.B. Unless you think Palestinians are willing to give up Gaza(which you and I, both, know isn't likely). How is it possible to make it a continuous state without dividing Israel, which, also, would like to remain continuous?
And if bridges are involved, who will police them? You know if it is the Israelis, the Palestinians will have a fit. And if it is the Palestinians, the Israelis will have a fit.

Do you see the problem?

 

[Bismillah]

I'm not too sure if you've noticed, but I'm not most people.

I am not talking about "most people" I am talking about the official position agreed upon by the Israeli and Palestinian delegations.

I am not isolating W.B.. I am talking about connecting Gaza and W.B.

Given that Gaza will be the economic harbor and access point to the Mediterranean it will be an essential part of the Palestinian economy. As such it is not sensible to think that Gaza will be ignored it will in essence be the economic capital and the W.B will be the political one.

Unless you think Palestinians are willing to give up Gaza(which you and I, both, know isn't likely). How is it possible to make it a continuous state without dividing Israel, which, also, would like to remain continuous?

A strip of land connecting the two is adequate given that it is not closed off, nor travel is limited.

And if bridges are involved, who will police them? You know if it is the Israelis, the Palestinians will have a fit. And if it is the Palestinians, the Israelis will have a fit.

It is already agreed upon by both sides that Israel will police them.

Do you see the problem?

Not really, are you envisaging a West-East Pakistan scenario?

 

[Mr Spinkles]

A strip of land connecting the two, though the passage would remain under Israeli sovereignty.

This sounds very reasonable to me ....

 

[Witch9]

Not always. It's a case by case sort of thing. And in this case, the right is right.

In this case, the right is right because they're right and only the right is ever right. We've seen it before around the world and throughout history. But thanks for sharing your opinion.
:sleep: