Do Palestinians really want to share the land?

Votto

Diamond Member
Oct 31, 2012
53,814
52,672
3,605
Ten Basic Facts about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict | HuffPost

In all the discussion about this decades-long conflict and the quest for a solution, some basic facts are too often missing, neglected, downplayed, or skewed.

Not only does this do a disservice to history, but it also contributes to prolonging the conflict by perpetuating false assumptions and mistaken notions.

Consider:

Fact #1: There could have been a two-state solution as early as 1947. That’s precisely what the UN Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP) proposed, recognizing the presence of two peoples – and two nationalisms – in a territory governed temporarily by the United Kingdom. And the UN General Assembly decisively endorsed the UNSCOP proposal. The Jewish side pragmatically accepted the plan, but the Arab world categorically rejected it.

Fact #2: When Israel declared independence on May 14, 1948, it extended the hand of friendship to its Arab neighbors, as clearly evidenced by its founding documents and statements. That offer, too, was spurned. Instead, five Arab armies declared war on the fledgling Jewish state, seeking its total destruction. Despite vastly outnumbering the Jews and possessing superior military arsenals, they failed in their quest.

Fact #3: Until 1967, the eastern part of Jerusalem and the entire West Bank were in the hands of Jordan, not Israel. Had the Arab world wished, an independent Palestinian state, with its capital in Jerusalem, could have been established at any time. Not only did this not happen, but there is no record of it ever having been discussed. To the contrary, Jordan annexed the territory, seeking full and permanent control. It proceeded to treat Jerusalem as a backwater, while denying Jews any access to Jewish holy sites in the Old City and destroying the synagogues there. Meanwhile, Gaza was under Egyptian military rule. Again, there was no talk of sovereignty for the Palestinians there, either.

Fact #4: In May 1967, the Egyptian and Syrian governments repeatedly threatened to annihilate Israel, as these countries demanded that UN peacekeeping forces be withdrawn from the region. Moreover, Israeli shipping lanes to its southern port of Eilat were blocked, and Arab troops were deployed to front-line positions. The Six-Day War was the outcome, a war that Israel won. Coming into possession of the Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, Sinai Peninsula, West Bank, and eastern Jerusalem, Israel extended feelers to its Arab neighbors, via third parties, seeking a “land for peace” formula. The Arab response came back on September 1, 1967, from Khartoum, Sudan, where the Arab League nations were meeting. The message was unmistakable: “No peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel.” Yet another opportunity to end the conflict had come and gone.

Fact #5: In November 1977, Egyptian President Anwar Sadat broke with the Arab rejectionist consensus. He traveled to the Israeli capital of Jerusalem to meet with Israeli leaders and address Israel’s parliament and speak of peace. Two years later, underscoring the lengths to which Israel was prepared to go to end the conflict, a deal was reached, in which Israel – led, notably, by a right-wing government– yielded the vast Sinai Peninsula, with its strategic depth, oil deposits, settlements, and air bases, in exchange for the promise of a new era in relations with the Arab world’s leading country. In 1981, Sadat was slain by the Muslim Brotherhood for his alleged perfidy, but his legacy of peace with Israel, thankfully, has endured.

Fact #6: In September 1993, Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) reached an agreement, known as the Oslo Accords, offering hope for peace on that front as well, but eight months later, PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat confirmed the suspicions of many that he was not honest, when he was caught on tape in a Johannesburg mosque asserting that this agreement was nothing more than a temporary truce until final victory.

Fact #7: In 1994, Jordan’s King Hussein, following in the footsteps of Egyptian President Sadat, reached an agreement with Israel, again demonstrating Israel’s readiness for peace – and willingness to make territorial sacrifices when sincere Arab leaders come forward.

Fact #8: In 2000-1, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, leading a left-of-center government and supported by the Clinton administration, offered a groundbreaking two-state arrangement to Arafat, including a bold compromise on Jerusalem. Not only did the Palestinian leader reject the offer, but he shockingly told Clinton that Jews had never had any historical connection to Jerusalem, gave no counter-offer, and triggered a new wave of Palestinian violence that led to more than 1,000 Israeli fatalities (proportionately equivalent to 40,000 Americans).

Fact #9: In 2008, three years after Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon unilaterally withdrew all Israeli soldiers and settlers from Gaza, only to see Hamas seize control and destroy another chance for coexistence, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert went even further than Barak in extending an olive branch to the Palestinian Authority. He offered a still more generous two-state proposal, but got no formal response from Mahmoud Abbas, Arafat’s successor. A Palestinian negotiator subsequently acknowledged in the media that the Israeli plan would have given his side the equivalent of 100 percent of the disputed lands under discussion.

Fact #10: At the request of the Obama administration, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu agreed to a ten-month freeze on settlement-building in 2010, as a good-faith gesture to lure the Palestinians back to the table. Regrettably, it failed. The Palestinians didn’t show up. Instead, they have continued to this day their strategy of incitement; attempts to bypass Israel – and face-to-face talks – by going to international organizations instead; denial of the age-old Jewish link to Jerusalem and, by extension, the region; and lifetime financial support for captured terrorists and the families of suicide bombers.

Isn’t it high time to draw some obvious conclusions from these facts, recognize the many lost opportunities to reach a settlement because of a consistent “no” from one side, and call on the Palestinians to start saying “yes” for a change?
 
I have to admit, I'm shocked that this came from the Huff Post.
 
There is no such thing as peace with Muslims. They know only murder and conquest. All non-Muslims around the world are under siege by Islamists: Hindu, Buddhists, Christians, and of course Jews.

The world needs to wake up, kick all Muslims out of your countries and deny them entry. Let them wallow in their own countries and they will kill each other off, because they also kill each other for being the wrong sect of Islam.
 
Neither side wants to share. As to the first 2 points, it’s funny that a group of people come in to make a land grab in a place they’ve never lived, and then people argue they were “gracious” because they offered the inhabitants of that land some shittier land.
 
No, it has never been about statehood. The entire creation of these so-called "Palestinians" is just an Arab ploy to make it look like those big, bad Jews are picking on those defenseless little "Palestinians", when the fact of the matter is that it is Arabs who already have vast swaths of land under their control but decry Jews having even a tiny. little sliver.
 
No, it has never been about statehood. The entire creation of these so-called "Palestinians" is just an Arab ploy to make it look like those big, bad Jews are picking on those defenseless little "Palestinians", when the fact of the matter is that it is Arabs who already have vast swaths of land under their control but decry Jews having even a tiny. little sliver.

The Palestinians can't even get along with themselves as they fight each other.

To make matters worse, they no longer have elections. They just suspend them

And if you think the popularity of Trump is bad, try looking at Abbas. No wonder he suspended elections.

LMAO!
 
No, it has never been about statehood. The entire creation of these so-called "Palestinians" is just an Arab ploy to make it look like those big, bad Jews are picking on those defenseless little "Palestinians", when the fact of the matter is that it is Arabs who already have vast swaths of land under their control but decry Jews having even a tiny. little sliver.

The Palestinians can't even get along with themselves as they fight each other.

To make matters worse, they no longer have elections. They just suspend them

And if you think the popularity of Trump is bad, try looking at Abbas. No wonder he suspended elections.

LMAO!


If you go back to the time before and during the creation of Israel, you will find the names of the two most prominent Arab clans in the area. One was the Nashashibi clan who was generally fairly co-operative and moderate. The other was the al Husseini clan of the famous Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem.

Can you guess which clan the Egyptian who changed his name to "Yasser Arafat" belonged to, and who then proceeded to invent this entirely new people called "Palestinians"? The entire identity of this sub group of Arabs is distilled through the al Husseinis rather than the Nashashibis, and it has always been about genocidal hatred of Jews rather than statehood.
 
There is no such thing as peace with Muslims. They know only murder and conquest. All non-Muslims around the world are under siege by Islamists: Hindu, Buddhists, Christians, and of course Jews.

The world needs to wake up, kick all Muslims out of your countries and deny them entry. Let them wallow in their own countries and they will kill each other off, because they also kill each other for being the wrong sect of Islam.

Perhaps a better idea would be to force those Muslims in your country to convert to Christianity or be killed, arrested and have their property seized, that or at least force them to pay a heavy dhimmi tax. It only seems fair and you would think something they'd understand. If nothing else, it might make western countries look less attractive to them!

I rather like the idea of taking the total cost of Muslim and Islamic wars, violence, crime and destruction the world over and divide that into the rough number of adult Muslims living, to be paid each as a tax. That way at least they would be paying for the cost of putting up with them?
 
There is no such thing as peace with Muslims. They know only murder and conquest. All non-Muslims around the world are under siege by Islamists: Hindu, Buddhists, Christians, and of course Jews.

The world needs to wake up, kick all Muslims out of your countries and deny them entry. Let them wallow in their own countries and they will kill each other off, because they also kill each other for being the wrong sect of Islam.

Perhaps a better idea would be to force those Muslims in your country to convert to Christianity or be killed, arrested and have their property seized, that or at least force them to pay a heavy dhimmi tax. It only seems fair and you would think something they'd understand. If nothing else, it might make western countries look less attractive to them!

I rather like the idea of taking the total cost of Muslim and Islamic wars, violence, crime and destruction the world over and divide that into the rough number of adult Muslims living, to be paid each as a tax. That way at least they would be paying for the cost of putting up with them?

By my estimate, every adult age Muslim in the world owes us $14,000 to pay for the cost of their radical extremists just to break even! I bet if they all had to fork out that money, or at least Muslim countries did ($14,000 USD X (N)Muslims in country), they would be MUCH MORE proactive in nipping radicalism at its root!
 

Forum List

Back
Top