Any one wish to discuss Israel vs. Palestine here?

[Foxfyre]

maybe the solution is to create conditions and an environment where the warder's daughters and sons and the prisoner's daughters and sons won't kill each other.

i think you are approaching this the entirely wrong way. you have to put yourself totally and emotionally in the palestinian's shoes. i know this will happen...if israeli jews wipe out the palestinians, israel will be wiped out. the world will not forgive that.

No I don't. I can empathise with the anger of that would be killer previously mentioned without in any way approving his method of dealing with his anger.

Israel has given absolutely zero reason to let anybody believe they want to wipe out anybody. They want to be left alone in peace, and I believe they would be 100% peaceful with anybody who understands and allows that.

There have been brief truces now and then, but all short lived and all without any acknowledgement of intent to allow the Israel to exist in peace. The Palestinians have never--I repeat NEVER--given any indication that they understand Israel's right to live in peace or that it should ever have any right to do so.

Until their leadership can do that and becomes proactive to ensure that it happens, they are the party who is most wrong and the least deserving of help.

ok...i get it...and if i had to make a choice then as to who gets pushed into the sea, then i am all for the jews being pushed into the sea...given no other alternative between one or the other.

i swear, can't you get out of the finger pointing mode for even a brief moment. i am pretty good at adversarial bargaining...and i think you reflect the israeli governments stance quite well.

I am not finger pointing whatsoever. I am perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. Israel also is perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

I am perfectly willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. The Palestinians have not been willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

You seem to think the Palestinians have the moral edge in that scenario.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

and this thread devolves into a perfect explanation of why there will never be peace in the middle east.

Hardly anyone is willing to admit that BOTH sides are at fault in multiple ways, nope more fun to blame one side or the other.

sounds sorta pretty close to right to me. i asked about solutions on a post and that pretty well died...and i conceded for the most part the past history while trying to acknowledge the facts. that wasn't easy.

people really need to be brave enough to get past all the wrongs and step forward and say "forget this. what can we do for each other that is mutually beneficial."

What would be mutually beneficial is for the Palestinian leadership call off all their terrorists and officially and finally agree that Israel has the right to exist in peace, prosperity, and without fear of its neighbors. Give Israel peace and you eliminate every roadblock to achieving mutual benefit. Israel's neighbors have no reason to fear an unthreatened and unattacked Israel.

Irrelevant Israel already exists and what Palestinians say doesn't change whether Israel exists or not

 

[Foxfyre]

sounds sorta pretty close to right to me. i asked about solutions on a post and that pretty well died...and i conceded for the most part the past history while trying to acknowledge the facts. that wasn't easy.

people really need to be brave enough to get past all the wrongs and step forward and say "forget this. what can we do for each other that is mutually beneficial."

What would be mutually beneficial is for the Palestinian leadership call off all their terrorists and officially and finally agree that Israel has the right to exist in peace, prosperity, and without fear of its neighbors. Give Israel peace and you eliminate every roadblock to achieving mutual benefit. Israel's neighbors have no reason to fear an unthreatened and unattacked Israel.

Irrelevant Israel already exists and what Palestinians say doesn't change whether Israel exists or not

What Palestinians say and how they act has a great deal to do with a happy solution being impossible to obtain, however. Israel has not refused the Palestiniians a right to exist.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

What would be mutually beneficial is for the Palestinian leadership call off all their terrorists and officially and finally agree that Israel has the right to exist in peace, prosperity, and without fear of its neighbors. Give Israel peace and you eliminate every roadblock to achieving mutual benefit. Israel's neighbors have no reason to fear an unthreatened and unattacked Israel.

Irrelevant Israel already exists and what Palestinians say doesn't change whether Israel exists or not

What Palestinians say and how they act has a great deal to do with a happy solution being impossible to obtain, however. Israel has not refused the Palestiniians a right to exist.

How do you have two states when Israel wants a demographically Jewish nation? And remember when netanyhu came to new York and said no 67 borders, no ending is settlement contruction, no end to the blockade or occupation? So tell us then

 

[georgephillip]

I agree. Israel has shown no interest in interfering in the internal affairs of other countries. All Israel has ever wanted is to simply be left alone in peace. We can argue until the cows come home the legalities, proprieties, and moral consequences of Israel's choices to defend itself and deal with those determined to destroy Israel, but the bottom line is that Israel has a history of leaving those alone who allow Israel its peace.

How many times do you have to be told, an "occupational force" cannot claim self-defense?

There may be some (honest?) confusion over the meaning of "state' and "territory" in play here.
The Fourth Geneva Convention refers exclusively to "territory"

"The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies."

Israel is the Occupying Power and it has been transferring its civilians (who come from all corners of the globe) into the Occupied Territories since 1967. Only the diplomatic and military backing of the US government prevents the Jewish state from suffering the same fate as White South Africa.

 

[georgephillip]

I agree. Israel has shown no interest in interfering in the internal affairs of other countries. All Israel has ever wanted is to simply be left alone in peace. We can argue until the cows come home the legalities, proprieties, and moral consequences of Israel's choices to defend itself and deal with those determined to destroy Israel, but the bottom line is that Israel has a history of leaving those alone who allow Israel its peace.

How many times do you have to be told, an "occupational force" cannot claim self-defense?

What state, other than Jordan and Israel, has any claim over the West Bank?
Once Jordan renounces it's claim, what state other than Israel has any claim?

"State" isn't the operative word here; "territory" and "powers" are:

"Section III. Occupied territories

Articles 47-78 impose substantial obligations on occupying powers. As well as numerous provisions for the general welfare of the inhabitants of an occupied territory, an occupier may not forcibly deport protected persons, or deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into occupied territory (Art.49)."

Israel has been illegally importing, deporting and transferring parts of its civilians population into the Occupied Territories for over forty years, or do you claim otherwise?

Fourth Geneva Convention - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Billo_Really]

What would be mutually beneficial is for the Palestinian leadership call off all their terrorists and officially and finally agree that Israel has the right to exist in peace, prosperity, and without fear of its neighbors.

Attacks against the IDF in the OPT is not terrorism, it's self-defense.

Give Israel peace and you eliminate every roadblock to achieving mutual benefit..

That's not true. The following video shows a typical Israeli checkpoint in the OPT. As one can see in the video, even after it has been determined Palestinian's are not carrying any weapons, they are still denied passage through the checkpoint.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMRiTGk0L3E]Israeli Checkpoint Cruelty And Opression , Israel a Democracy or Apartheid State ? - YouTube[/ame]

Israel's neighbors have no reason to fear an unthreatened and unattacked Israel.

Except for the fact that it was Israel who started the last 6 wars they've been in.

 

[sealadaigh]

No I don't. I can empathise with the anger of that would be killer previously mentioned without in any way approving his method of dealing with his anger.

Israel has given absolutely zero reason to let anybody believe they want to wipe out anybody. They want to be left alone in peace, and I believe they would be 100% peaceful with anybody who understands and allows that.

There have been brief truces now and then, but all short lived and all without any acknowledgement of intent to allow the Israel to exist in peace. The Palestinians have never--I repeat NEVER--given any indication that they understand Israel's right to live in peace or that it should ever have any right to do so.

Until their leadership can do that and becomes proactive to ensure that it happens, they are the party who is most wrong and the least deserving of help.

ok...i get it...and if i had to make a choice then as to who gets pushed into the sea, then i am all for the jews being pushed into the sea...given no other alternative between one or the other.

i swear, can't you get out of the finger pointing mode for even a brief moment. i am pretty good at adversarial bargaining...and i think you reflect the israeli governments stance quite well.

I am not finger pointing whatsoever. I am perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. Israel also is perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

I am perfectly willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. The Palestinians have not been willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

You seem to think the Palestinians have the moral edge in that scenario.

ok...this is getting nowhere. you're only solution to the situation is that the palestinians are all wrong and the israelis are all right, and that isn't a solution.

meanwhile, i am honestly trying to avoid finger pointing.

ok...so you are saying that israel should abide by their agreement with the nations of the world in UNGA resolution 273, which includes the agreement to abide by UNGA resolution181?

a genocide is going on, and you want to make it the fault of the victims of that genocide. does that sound at all familiar? think mid 20th century.

 

[BecauseIKnow]

ok...i get it...and if i had to make a choice then as to who gets pushed into the sea, then i am all for the jews being pushed into the sea...given no other alternative between one or the other.

i swear, can't you get out of the finger pointing mode for even a brief moment. i am pretty good at adversarial bargaining...and i think you reflect the israeli governments stance quite well.

I am not finger pointing whatsoever. I am perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. Israel also is perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

I am perfectly willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. The Palestinians have not been willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

You seem to think the Palestinians have the moral edge in that scenario.

ok...this is getting nowhere. you're only solution to the situation is that the palestinians are all wrong and the israelis are all right, and that isn't a solution.

meanwhile, i am honestly trying to avoid finger pointing.

ok...so you are saying that israel should abide by their agreement with the nations of the world in UNGA resolution 273, which includes the agreement to abide by UNGA resolution181?

a genocide is going on, and you want to make it the fault of the victims of that genocide. does that sound at all familiar? think mid 20th century.

When zionists ask you about a peace process and two state solution all you have to do is talk about what Netanyahu said at the speech in new York:no end of settlments, no 67 borders, no Palestinian control over their borders, no end to blockade of gaza.

 

[Foxfyre]

ok...i get it...and if i had to make a choice then as to who gets pushed into the sea, then i am all for the jews being pushed into the sea...given no other alternative between one or the other.

i swear, can't you get out of the finger pointing mode for even a brief moment. i am pretty good at adversarial bargaining...and i think you reflect the israeli governments stance quite well.

I am not finger pointing whatsoever. I am perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. Israel also is perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

I am perfectly willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. The Palestinians have not been willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

You seem to think the Palestinians have the moral edge in that scenario.

ok...this is getting nowhere. you're only solution to the situation is that the palestinians are all wrong and the israelis are all right, and that isn't a solution.

meanwhile, i am honestly trying to avoid finger pointing.

ok...so you are saying that israel should abide by their agreement with the nations of the world in UNGA resolution 273, which includes the agreement to abide by UNGA resolution181?

a genocide is going on, and you want to make it the fault of the victims of that genocide. does that sound at all familiar? think mid 20th century.

As long as you continue to so blatantly mischaracterize what I have been saying, you're right. This is getting nowhere.

 

[sealadaigh]

I am not finger pointing whatsoever. I am perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. Israel also is perfectly willing for the Arab people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

I am perfectly willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be. The Palestinians have not been willing for the Israeli people to live in peace, to prosper, and to be in charge of their own destiny whatever the consequences of that might be.

You seem to think the Palestinians have the moral edge in that scenario.

ok...this is getting nowhere. you're only solution to the situation is that the palestinians are all wrong and the israelis are all right, and that isn't a solution.

meanwhile, i am honestly trying to avoid finger pointing.

ok...so you are saying that israel should abide by their agreement with the nations of the world in UNGA resolution 273, which includes the agreement to abide by UNGA resolution181?

a genocide is going on, and you want to make it the fault of the victims of that genocide. does that sound at all familiar? think mid 20th century.

As long as you continue to so blatantly mischaracterize what I have been saying, you're right. This is getting nowhere.

well, it gets very frustrating, and "continue" is not what i am doing, nor is "mischaracterise."

i really am trying to be nice and ask you what you think a solution would be where both sides can flourish and basically, the gist of what i am hearing you say is that the palestinians have to change and that israel needs to trust israel to do right by them.

ok, i will try this. what do you meaan by israel will do the right thing, because i think the right thing is UNGA 181 (via UNGA 273), which israel agreed to honour in exchange for the world's nations to "recognise israel's existence as a state" by granting her member nation status in the UN.

you keep pointing the finger at the palestinians and i am trying very hard to not point a finger at israel, or at least not point a judgemental finger at them.

you keep saying the palestinianss should trust israel and were i to point fingers, i could accumulate a very long list of broken agreements and violations of international law to include war crimes and acts of genocide done by israel.

and if i did that i would be being a self indulgent jerk, at least within the parameters of this particular discussion...here is the text for 181 and a wiki explanation followed by a wiki explanation of 273 that includes the text. one could almost make the argument thaat israel fails to recognise their own "right to exist."

The Avalon Project : UN General Assembly Resolution 181

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

i'm a pragmatist though. i do not think they can go back to the '48 plan...so how about this...

israel withdraws to the green line and helps create the infrastructure that will allow unfettered palestinian travel and access from the west bank to gaza and her ports.

israel relinguishes east jerusalem/al quds to become the capital of palestine with the provision that the UN and its member states recognise west al quds/jerusalem as the capital of israel. the holy places can be hammered out later.

that the world nations aid in accepting the refugees into their countries and provide the necessary incentives to do so, and israel will pay the lion's share of those incentives... maybe divert a large portion of the funds we give to israel in foreign aid towards that end,

that's a start. israel would have to give up the de facto land it occupies within the green line, but would not be forced to withdraw to the de juris borders it agreed to in UNGA resolution 273. i am throwing it out without getting into the silly bickering that is constantly going on between proponents of either side.

then, once you and i agree on something, we can go to our respective corners and put pressure on whomever and organise to achieve thaat goal.

 

[georgephillip]

"This week (July 11, 2012), a judicial committee empanelled by the Netanyahu government reached a (literally) ground-breaking decision: There is no such thing as the occupation .

"The eponymous Levy Commission, dubbed for the former Israeli Supreme Court justice Edmond Levy, who headed the three-member committee, not only leveled the playing field by dismissing international legal opinion on the status of the occupied territories, but established a new governmental regime, based in this original judicial precedent, that would retroactively approve existing settlement outposts and promote Jewish-Israeli expansion in the West Bank."

For two generations Israel has defied International Law by building permanent settlements and transporting its citizens into territories it occupied in June of 1967. The Levy Commission now gives a Prime Minister with a 50% approval rating an opportunity to "dismantle four decades of occupation by legal fiat."

What could go wrong?

"It is said that those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. But they who would obliterate it entirely and unilaterally may suffer a worse fate: the destruction of both the dream and reality of the State of Israel."

From Levy to Area C: An opportunity to miss an opportunity | Sara Hirschhorn | Ops & Blogs | The Times of Israel

 

[sealadaigh]

I'm curious to see how the discussions will go in a temperate zone.

and how do you think it went? i felt kind of frustrated at times, as if i were standing alone, but i also think it was productive to some extent. thank you for starting this thread.

 

[georgephillip]

The CDZ is the best improvement to USMB I've seen since coming here three years ago.
If we can debate Zionism cleanly, any thing is possible.

 

[Foxfyre]

For me the bottom line is that the Romans drove the Jews out of Jerusalem during or around 70 A.D. and the Jews have endured intermittant persecution, for being Jews, in almost every place they lived for the next 2000 years. In the Roman Empire they were denied property rights which helps account for the large number of Jews being into banking and shipping and other pursuits that do not require land. They have been driven out of place after place, maligned, accused, suffered genocide, discrimination, and viscious pograms all over the world. And yet there is no other people on Earth who proportionately have accomplished as much historical greatness as have the Jews. They are a remarkable people. And for the most part all they have ever asked is to be allowed to be who they are in peace.

Hitler's Germany brought it all to a head with the slaughter of 6 million Jews with little or no objection from anybody. Jews also suffered mightily in Russia and other countries who were adopting Leninist communism. And finally the world took compassion upon them and, with the full force and authority of the U.N,., gave the Jews a teensy little strip of land that included that portion of ancient Judah that the Jews believed to be granted to them by G-d. The Jews were perfectly willing to share that land with the Arabs who were already there.

Those Arabs who stayed when the Arab armies were approaching to destroy Israel became full citizens of Israel and have enjoyed the benefits of freedom, tolerance, prosperity, and a much better life than they probably could have had in any other country. About 20% of the Israeli population is Arab today. Those who fled so that the Arabs could freely destroy the Jews were not welcomed back.

But over the years, persecuted Jews have mirgrated from their European and African homelands, from South America and Asia, to the teensy land of Israel where for the first time they had guaranteed civil rights. And yet despite the teensy land of Israel being no larger than a large New Mexico county--the land would fit into the State of Florida eight times--some cannot stand that the Jews were awarded that land and think they should give it up and just go away.

And frankly, I just don't understand that thinking.

 

[Amelia]

I'm curious to see how the discussions will go in a temperate zone.

and how do you think it went? i felt kind of frustrated at times, as if i were standing alone, but i also think it was productive to some extent. thank you for starting this thread.

It went great for my purposes.

I got to see some points of view I hadn't seen before. I don't know that much about it. I come from a Zionist background and have never questioned that very much. I've occasionally wanted to learn more but the, er, let me say, passion, expressed in other forums has made me say "maybe some other time".

So, I've enjoyed this thread and the chance to hear some other perspectives expressed in a manner which didn't make me want to duck and cover.

 

[TomasG]

For me the bottom line is that the Romans drove the Jews out of Jerusalem during or around 70 A.D. and the Jews have endured intermittant persecution, for being Jews, in almost every place they lived for the next 2000 years.

Perhaps for some the bottom line is that the Jews drove the Canaanites out of the land once called the Land of Canaan, present day Israel.

You can start your timeline in a few places but should point out to the fact that this territory has been home to a few people who feel it is theirs to call home.

 

[georgephillip]

1948 seems like a good choice, to me.

650,000 Jews and 1.2 million Arabs and others lived in Mandate Palestine, yet the UN saw fit to offer a partition plan that gave the Jews 55% of all the land. Arabs and others lost the ensuing war, and the Zionists claimed an additional 15% of Palestine, evicting over 700,000 Arabs and others from their homes, businesses, and bank accounts.

 

[Intense]

For me the bottom line is that the Romans drove the Jews out of Jerusalem during or around 70 A.D. and the Jews have endured intermittant persecution, for being Jews, in almost every place they lived for the next 2000 years.

Perhaps for some the bottom line is that the Jews drove the Canaanites out of the land once called the Land of Canaan, present day Israel.

You can start your timeline in a few places but should point out to the fact that this territory has been home to a few people who feel it is theirs to call home.

You know that the Canaanites are Descendants of Abram, right?

 

[Foxfyre]

For me the bottom line is that the Romans drove the Jews out of Jerusalem during or around 70 A.D. and the Jews have endured intermittant persecution, for being Jews, in almost every place they lived for the next 2000 years.

Perhaps for some the bottom line is that the Jews drove the Canaanites out of the land once called the Land of Canaan, present day Israel.

You can start your timeline in a few places but should point out to the fact that this territory has been home to a few people who feel it is theirs to call home.

Except that Old and New Testament accounts indicate that there were numerous non-Jewish people in the area long after Abraham first went to Canaan and during and long after the glory days of King David's reign. And tribal land wars were common among all peoples of those times. At the time of Jesus' birth, there were more Jewis in Alexandria and numerous other places than there were in Jerusalem.

But until the establishment of Israel in 1948, from 70 A.D. on, the Jewish people had no homeland to call their own anywhere.

Rebuttal to George Phillip's post:

Zionist settlement between 1880 and 1948 did not displace or dispossess Palestinians. Every indication is that there was net Arab immigration into Palestine in this period, and that the economic situation of Palestinian Arabs improved tremendously under the British Mandate relative to surrounding countries. By 1948, there were approximately 1.35 million Arabs and 650,000 Jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean, more Arabs than had ever lived in Palestine before, and more Jews than had lived there since Roman times. Analysis of population by sub-districts shows that Arab population tended to increase the most between 1931 and 1948 in the same areas where there were large proportions of Jews. Therefore, Zionist immigration did not displace Arabs. For a detailed discussion that focuses on this myth, please refer to Zionism and its Impact here: Zionism and its Impact

MidEast Web - Population of Palestine