What must Israel do to "end the occupation"? (solutions thread)

[Challenger]

The problem and the solution.

Do you watch these videos that you post, Tinmore? At 10:35 in the first video the speaker claims that "every single thing needed to sustain life has to be brought into Gaza through the tunnels". Its a lie. A blatant lie. Its not an exaggeration -- its a lie. You do not strike me as unintelligent. You know this is a lie.

So why do you support someone who lies this blatantly?

Had he actually said that, maybe. As usual, Hasbara trolls take a comment out of context and put their negative spin on it.

 

[Slyhunter]

I intend this thread to be a "solutions" thread like those on the one, two and no more state solutions threads. For those not familiar with those threads -- the intent is not to re-hash the same old, same old, but to provide detailed, concrete suggestions for solving the conflict and moving forward.

The common refrain from the Palestinian side is that Israel must "end the occupation". What does that mean in concrete terms? What specific steps (military, practical, economic, political, legal) should Israel take? Do you think this should be done step-by-step or all at once? What measurable conditions will count the occupation ended?

Please be as specific as possible. For example, "end the blockade of Gaza" is too vague.

Be prepared to defend your proposals and explain why they are practical and will lead to an end of conflict agreement.

Kill all the Palestinians.
Problem solved.

My, Adolph and Heinrich would be so proud of you; their ideology is alive and well in you and yours. Sieg Heil!

It's not like I said kill all the Arabs. Just some of them. The rats posing as Palestinians.

 

[teddyearp]

Do you watch these videos that you post, Tinmore? At 10:35 in the first video the speaker claims that "every single thing needed to sustain life has to be brought into Gaza through the tunnels". Its a lie. A blatant lie. Its not an exaggeration -- its a lie. You do not strike me as unintelligent. You know this is a lie.

So why do you support someone who lies this blatantly?

Had he actually said that, maybe. As usual, Hasbara trolls take a comment out of context and put their negative spin on it.

Maybe you need to watch those videos Challenger. Because that is exactly what he said, and he repeated it, and it was in that exact context. As usual the electronic intifada keeps throwing lies upon the wall to try to get them to stick.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

I can't believe that the Jews can really be that happy to have to oppress millions of non-Jews to maintain their rule. But I may be wrong.

Then you must have been lying when you said you've been to Israel before. If you have, you would have seen it with your own eyes.

I do think monte was lying in that respect (about having been to Israel).

monte, to prove that you haven't lied about that, please answer one question. Forgetting about the territories for a moment, what is your assessment of the treatment of Arabs inside what is known as "Israel proper?"

monte, are you afraid to answer my question and prove that you're not lying when you claim you've been to Israel?

 

[louie888]

monte, are you afraid to answer my question and prove that you're not lying when you claim you've been to Israel?

Start a thread, asshole troll. How the fuck does that have anything to do with solutions?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

monte, are you afraid to answer my question and prove that you're not lying when you claim you've been to Israel?

Start a thread, asshole troll. How the fuck does that have anything to do with solutions?

You're the one who's a lowlife asshole, and I wasn't talking to you anyway. This was the turn that the conversation took.

 

[teddyearp]

monte, are you afraid to answer my question and prove that you're not lying when you claim you've been to Israel?

Start a thread, asshole troll. How the fuck does that have anything to do with solutions?

You've got a lot of nerve fuckface to dig on someone else about solutions.

 

[Shusha]

So does anyone have a solution for how Israel can "end the occupation"?

Have we even decided what Israel must do in order to have the "occupation" considered ended?

I think we've tossed around 1949 Armistice lines and 181 Partition lines. Let's go with those. (I'm not agreeing that should be done -- just setting up the parameters for the solution).

Let's say Israel ceased to exercise her sovereignty on any territory outside the 1949 Armistice lines. Would that be enough? If so, how will we know that Israel has ceased to exercise her sovereignty? Again, please, I beg you, try to be specific.

 

[Challenger]

You can't find a just solution to a problem without defining the problem.

This makes sense. Define the problem then. What territory is occupied? Which peoples are occupied? How is occupation measured? How is the absence of occupation measured?

Define the problem? This might help.

Thank you! Yes, I entirely agree that this is exactly how the Palestinians define the problem.

No Jewish sovereignty. No Jewish presence. No Jewish rights. On any of the territory from the Mandate for Palestine.

That was the definition of the problem 100 years ago and that is still the problem now. And it is why it is impossible for Israel to "end the occupation".


The only was for Israel to "end the occupation" is to self-destruct. Anything less than that will not solve the problem according to the Palestinian definition above.

But here's where it gets stupid for the Palestinians -- the Palestinian definition of the problem means there is no way for the Palestinians to get what they want. They have set for themselves an unachievable goal.

Actually that's how most of the world outside the US and Western Europe defines the problem, the facts are self evident. Zionism created a "state" that would be dominated by a foreign multi-ethnic religious group whose only tenuous link to Palestine was just that, “religious". Had Jewish people from wherever, settled there and become part of the native community, learned the language and customs, they would have been accepted as they had been in the past, and would now be a thriving part of a prosperous and vibrant, democratic Palestine as intended by the British who by and large successfully inculcated western ideals amongst the Palestinian ruling classes and intelligencia of the time. They would have had "sovereignty" as an equal part of an independent, secular Palestine, with their civil and religious rights protected by a constitution agreed with the native Palestinians.


Instead, Zionism sought to dispossess and displace the native population to provide “lebensraum” for their mythical Jewish race; there was never any intent to share or be part of something other than a “Jews only” state. That is the fundamental problem with Zionism and Zionist Israel today. If Zionist Israel has to “self destruct” in order to achieve genuine equal rights for all it’s inhabitants, Christian, Jewish and Muslim that can only be a good thing in my view, much better than the continuing abuse and oppression which just generates hatred and legitimate acts of resistance against the occupiers, along with providing fertile propaganda against the West to radicalise Muslims worldwide and foster Jihadis everywhere.

 

[Challenger]

And I'm not buying so much "stolen land" when I've seen the Deeds of Record for the original city centers in Israel..

Actual deeds? Who issued the deeds? When and where did you see them? Which cities were involved?

Genesis 25: 9-10: And Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which is before Mamre; the field which Abraham purchased of the children of Heth; there was Abraham buried, and Sarah his wife. (The price was 400 shekels.)

Joshua 24:32: And the bones of Joseph, which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt, buried they in Shechem, in the parcel of ground which Jacob bought of the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of money; and they became the inheritance of the children of Joseph.

Second Samuel 24:24-25: And the king said unto Araunah the Jebusite: "Nay, but I will verily buy it of thee at a price; neither will I offer burnt-offerings unto the Lord my God, which cost me nothing." So David bought the threshing-floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver. And David built there an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt-offerings and peace-offerings. So the Lord was entreated for the land, and the plague was stayed from Israel.

First Kings 16:24: And Omri bought the hill Samaria of Shemer for two talents of silver: and he built on the hill, and called the name of the city which he built , after the name of Shemer, the owner of the hill, Samaria.

So the cities of Hebron, Shechem (Nablus), and Jerusalem, as well as the land of Samaria, belong to the Jews, from their deed, which is in the Bible. The Arabs are living there illegally.

So, no deeds then, I thought not. See Shusha's post about religous beliefs not being valid in a court of law...

 

[Challenger]

All of the land that Israel claims was taken at the point of a gun.

Since you're not helping solve any problems, we can just ignore false premises. Like the one above. Or the 7% number in your previous post. You're pretty irrelevant if you don't value credibility on your assertions.

I'm gonna focus on what creates a Homeland for the Palestinians. Because this has gone on too long..

Legitimate land purchases amounted to only 5-7% of the land, everything else was "stolen" and if you don't like the word, try "illegally appropriated through violence and intimidation" if it makes you feel better.

 

[Challenger]

I intend this thread to be a "solutions" thread like those on the one, two and no more state solutions threads. For those not familiar with those threads -- the intent is not to re-hash the same old, same old, but to provide detailed, concrete suggestions for solving the conflict and moving forward.

The common refrain from the Palestinian side is that Israel must "end the occupation". What does that mean in concrete terms? What specific steps (military, practical, economic, political, legal) should Israel take? Do you think this should be done step-by-step or all at once? What measurable conditions will count the occupation ended?

Please be as specific as possible. For example, "end the blockade of Gaza" is too vague.

Be prepared to defend your proposals and explain why they are practical and will lead to an end of conflict agreement.

Kill all the Palestinians.
Problem solved.

My, Adolph and Heinrich would be so proud of you; their ideology is alive and well in you and yours. Sieg Heil!

It's not like I said kill all the Arabs. Just some of them. The rats posing as Palestinians.

Oh, just a "little genocide" then...OK

 

[P F Tinmore]

So does anyone have a solution for how Israel can "end the occupation"?

Have we even decided what Israel must do in order to have the "occupation" considered ended?

I think we've tossed around 1949 Armistice lines and 181 Partition lines. Let's go with those. (I'm not agreeing that should be done -- just setting up the parameters for the solution).

Let's say Israel ceased to exercise her sovereignty on any territory outside the 1949 Armistice lines. Would that be enough? If so, how will we know that Israel has ceased to exercise her sovereignty? Again, please, I beg you, try to be specific.

Actually, if you just end the 1967 occupation that would only affect about 1/3 of Palestinians. The vast majority would still live with few or no rights. Obviously that is not the solution.

Equal rights for Palestinians would not destroy Israel. It would be a liberal democracy with equal rights for all similar to the US. That can't be a bad thing. No Israelis would give up any rights.

 

[Hollie]

So does anyone have a solution for how Israel can "end the occupation"?

Have we even decided what Israel must do in order to have the "occupation" considered ended?

I think we've tossed around 1949 Armistice lines and 181 Partition lines. Let's go with those. (I'm not agreeing that should be done -- just setting up the parameters for the solution).

Let's say Israel ceased to exercise her sovereignty on any territory outside the 1949 Armistice lines. Would that be enough? If so, how will we know that Israel has ceased to exercise her sovereignty? Again, please, I beg you, try to be specific.

Actually, if you just end the 1967 occupation that would only affect about 1/3 of Palestinians. The vast majority would still live with few or no rights. Obviously that is not the solution.

Equal rights for Palestinians would not destroy Israel. It would be a liberal democracy with equal rights for all similar to the US. That can't be a bad thing. No Israelis would give up any rights.

Actually, your taqiyya is a pathetic attempt to deflect from islamist fascism.

There is no conception of liberal democracy in islamist ideology. In fact, liberal democracy is shirk in the realm of islamism. In fact, at no time in islamist history has an islamist dominated society ever practiced a form of liberal democracy. At no time in Islamist history has an islamist dominated society provided equal rights to the reviled infidel and non-islamist.

 

[flacaltenn]

And I'm not buying so much "stolen land" when I've seen the Deeds of Record for the original city centers in Israel..

Actual deeds? Who issued the deeds? When and where did you see them? Which cities were involved?

Genesis 25: 9-10: And Isaac and Ishmael his sons buried him in the cave of Machpelah, in the field of Ephron the son of Zohar the Hittite, which is before Mamre; the field which Abraham purchased of the children of Heth; there was Abraham buried, and Sarah his wife. (The price was 400 shekels.)

Joshua 24:32: And the bones of Joseph, which the children of Israel brought up out of Egypt, buried they in Shechem, in the parcel of ground which Jacob bought of the sons of Hamor the father of Shechem for a hundred pieces of money; and they became the inheritance of the children of Joseph.

Second Samuel 24:24-25: And the king said unto Araunah the Jebusite: "Nay, but I will verily buy it of thee at a price; neither will I offer burnt-offerings unto the Lord my God, which cost me nothing." So David bought the threshing-floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver. And David built there an altar unto the Lord, and offered burnt-offerings and peace-offerings. So the Lord was entreated for the land, and the plague was stayed from Israel.

First Kings 16:24: And Omri bought the hill Samaria of Shemer for two talents of silver: and he built on the hill, and called the name of the city which he built , after the name of Shemer, the owner of the hill, Samaria.

So the cities of Hebron, Shechem (Nablus), and Jerusalem, as well as the land of Samaria, belong to the Jews, from their deed, which is in the Bible. The Arabs are living there illegally.

So, no deeds then, I thought not. See Shusha's post about religous beliefs not being valid in a court of law...

They were on special display at the Stanford site. All links are gone. But a quick trip to the Wiki about the founding of Tel Aviv (or Ahuzit Bayit) will clear all that up for you.. Next time I go to Silicon Valley, I'll get access from the Stanford library.

 

[Shusha]

Actually, if you just end the 1967 occupation that would only affect about 1/3 of Palestinians. The vast majority would still live with few or no rights. Obviously that is not the solution.

Wait, what?! Which Palestinians have few or no rights? Which rights are we talking about?

The Palestinians in Palestine would have full rights as citizens of their own national homeland. (I assume that is the 1/3 you are talking about).

The Palestinians in Israel would have full rights as citizens of Israel (they already do). If they wanted to experience their right to self-determination in a homogeneous Palestinian culture, they would have the right to move to their national homeland.

The Palestinians in the diaspora would have full rights as citizens of which ever country they make their home. And additionally, have the right to experience self-determination by moving to their homeland.

The Palestinians stuck in limbo in refugee camps would, presumably, be considered as part of any final treaty negotiation and receive rights as above, preferably through their own choice.

So where is the lack of a solution in that?

It would be a liberal democracy with equal rights for all similar to the US. That can't be a bad thing. No Israelis would give up any rights.

Palestine? Gaza? Liberal democracies? Who are you trying to fool? Me? Or yourself? Both Palestine and Gaza have constitutions claiming Islamic States under sharia law. Neither has held democratic elections in years. Where is the liberalism? Where is the democracy?

Israel would be giving up the right to Jewish self-determination. That is rather a large thing to give up. That is the POINT of this whole show. That is the essence of the conflict -- Jews want Jewish self-determination and Palestinians want Palestinian self-determination. Do you think the Palestinians would be willing to live in a Jewish State with a Jewish flag and a Jewish anthem and Jewish laws and Jewish language and Jewish narratives taught in school with Jewish history and a Jewish Temple on a Jewish Temple Mount? So why would you think that the Jewish people would be willing to live in an Arab Muslim State with an Arab flag and an Arab anthem and sharia law and Arabic language and Arabic narratives taught in schools and Arab exclusive access to the Temple Mount?

 

[montelatici]

The problem is that Israeli wants to maintain a theocratic state that only allows those of a specific religion to rule. That just doesn't match up with Western values, it is more akin to Islamic theocracies. There will not be a Palestinian Christian/Muslim state, so Israel will have to continue being an Apartheid state with most of the non-Jews held in Bantustans they control.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The Palestinians in Israel would have full rights as citizens of Israel (they already do).

Of course that is a load of Israel bullshit.

How much legislation proposed by an Arab party become law?

How many times has an Arab party become part of a coalition government?

How many Palestinian citizens of Israel still own the property they owned before 1948?

The list is long.

 

[Shusha]

The problem is that Israeli wants to maintain a theocratic state that only allows those of a specific religion to rule. That just doesn't match up with Western values, it is more akin to Islamic theocracies.

You're kidding, right? Israel does not match up with Western values? Israel is a theocratic state? Like Islamic states whose laws are based on sharia? What planet do you live on?

Israel has people of all religions and ethnic groups running their government. How many Jews govern Gaza? Or Palestine? Oh wait, none! Because there are no Jews there.

 

[Hollie]

The problem is that Israeli wants to maintain a theocratic state that only allows those of a specific religion to rule. That just doesn't match up with Western values, it is more akin to Islamic theocracies. There will not be a Palestinian Christian/Muslim state, so Israel will have to continue being an Apartheid state with most of the non-Jews held in Bantustans they control.

Israel is not a theocratic state.

It's remarkable how you willingly make a fool of yourself in s public forum by cutting and pasting the same comment that has been shown to be false and fraudulent.