Would giving bak the West Bank IMPROVE security for Israel?

[shantd]

Hello, first post on this forum. A bit of background. I'm a Christian Armenian born and raised in the United States. I don't really have a dog in the race regarding Israel/Palestine, it's just a topic I've always been interested in. Since Israel gave back Gaza to Palestine I've more or less sided with Israel on the issue, believing the Palestinians to be the bigger roadblock to peace between the 2 sides.

Anyway, I've been searching for a forum that has some pro-Israel members as most of the forums I've found online are almost entirely (and fanatically) pro Arab so it's hard to get the other side. That said, I read a thread here where somebody asked if Israel was imposing Apartheid on Palestinians and most of the replies were "You're a moron", "You don't even know what Apartheid is", etc...I'm hoping to get more insightful responses than that here, with all respect.

Onto the topic. On another forum, I was debating with somebody that it was unreasonable to expect Israel to simply hand over the West Bank right now because they gave back Gaza and it (quite literally) blew up in their face. My belief is that security concerns caused by Palestine make it very hard for peace talks to advance. This was his response:

"The West Bank and Gaza scenarios are two different animals.

The Gaza is closed by land, air and sea. They are in a cage where Israel controls what goes in and out.

Pulling out of the West Bank would not decrease Israel's security. It would improve it. The could make the West Bank Barrier any place they want it.

This was the first I heard this argument. My initial thought was that no matter where Israel puts the border, that won't stop artillery shells and rockets, and as I understand it, you can hit Tel Aviv from virtually anywhere in the West Bank. W

So what is your opinion on this point? Thanks,

Shant

 

[uscitizen]

Is moving out the right thing to do is the question?

 

[P F Tinmore]

Welcome to the board, shantd.

Here is some food for thought from one of my previous posts:

So called terrorist attacks on Israel are constantly reported. Surely the rockets fired on Sderot were the main excuse for the invasion of Gaza. However, it is never reported that Sderot was built on top of the Palestinian village of Najd. Israel attacked Najd before the war of 1948 driving the indigenous population out of their homes and off their land. Most of those driven out became refugees in Gaza. This was an act of aggression against this farm community.

International law forbids the acquisition of land in acts of aggression. With this in mind, Israel cannot legally claim possession of this land. Further evidence of this is the fact that there is no border between Gaza and Sderot. Israel has built a cage around Gaza, but there is no border there. Also, with this in mind, Hamas and other Palestinian resistance groups have not attacked anyone outside of Palestine. The Palestinians have every legal right to resist this occupation of their land.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/1918548-post12.html

I too am an American Christian. It is not reported that Palestine was about 20% Christian 100 years ago. Israel drove out the Christians as well as the Muslims during its creation and is still cleansing Christians from their homes. Israel has destroyed the Holy Land and that is one of the reasons I support Palestine.

 

[The Rabbi]

PF Tinmore is a nutjob, best ignored by serious people.

Israel gave up the Gaza not out of altruism (does any state act out of altruism??) but because the cost and difficulty in patrolling it were enormous. So the question is, what would happen if they withdrew from the west bank as well?
For starters there would be some pretty unhappy settlers. And don't discount that as a domestic factor. Secondly it would create a power vacuum. The PA has proven itself utterly corrupt and incompetent in administrering anything. In such a scenario only the strongest and most radical groups would prevail. And those are the ones bent on Israel's destruction.
So I dont see any good reason to withdraw. I dont see a very good reason to stay either, but thats another issue.

 

[P F Tinmore]

PF Tinmore is a nutjob, best ignored by serious people.

Israel gave up the Gaza not out of altruism (does any state act out of altruism??) but because the cost and difficulty in patrolling it were enormous. So the question is, what would happen if they withdrew from the west bank as well?
For starters there would be some pretty unhappy settlers. And don't discount that as a domestic factor. Secondly it would create a power vacuum. The PA has proven itself utterly corrupt and incompetent in administrering anything. In such a scenario only the strongest and most radical groups would prevail. And those are the ones bent on Israel's destruction.
So I dont see any good reason to withdraw. I dont see a very good reason to stay either, but thats another issue.

It is true that the PA is corrupt to the core. But when the Palestinians elected more honest leaders, the US (and Israel) Installed the old corruption back into power in the West Bank.

There would be no power vacuum. The succession of power is laid out in their constitution. It would not be a power grab.

 

[shantd]

Is moving out the right thing to do is the question?

I guess that depends on which side one is on. One would like to believe that moving out could be made into a mutually beneficial scenario but given their history, it sure seems optimistic.

Whether moving out is the right thing to do is indeed a primary question, but to answer that one needs to explore the likely scenarios and/or potential results of moving out, which is the motivation behind my question. If indeed one can make a case that moving out would actually improve security concerns for Israel, it puts a whole new spin on it. I'm skeptical, as the West Bank has enormous strategic importance to any country wishing to invade Israel. But I'd still like to know, ideally from those on both sides of the issue, if a reasonable case could be made that security would actually improve for Israel were they to pull out.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I think this is a false question. It leads to the assumption that the occupation of the West Bank is the problem. That if the occupation in the West Bank was ended the problem should be solved. This would not be a comprehensive address of the problems.

If we understand this we could see why "leaving Gaza" was a disaster.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Is moving out the right thing to do is the question?

I guess that depends on which side one is on. One would like to believe that moving out could be made into a mutually beneficial scenario but given their history, it sure seems optimistic.

Whether moving out is the right thing to do is indeed a primary question, but to answer that one needs to explore the likely scenarios and/or potential results of moving out, which is the motivation behind my question. If indeed one can make a case that moving out would actually improve security concerns for Israel, it puts a whole new spin on it. I'm skeptical, as the West Bank has enormous strategic importance to any country wishing to invade Israel. But I'd still like to know, ideally from those on both sides of the issue, if a reasonable case could be made that security would actually improve for Israel were they to pull out.

The question I have is what other country would want to invade Israel and why.

 

[Marc39]

Welcome to the board, shantd.

Here is some food for thought from one of my previous posts:

Your ability to think has yet to be substantiated. Certainly, your posts are not evidence.

There is no rule in law prohibiting the seizure of territory in a defensive war, the circumstance under which Israel obtained the territories.

Don't pretend to know anything about the law because you end up looking like a fool.

 

[Marc39]

I think this is a false question. It leads to the assumption that the occupation of the West Bank is the problem. That if the occupation in the West Bank was ended the problem should be solved. This would not be a comprehensive address of the problems.

If we understand this we could see why "leaving Gaza" was a disaster.

Dummy, neither Gaza nor the West Bank are sovereign Arab states, thus, cannot be occupied.

 

[Douger]

Let's look first at IsNtRealz borders pre 1967.

 

[Douger]

That should give you some idea of how much real estate these low life motherfuckers have "appropriated"

My suggestion to the problem ?
"Off the map".

 

[JenyEliza]

Hello, first post on this forum. A bit of background. I'm a Christian Armenian born and raised in the United States. I don't really have a dog in the race regarding Israel/Palestine, it's just a topic I've always been interested in. Since Israel gave back Gaza to Palestine I've more or less sided with Israel on the issue, believing the Palestinians to be the bigger roadblock to peace between the 2 sides.

Anyway, I've been searching for a forum that has some pro-Israel members as most of the forums I've found online are almost entirely (and fanatically) pro Arab so it's hard to get the other side. That said, I read a thread here where somebody asked if Israel was imposing Apartheid on Palestinians and most of the replies were "You're a moron", "You don't even know what Apartheid is", etc...I'm hoping to get more insightful responses than that here, with all respect.

Onto the topic. On another forum, I was debating with somebody that it was unreasonable to expect Israel to simply hand over the West Bank right now because they gave back Gaza and it (quite literally) blew up in their face. My belief is that security concerns caused by Palestine make it very hard for peace talks to advance. This was his response:

"The West Bank and Gaza scenarios are two different animals.

The Gaza is closed by land, air and sea. They are in a cage where Israel controls what goes in and out.

Pulling out of the West Bank would not decrease Israel's security. It would improve it. The could make the West Bank Barrier any place they want it.

This was the first I heard this argument. My initial thought was that no matter where Israel puts the border, that won't stop artillery shells and rockets, and as I understand it, you can hit Tel Aviv from virtually anywhere in the West Bank. W

So what is your opinion on this point? Thanks,

Shant

My opinion?

Giving the Gaza Strip to the PA in the vain hope that Israel could buy peace with the so-called palestinian people was a fool's errand on the part of the Israelis.

The "palestinians" will NEVER negotiate in good faith. They will NEVER keep any commitments they make at the bargaining table. They are liars and bloodthirsty terrorists and should be treated as such.

You cannot reason with them. You cannot negotiate with them. You cannot trust them. They are NOT and NEVER WILL BE legitimate "partners in peace" in the middle east.

Giving the "palestinians" any part of the West Bank will NOT result in peace for Israel, but more danger, death and destruction for innocent Israeli civilian citizens.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Is moving out the right thing to do is the question?

I guess that depends on which side one is on. One would like to believe that moving out could be made into a mutually beneficial scenario but given their history, it sure seems optimistic.

Whether moving out is the right thing to do is indeed a primary question, but to answer that one needs to explore the likely scenarios and/or potential results of moving out, which is the motivation behind my question. If indeed one can make a case that moving out would actually improve security concerns for Israel, it puts a whole new spin on it. I'm skeptical, as the West Bank has enormous strategic importance to any country wishing to invade Israel. But I'd still like to know, ideally from those on both sides of the issue, if a reasonable case could be made that security would actually improve for Israel were they to pull out.

The question I have is what other country would want to invade Israel and why.

Ya Syria, and the Arabs never attacked Israel. A regime change in Jordan and one in Egypt and Israel could find enemies on her borders again.