A Simple Final Solution

[ForeverYoung436]

"These are some examples of the lengths to which the State of Israel is prepared to go - in order to maintain a Jewish majority in the country - even if they violate international law. This paper will examine whether the forced displacement and denationalization of Palestine's original non-Jewish inhabitants - including an examination of Israel's Nationality and Entrance into Israel Law (2003) - are compatible with the basic principles of international law today."

Drivel?

"'I think we should no longer think of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, but Palestinian settlements in Israel,' Danny Danon, deputy defense minister, said in an interview.

"Danon, recently elected to head the central committee of the Likud party, imagines an archipelago of Palestinian cities — Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah and Hebron — as Arab islands in an Israeli sea.

“'The Jewish people are not settlers in the West Bank, but Israel will make the Palestinians settlers and Jordan will be the one taking control over Palestinians and that’s it,' Danon told Israel’s Channel 1 this summer."

A Greater Israel? Faction says no to two-state solution, yes to annexing Palestinian areas - The Washington Post

How does Danny's plan sound to you, Drivel?

I don't consider the word "drivel" to be excellent debating, but Georgie--you're more interested in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than most average Israelis are. And you've never even set foot in the country!

 

[RoccoR]

et al,

I've heard a number of possible solutions. This idea of an archipelago of Palestinian cities, by Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon, seem rather novel. I'm not sure the Palestinians will appreciate it.

But what I would like to hear and study is the current proposals by the State of Palestine; what they want. And, of course, I would like to hear about the various views on war reparation, restitution, reconciliation, and civil claims settlements.

I don't think I understand what the Palestinian claims are in modern times, relative to the realities of today.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

Drivel?

"'I think we should no longer think of Jewish settlements in the West Bank, but Palestinian settlements in Israel,' Danny Danon, deputy defense minister, said in an interview.

"Danon, recently elected to head the central committee of the Likud party, imagines an archipelago of Palestinian cities — Jenin, Nablus, Ramallah and Hebron — as Arab islands in an Israeli sea.

“'The Jewish people are not settlers in the West Bank, but Israel will make the Palestinians settlers and Jordan will be the one taking control over Palestinians and that’s it,' Danon told Israel’s Channel 1 this summer."

A Greater Israel? Faction says no to two-state solution, yes to annexing Palestinian areas - The Washington Post

How does Danny's plan sound to you, Drivel?

I don't consider the word "drivel" to be excellent debating, but Georgie--you're more interested in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict than most average Israelis are. And you've never even set foot in the country!

I haven't been to Syria, Iraq or Iran, either; however it's pretty hard to fail to notice how the US and Israel began to identify those two Muslim states as the next stage in the Long War immediately after the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

If World War III begins anywhere, it will likely be in the Middle East with the Jewish state playing the role it was created for, IMHO.

?Theater Iran Near Term? (TIRANNT) | Global Research

 

[georgephillip]

et al,

I've heard a number of possible solutions. This idea of an archipelago of Palestinian cities, by Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon, seem rather novel. I'm not sure the Palestinians will appreciate it.

But what I would like to hear and study is the current proposals by the State of Palestine; what they want. And, of course, I would like to hear about the various views on war reparation, restitution, reconciliation, and civil claims settlements.

I don't think I understand what the Palestinian claims are in modern times, relative to the realities of today.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't understand why you would start by asking the Palestinians for their current proposals when it's obvious there's no parity of power between what the Arabs of Palestine want and what the Jews are prepared to discuss.

I'm not clear on Greater Israel's eastern border, for example, or which sovereign state will control the airspace over Danon's archipelago of Palestinian cities?

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

Yes, I understand your question.

et al,

I've heard a number of possible solutions. This idea of an archipelago of Palestinian cities, by Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon, seem rather novel. I'm not sure the Palestinians will appreciate it.

But what I would like to hear and study is the current proposals by the State of Palestine; what they want. And, of course, I would like to hear about the various views on war reparation, restitution, reconciliation, and civil claims settlements.

I don't think I understand what the Palestinian claims are in modern times, relative to the realities of today.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't understand why you would start by asking the Palestinians for their current proposals when it's obvious there's no parity of power between what the Arabs of Palestine want and what the Jews are prepared to discuss.

(COMMENT)

It appear to be the experience that no matter what solution is tabled before the Palestinian, it will be rejected, out of hand. In which case, one would have to be prepared to address whatever the Palestinian wants to pursue. In any negotiation, it is best to come prepared.

I'm not clear on Greater Israel's eastern border, for example, or which sovereign state will control the airspace over Danon's archipelago of Palestinian cities?

(COMMENT)

To my knowledge, the Palestinians (having a long established history of air-piracy) don't have an international airport, except that of Jerusalem LLJR JR with a short, Paved of 6400 ft runway with instrument approach (IFR). There are some very strict conventions that would be difficult for the Palestinians to achieve.

I think, for RADAR surveillance purposes and civilian approach control, that is already worked-out.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

Yes, I understand your question.

et al,

I've heard a number of possible solutions. This idea of an archipelago of Palestinian cities, by Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon, seem rather novel. I'm not sure the Palestinians will appreciate it.

But what I would like to hear and study is the current proposals by the State of Palestine; what they want. And, of course, I would like to hear about the various views on war reparation, restitution, reconciliation, and civil claims settlements.

I don't think I understand what the Palestinian claims are in modern times, relative to the realities of today.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't understand why you would start by asking the Palestinians for their current proposals when it's obvious there's no parity of power between what the Arabs of Palestine want and what the Jews are prepared to discuss.

(COMMENT)

It appear to be the experience that no matter what solution is tabled before the Palestinian, it will be rejected, out of hand. In which case, one would have to be prepared to address whatever the Palestinian wants to pursue. In any negotiation, it is best to come prepared.

I'm not clear on Greater Israel's eastern border, for example, or which sovereign state will control the airspace over Danon's archipelago of Palestinian cities?

(COMMENT)

To my knowledge, the Palestinians (having a long established history of air-piracy) don't have an international airport, except that of Jerusalem LLJR JR with a short, Paved of 6400 ft runway with instrument approach (IFR). There are some very strict conventions that would be difficult for the Palestinians to achieve.

I think, for RADAR surveillance purposes and civilian approach control, that is already worked-out.

Most Respectfully,
R

Yet it wasn't Arabs or Palestinians who rejected Gunnar Jarring's 1971 peace proposal

"The disagreements over interpretation came to a head in February 1971, when UN mediator Gunnar Jarring presented a proposal to Egypt and Israel that called for full peace between them in return for full Israeli withdrawal from Egyptian territory.

"Egyptian President Sadat accepted the proposal.

"Sadat's acceptance of Jarring's 'famous' peace proposal was a 'bombshell,' Prime Minister Rabin recalls in his memoirs, a 'milestone.'

"While officially welcoming Egypt's expression 'of its readiness to enter into a peace agreement with Israel,' the government of Israel rejected the agreement, stating that 'Israel will not withdraw to the pre-June 5, 1967 lines.'

"The reasoning was explained by Haim Bar-Lev of the governing Labor Party: 'I think that we could obtain a peace settlement on the basis of the earlier [pre-June 1967] borders. If I were persuaded that this is the maximum that we might obtain, I would say: agreed. But I think that it is not the maximum. I think that if we continue to hold out, we will obtain more.'"

How much more of Palestine are Jews entitled to obtain, Rocco?

The Israel-Arafat Agreement, by Noam Chomsky

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

This is a matter of reconciliation, restitution, war reparation, and civil claims.

How much more of Palestine are Jews entitled to obtain, Rocco?[/B]

(COMMENT)

I don't look at it with respect to territorial claims. I think that most of the UN Resolutions, being equally ignored by both sides, have outlived their usefulness.

This is why the Israelis should unilaterally withdraw and permanently seal the barriers and terminate any infrastructure umbilical with Gaza and the West Bank.

If the differences are so grave that neither side can make an agreement; that they agree the differences are irreconcilable, then a 100% separation needs to be established in the interest of peace.

And strike by the Jihadist or Fedayeen, relative to the disagreement thereafter, would be considered an act of war and subject to the environment and retaliation that entails (Arab rules apply).

There are only so many ways to end a irreconcilable difference.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[georgephillip]

georgephillip, et al,

This is a matter of reconciliation, restitution, war reparation, and civil claims.

How much more of Palestine are Jews entitled to obtain, Rocco?[/B]

(COMMENT)

I don't look at it with respect to territorial claims. I think that most of the UN Resolutions, being equally ignored by both sides, have outlived their usefulness.

This is why the Israelis should unilaterally withdraw and permanently seal the barriers and terminate any infrastructure umbilical with Gaza and the West Bank.

If the differences are so grave that neither side can make an agreement; that they agree the differences are irreconcilable, then a 100% separation needs to be established in the interest of peace.

And strike by the Jihadist or Fedayeen, relative to the disagreement thereafter, would be considered an act of war and subject to the environment and retaliation that entails (Arab rules apply).

There are only so many ways to end a irreconcilable difference.

Most Respectfully,
R

How would the unilateral Israeli withdrawal affect the Jordan Valley or the air space over Ramallah?

 

[RoccoR]

georgephillip, et al,

To be honest, I'm not sure.

How would the unilateral Israeli withdrawal affect the Jordan Valley or the air space over Ramallah?

(COMMENT)

That would take an assessment I don't have. You could probably write a whole book on this one city area. I'm pretty sure that all the key GPS points are registered. Periodically, new CIB Imagery is taken and punched-out.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[SAYIT]

georgephillip, et al,

This is a matter of reconciliation, restitution, war reparation, and civil claims.

How much more of Palestine are Jews entitled to obtain, Rocco?[/B]

(COMMENT)

I don't look at it with respect to territorial claims. I think that most of the UN Resolutions, being equally ignored by both sides, have outlived their usefulness.

This is why the Israelis should unilaterally withdraw and permanently seal the barriers and terminate any infrastructure umbilical with Gaza and the West Bank.

If the differences are so grave that neither side can make an agreement; that they agree the differences are irreconcilable, then a 100% separation needs to be established in the interest of peace.

And strike by the Jihadist or Fedayeen, relative to the disagreement thereafter, would be considered an act of war and subject to the environment and retaliation that entails (Arab rules apply).

There are only so many ways to end a irreconcilable difference.

Most Respectfully,
R

I sense a new weariness or even hopelessness in your tone and that of GP. If conflict weariness also exists in the Mideast perhaps it will translate into a sustainable peace.
It should be noted that these peeps "live in each other's skin" ... They cannot really be separated by physical borders. For instance, where would Israel build the walls necessary for "100% separation?" We have seen the world's reaction to the Israeli unilateral effort to end Arafat's final Intifada. What would become of the Israelis fenced out of Israel and the Palestinians fenced in?