Can there really be a two state solution?

[teddyearp]

What is truth to you?

 

[Coyote]

Without a two-state solution, what is there?

Breaking the palistan up and resettlement of palistanians back in arab lands, of course.

Ok, your fantasy is entertaining but we both know that a solution involving ethnic cleansing on such a massive scale by either the Palestinians nor the international community and would turn Israel into a true pariah.

 

[Coyote]

Without a two-state solution, what is there?

Either a three state solution, which would be more sensible, or have Gaza incorporated into Egypt and the West Bank into Jordan which would make the most sense of all. .

Three states being Gaza, West Bank and Israel? I could see either of those as possible but not probable because neither Egypt nor Jordan want to take the Palestinian issue on.

 

[Coyote]

Like the article summary says---

A two-state solution looks increasingly unlikely - and, for Israel, unnecessary

Seems to me any two state solution (so to speak) can only result in two states at endless conflict unless a Palestinian State was established in some Arab country far from Israel's brutal treatment of peace offerings, a security fence & land concesssions to keep the Palestinians in Israel. Problem is no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, will grant their Palestinians a right of return. Do you think maybe Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

Drivel, to quote another poster's favorite term.

 

[Coyote]

Without a two-state solution, what is there?

Reality.

Justice.

You choose.

It's not my choice and those are nice platitudes.

What "reality" and what "justice" and for whom?

Seriously - what is a realistic alternative to a two-state solution?

 

[Coyote]

Without a two-state solution, what is there?

A single state where both sides have to learn to become one people on one land and not keep thinking of themselves as separate or different but just the same and deserving of building a furture in the state they share.

Arab Israelis already live in peace as Israelis with rights they would not have elsewhere. In a single Israeli state any action against Israel would be treason but they would be better off then they are now.
They would have to stop thinking of themselves as palestinians and think of themselves as Israelis, just like the jews, christians and other muslim Israelis do. They would serve the country the same as other Israelis.

Ideally I would agree. I'm not just not sure it's possible in the current climate - on both sides.

 

[Coyote]

Without a two-state solution, what is there?

Genocide of the Jews and destruction of the world.

Exagerate much?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Three states being Gaza, West Bank and Israel? I could see either of those as possible but not probable because neither Egypt nor Jordan want to take the Palestinian issue on.

Yes. The clans in Gaza are different than the clans in the west bank, and it would be difficult enough from an administrative standpoint to form a non-continuous country even if blood ties didn't play such an important aspect of the culture -- nearly impossible with.

As to Jordan and Egypt, since Jordan IS the state established to give Arabs 78% of Palestine and Gaza has been part of Egypt before, what's the big deal? It's not as if we are talking about any sort of distinct ethnic group here, or anything. They didn't even start referring to themselves as "Palestinian" until Arafat started demanding they do, so it's not as if they are a legitimate cultural group that deserves a state based upon a long history of being a people. Do you argue that West Virginians deserve a country of their own simply on the basis that they start calling themselves West Virginians rather than Americans? These "Palestinians" are less different from their fellow Arabs in Egypt or Jordan than West Virginians are from Californians or New Yorkers.

 

[montelatici]

Three states being Gaza, West Bank and Israel? I could see either of those as possible but not probable because neither Egypt nor Jordan want to take the Palestinian issue on.

Yes. The clans in Gaza are different than the clans in the west bank, and it would be difficult enough from an administrative standpoint to form a non-continuous country even if blood ties didn't play such an important aspect of the culture -- nearly impossible with.

As to Jordan and Egypt, since Jordan IS the state established to give Arabs 78% of Palestine and Gaza has been part of Egypt before, what's the big deal? It's not as if we are talking about any sort of distinct ethnic group here, or anything. They didn't even start referring to themselves as "Palestinian" until Arafat started demanding they do, so it's not as if they are a legitimate cultural group that deserves a state based upon a long history of being a people. Do you argue that West Virginians deserve a country of their own simply on the basis that they start calling themselves West Virginians rather than Americans? These "Palestinians" are less different from their fellow Arabs in Egypt or Jordan than West Virginians are from Californians or New Yorkers.

Why do you post that propaganda. Trans-Jordan was never part of Palestine as confirmed by reports of the Mandatory including the 1922 Report where it states clearly that:

"REPORT ON PALESTINE ADMINISTRATION

1922.

PALESTINE.

REPORT ON
PALESTINE ADMINISTRATION, 1922.

"The Order in Council also contains a provision that it shall not apply to the Transjordan territory."



- See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations 31 December 1922


Another Zionist lie you propagate about the Palestinians not existing before Arafat. The Palestinians were considered Palestinians before there was any mention of Israelis, the Jews were simply known as Zionists.

As confirmed by the letters written by the Palestinian Delegation to the British as early as 1922.

PALESTINE. CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE PALESTINE ARAB DELEGATION AND THE ZIONIST ORGANISATION. Presented to Parliament by Command of His Majesty. JUNE, 1922. LONDON: -
​

".........We, therefore, hold that the proposed constitution is wholly unsatisfactory, because:—

• 
  
  (a) In the preamble to the Palestine Order in Council "the declaration of November 2nd, 1917, in favour of the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish People" is made a basis for this Order; the People of Palestine cannot accept this Declaration as a basis for discussion."

- See more at: UK correspondence with Palestine Arab Delegation and Zionist Organization British policy in Palestine Churchill White Paper - UK documentation Cmd. 1700 Non-UN document excerpts 1 July 1922

​

 

[Coyote]

Three states being Gaza, West Bank and Israel? I could see either of those as possible but not probable because neither Egypt nor Jordan want to take the Palestinian issue on.

Yes. The clans in Gaza are different than the clans in the west bank, and it would be difficult enough from an administrative standpoint to form a non-continuous country even if blood ties didn't play such an important aspect of the culture -- nearly impossible with.

As to Jordan and Egypt, since Jordan IS the state established to give Arabs 78% of Palestine and Gaza has been part of Egypt before, what's the big deal? It's not as if we are talking about any sort of distinct ethnic group here, or anything. They didn't even start referring to themselves as "Palestinian" until Arafat started demanding they do, so it's not as if they are a legitimate cultural group that deserves a state based upon a long history of being a people. Do you argue that West Virginians deserve a country of their own simply on the basis that they start calling themselves West Virginians rather than Americans? These "Palestinians" are less different from their fellow Arabs in Egypt or Jordan than West Virginians are from Californians or New Yorkers.

I agree on the differences between Gazans and West Bank Palestinians and the difficulties of creating a state out of two disconnected areas. Somewhere here we had an interesting thread on how it could work, and what could be swapped but I it was long ago.

Every cultural group was at one time new and I think at this point, Palestinians have been defined long enough to consider themselves a distinct entity and the ME is full of numerous overlapping ethnic groups that seem similar to us, but not to themselves particularly when you hear them talking about or putting down this group or that group. I think more though that neither Jordan or Egypt want to shoulder the burden of the Palestinians. Being absorbed into another nation at this point would not halt their nationalistic aspirations and likely would not halt the violence. Why would Egypt or Jordan want to take on that? Didn't Jordan effectively wash it's hands of the Palestinians?

 

[Lipush]

Without a two-state solution, what is there?

Reality.

Justice.

You choose.

It's not my choice and those are nice platitudes.

What "reality" and what "justice" and for whom?

Seriously - what is a realistic alternative to a two-state solution?

Hell, I dunno. I don't think there is a solution at all, at this point.

 

[MJB12741]

Like the article summary says---

A two-state solution looks increasingly unlikely - and, for Israel, unnecessary

Seems to me any two state solution (so to speak) can only result in two states at endless conflict unless a Palestinian State was established in some Arab country far from Israel's brutal treatment of peace offerings, a security fence & land concesssions to keep the Palestinians in Israel. Problem is no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, will grant their Palestinians a right of return. Do you think maybe Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

Drivel, to quote another poster's favorite term.

How interesting considering you yourself just previously said "neither Egypt nor Jordan want to take the Palestinian issue on."

 

[P F Tinmore]

Like the article summary says---

A two-state solution looks increasingly unlikely - and, for Israel, unnecessary

Seems to me any two state solution (so to speak) can only result in two states at endless conflict unless a Palestinian State was established in some Arab country far from Israel's brutal treatment of peace offerings, a security fence & land concesssions to keep the Palestinians in Israel. Problem is no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, will grant their Palestinians a right of return. Do you think maybe Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

Drivel, to quote another poster's favorite term.

How interesting considering you yourself just previously said "neither Egypt nor Jordan want to take the Palestinian issue on."

Since when is it their job to clean up after Israel?

 

[Coyote]

Like the article summary says---

A two-state solution looks increasingly unlikely - and, for Israel, unnecessary

Seems to me any two state solution (so to speak) can only result in two states at endless conflict unless a Palestinian State was established in some Arab country far from Israel's brutal treatment of peace offerings, a security fence & land concesssions to keep the Palestinians in Israel. Problem is no surrounding Arab country, who know the Palestinians best, will grant their Palestinians a right of return. Do you think maybe Mecca might be a nice place for a Palestinian State?

Drivel, to quote another poster's favorite term.

How interesting considering you yourself just previously said "neither Egypt nor Jordan want to take the Palestinian issue on."

That doesn't alter the fact that your response is drivel.

 

[docmauser1]

Without a two-state solution, what is there?

Breaking the palistan up and resettlement of palistanians back in arab lands, of course.

Ok, your fantasy is entertaining ...

Funny, is the reality of intent of driving jews out as entertaining as my "fantasy"? heh

...but we both know that a solution involving ethnic cleansing on such a massive scale by either the Palestinians nor the international community and would turn Israel into a true pariah.

Now that was entertaining, indeed.

 

[docmauser1]

Since when is it their job to clean up after Israel?

Ah, arabs supply settlers/squatters, but don't want want to clean them. Funny.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Ok, your fantasy is entertaining but we both know that a solution involving ethnic cleansing on such a massive scale by either the Palestinians nor the international community and would turn Israel into a true pariah.

Considering the there were once a million Jews living in Arab lands and they have been clensed so thoroughly that just scant thousands remain, it is obvious that it really isn't ethnic clensing that gets you worked up at all.

If it did, you would consider the actual practitioners to be pariahs instead of devoting so many thousands of postings to advancing their interests with such manic intensity as you do.

 

[Coyote]

Ok, your fantasy is entertaining but we both know that a solution involving ethnic cleansing on such a massive scale by either the Palestinians nor the international community and would turn Israel into a true pariah.

Considering the there were once a million Jews living in Arab lands and they have been clensed so thoroughly that just scant thousands remain, it is obvious that it really isn't ethnic clensing that gets you worked up at all.

I wasn't talking to you but since you chose to respond, let's discuss this.

Peoples have been ethnically cleansed from a variety of nations through out human history. I think we can agree on this, yes?

As to the Jewish exodus from Arab lands during the formation of Israel, Wikipedia says this: Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia about events that took place almost 70 years ago.

The Jewish exodus from Arab and Muslim countries or Jewish exodus from Arab countries (Hebrew: יציאת יהודים ממדינות ערב‎, Yetziat yehudim mi-medinot Arav; Arabic: هجرة اليهود من الدول العربية والإسلامية‎ hijrat al-yahūd min ad-duwal al-'Arabīyah wal-Islāmīyah) was the departure, flight, evacuation and migration, with few actual expulsions, of 900,000–1,000,000 Jews[citation needed][disputed – discuss], primarily of Sephardi and Mizrahi background, from Arab and Muslim countries, mainly from 1948 onwards.​

I have said (multiple times on these boards) in reference to past events, that victims of previous ethnic cleansings - specifically the Jews that were forceably expelled from Arab lands in retaliation to the creation of Israel should be allowed the right to either return or be compensated for their lost property. I don't recall you ever mentioning a concern for them before now or indeed offering an idea for righting that injustice.

If it did, you would consider the actual practitioners to be pariahs instead of devoting so many thousands of postings to advancing their interests with such manic intensity as you do.

So are you saying you are supporting the expulsion of some 2,731,052 Palestinians living in the West Bank and another 1,816,379 in Gaza because of a wrong committed almost 70 years ago by other Arab nations (not the Palestinians)? Do you support retribution against innocent people in an attempt to right old wrongs? That is what it sounds like.

We are talking about a modern day "solution" that is anything but just and that you would certainly never recommend if it were directed against any other people.

 

[Coyote]

funny, is the reality of intent of driving jews out as entertaining as my "fantasy"? heh

That is no more an acceptable solution than ethnically cleansing the Palestinians. Do you support ethnic cleansing? (not that I expect a straight answer from you).

 

[docmauser1]

funny, is the reality of intent of driving jews out as entertaining as my "fantasy"? heh

That is no more an acceptable solution than ethnically cleansing the Palestinians.

Why, but it is perfectly acceptable! Jews, being the politically incorrect community, "must" abandon the eastern Jerusalem, jews "must" abandon judea and samaria, jews "must accept" the "right of return" that will drive jews out, in short, imagined peace and quiet for Europe and others "must" be bought and paid for in jews.

Do you support ethnic cleansing?

Of course, charged terms notwithstanding! We are against discrimination, after all, aren't we?

(not that I expect a straight answer from you).

Why?! I'm not a democrat and racist, or a drive-by Goody-Twoshoes from some NGO, or a USMB hypocrite, etc..