All About the Oslo Accords

Sixties Fan

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
19,141
Reaction score
1,504
Points
390
I read a lot about the Oslo Accords and both sides have their take on it. Especially as to why it has not succeeded.

The questions are:

What was the Oslo Accords supposed to achieve?
What was each side's role in it?
What, if anything has each side achieved since it was signed?
What are the advantages of keeping the Accords alive for each side, good or bad?
Was it done in good faith by both sides?
What was it like before the Accords?
What is it like now?
Is it best to keep it as is, or put an end to it?
What would be the consequences of ending it for each side?
Where did it go wrong?
etc, etc

Many decades later, there are a few articles which possibly point to the reason why the Accords seem to not have succeeded in bringing a Peace Treaty between Palestinians and Israelis, as negotiations did between Israelis, Egyptians and Jordanians before it, or any kind of peace at all.

Senior Palestinian Journalist: Arafat Told Me He Went Along With Oslo Accords Because It Would Make 'The Jews... Leave Palestine Like Rats Abandoning A Sinking Ship'


The ‘Oslo Diaries’ and Yasser Arafat’s trunk


Was Arafat in good faith when he signed it, or was this another Hudna on the Arab side, following on the footsteps of what Mohammad had done with the Jewish Tribe of Khaybar in the 7th Century as the article below suggests?

Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance


Is there any chance of making both sides return to the ideas of the Accords and eventually follow them to the conclusion they were meant to bring when they were first signed?

What do the experts say?

What do you say?
 

Dogmaphobe

Platinum Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2014
Messages
14,250
Reaction score
3,886
Points
1,095
Location
Or uh gun
In a nutshell, the Oslo accords gave Arafat 99 percent of what he was asking for, but he walked away from the deal because what he was asking for ostensively was not what he really wanted and he needed to save face with the genocidal antisemites of his al Husseini clan.

It was never about creating a state for the made up people called Palestinians. It was never about negotiating in good faith towards creating such a state.

It was simply a typical Arab Islamic charade to give the appearance of one thing while actually seeking another.
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
58,431
Reaction score
2,441
Points
1,815
I read a lot about the Oslo Accords and both sides have their take on it. Especially as to why it has not succeeded.

The questions are:

What was the Oslo Accords supposed to achieve?
What was each side's role in it?
What, if anything has each side achieved since it was signed?
What are the advantages of keeping the Accords alive for each side, good or bad?
Was it done in good faith by both sides?
What was it like before the Accords?
What is it like now?
Is it best to keep it as is, or put an end to it?
What would be the consequences of ending it for each side?
Where did it go wrong?
etc, etc

Many decades later, there are a few articles which possibly point to the reason why the Accords seem to not have succeeded in bringing a Peace Treaty between Palestinians and Israelis, as negotiations did between Israelis, Egyptians and Jordanians before it, or any kind of peace at all.

Senior Palestinian Journalist: Arafat Told Me He Went Along With Oslo Accords Because It Would Make 'The Jews... Leave Palestine Like Rats Abandoning A Sinking Ship'


The ‘Oslo Diaries’ and Yasser Arafat’s trunk


Was Arafat in good faith when he signed it, or was this another Hudna on the Arab side, following on the footsteps of what Mohammad had done with the Jewish Tribe of Khaybar in the 7th Century as the article below suggests?

Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance


Is there any chance of making both sides return to the ideas of the Accords and eventually follow them to the conclusion they were meant to bring when they were first signed?

What do the experts say?

What do you say?
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,702
Reaction score
3,460
Points
1,115
I read a lot about the Oslo Accords and both sides have their take on it. Especially as to why it has not succeeded.

The questions are:

What was the Oslo Accords supposed to achieve?
What was each side's role in it?
What, if anything has each side achieved since it was signed?
What are the advantages of keeping the Accords alive for each side, good or bad?
Was it done in good faith by both sides?
What was it like before the Accords?
What is it like now?
Is it best to keep it as is, or put an end to it?
What would be the consequences of ending it for each side?
Where did it go wrong?
etc, etc

Many decades later, there are a few articles which possibly point to the reason why the Accords seem to not have succeeded in bringing a Peace Treaty between Palestinians and Israelis, as negotiations did between Israelis, Egyptians and Jordanians before it, or any kind of peace at all.

Senior Palestinian Journalist: Arafat Told Me He Went Along With Oslo Accords Because It Would Make 'The Jews... Leave Palestine Like Rats Abandoning A Sinking Ship'


The ‘Oslo Diaries’ and Yasser Arafat’s trunk


Was Arafat in good faith when he signed it, or was this another Hudna on the Arab side, following on the footsteps of what Mohammad had done with the Jewish Tribe of Khaybar in the 7th Century as the article below suggests?

Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance


Is there any chance of making both sides return to the ideas of the Accords and eventually follow them to the conclusion they were meant to bring when they were first signed?

What do the experts say?

What do you say?
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
58,431
Reaction score
2,441
Points
1,815

The PLO never ratified the Oslo Accords.

You learn something new every day.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,702
Reaction score
3,460
Points
1,115

The PLO never ratified the Oslo Accords.

You learn something new every day.
Yassir “I don’t have AIDS” Arafat was “Chairman” of the PLO at that time.

You should learn something one day.
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,702
Reaction score
3,460
Points
1,115

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
58,431
Reaction score
2,441
Points
1,815

The PLO never ratified the Oslo Accords.

You learn something new every day.
Yassir “I don’t have AIDS” Arafat was “Chairman” of the PLO at that time.

You should learn something one day.
So?
So.... you’re befuddled because you learned something you didn’t know and it conflicts with what you prefer not to acknowledge.

Indeed.
I have always said that Oslo was never approved.
 
OP
Sixties Fan

Sixties Fan

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
19,141
Reaction score
1,504
Points
390

The PLO never ratified the Oslo Accords.

You learn something new every day.
Yassir “I don’t have AIDS” Arafat was “Chairman” of the PLO at that time.

You should learn something one day.
So?
So.... you’re befuddled because you learned something you didn’t know and it conflicts with what you prefer not to acknowledge.

Indeed.
I have always said that Oslo was never approved.
Not approved by whom? The people?
Then they should not have elected Arafat.
But they did, and that is the choice Arafat made.
To trick Israel and the world that he actually was going to work towards peace.

Ha, ha, ha :)
 

ILOVEISRAEL

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
4,267
Reaction score
419
Points
160
I read a lot about the Oslo Accords and both sides have their take on it. Especially as to why it has not succeeded.

The questions are:

What was the Oslo Accords supposed to achieve?
What was each side's role in it?
What, if anything has each side achieved since it was signed?
What are the advantages of keeping the Accords alive for each side, good or bad?
Was it done in good faith by both sides?
What was it like before the Accords?
What is it like now?
Is it best to keep it as is, or put an end to it?
What would be the consequences of ending it for each side?
Where did it go wrong?
etc, etc

Many decades later, there are a few articles which possibly point to the reason why the Accords seem to not have succeeded in bringing a Peace Treaty between Palestinians and Israelis, as negotiations did between Israelis, Egyptians and Jordanians before it, or any kind of peace at all.

Senior Palestinian Journalist: Arafat Told Me He Went Along With Oslo Accords Because It Would Make 'The Jews... Leave Palestine Like Rats Abandoning A Sinking Ship'


The ‘Oslo Diaries’ and Yasser Arafat’s trunk


Was Arafat in good faith when he signed it, or was this another Hudna on the Arab side, following on the footsteps of what Mohammad had done with the Jewish Tribe of Khaybar in the 7th Century as the article below suggests?

Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance


Is there any chance of making both sides return to the ideas of the Accords and eventually follow them to the conclusion they were meant to bring when they were first signed?

What do the experts say?

What do you say?
Maybe your next “ You Tube” should be about why Olmert’s offer was rejected. :D:D
 

Hollie

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
35,702
Reaction score
3,460
Points
1,115

The PLO never ratified the Oslo Accords.

You learn something new every day.
Yassir “I don’t have AIDS” Arafat was “Chairman” of the PLO at that time.

You should learn something one day.
So?
So.... you’re befuddled because you learned something you didn’t know and it conflicts with what you prefer not to acknowledge.

Indeed.
I have always said that Oslo was never approved.
Indeed, Oslo was approved by Arafat.
 

P F Tinmore

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2009
Messages
58,431
Reaction score
2,441
Points
1,815
I read a lot about the Oslo Accords and both sides have their take on it. Especially as to why it has not succeeded.

The questions are:

What was the Oslo Accords supposed to achieve?
What was each side's role in it?
What, if anything has each side achieved since it was signed?
What are the advantages of keeping the Accords alive for each side, good or bad?
Was it done in good faith by both sides?
What was it like before the Accords?
What is it like now?
Is it best to keep it as is, or put an end to it?
What would be the consequences of ending it for each side?
Where did it go wrong?
etc, etc

Many decades later, there are a few articles which possibly point to the reason why the Accords seem to not have succeeded in bringing a Peace Treaty between Palestinians and Israelis, as negotiations did between Israelis, Egyptians and Jordanians before it, or any kind of peace at all.

Senior Palestinian Journalist: Arafat Told Me He Went Along With Oslo Accords Because It Would Make 'The Jews... Leave Palestine Like Rats Abandoning A Sinking Ship'


The ‘Oslo Diaries’ and Yasser Arafat’s trunk


Was Arafat in good faith when he signed it, or was this another Hudna on the Arab side, following on the footsteps of what Mohammad had done with the Jewish Tribe of Khaybar in the 7th Century as the article below suggests?

Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance


Is there any chance of making both sides return to the ideas of the Accords and eventually follow them to the conclusion they were meant to bring when they were first signed?

What do the experts say?

What do you say?
Maybe your next “ You Tube” should be about why Olmert’s offer was rejected. :D:D
That is common knowledge for people who do not use Israeli propaganda for their only source of information.
 

ILOVEISRAEL

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2012
Messages
4,267
Reaction score
419
Points
160
I read a lot about the Oslo Accords and both sides have their take on it. Especially as to why it has not succeeded.

The questions are:

What was the Oslo Accords supposed to achieve?
What was each side's role in it?
What, if anything has each side achieved since it was signed?
What are the advantages of keeping the Accords alive for each side, good or bad?
Was it done in good faith by both sides?
What was it like before the Accords?
What is it like now?
Is it best to keep it as is, or put an end to it?
What would be the consequences of ending it for each side?
Where did it go wrong?
etc, etc

Many decades later, there are a few articles which possibly point to the reason why the Accords seem to not have succeeded in bringing a Peace Treaty between Palestinians and Israelis, as negotiations did between Israelis, Egyptians and Jordanians before it, or any kind of peace at all.

Senior Palestinian Journalist: Arafat Told Me He Went Along With Oslo Accords Because It Would Make 'The Jews... Leave Palestine Like Rats Abandoning A Sinking Ship'


The ‘Oslo Diaries’ and Yasser Arafat’s trunk


Was Arafat in good faith when he signed it, or was this another Hudna on the Arab side, following on the footsteps of what Mohammad had done with the Jewish Tribe of Khaybar in the 7th Century as the article below suggests?

Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance


Is there any chance of making both sides return to the ideas of the Accords and eventually follow them to the conclusion they were meant to bring when they were first signed?

What do the experts say?

What do you say?
Maybe your next “ You Tube” should be about why Olmert’s offer was rejected. :D:D
That is common knowledge for people who do not use Israeli propaganda for their only source of information.
YAWN.., Deflection as usual instead of answering the question.
 

member

Pls trust in God
Joined
Mar 14, 2012
Messages
1,823
Reaction score
422
Points
200
Location
Bensonhurst, Brooklyn
I read a lot about the Oslo Accords and both sides have their take on it. Especially as to why it has not succeeded.

The questions are:

What was the Oslo Accords supposed to achieve?
What was each side's role in it?
What, if anything has each side achieved since it was signed?
What are the advantages of keeping the Accords alive for each side, good or bad?
Was it done in good faith by both sides?
What was it like before the Accords?
What is it like now?
Is it best to keep it as is, or put an end to it?
What would be the consequences of ending it for each side?
Where did it go wrong?
etc, etc

Many decades later, there are a few articles which possibly point to the reason why the Accords seem to not have succeeded in bringing a Peace Treaty between Palestinians and Israelis, as negotiations did between Israelis, Egyptians and Jordanians before it, or any kind of peace at all.

Senior Palestinian Journalist: Arafat Told Me He Went Along With Oslo Accords Because It Would Make 'The Jews... Leave Palestine Like Rats Abandoning A Sinking Ship'


The ‘Oslo Diaries’ and Yasser Arafat’s trunk


Was Arafat in good faith when he signed it, or was this another Hudna on the Arab side, following on the footsteps of what Mohammad had done with the Jewish Tribe of Khaybar in the 7th Century as the article below suggests?

Tactical Hudna and Islamist Intolerance


Is there any chance of making both sides return to the ideas of the Accords and eventually follow them to the conclusion they were meant to bring when they were first signed?

What do the experts say?

What do you say?
Maybe your next “ You Tube” should be about why Olmert’s offer was rejected. :D:D
That is common knowledge for people who do not use Israeli propaganda for their only source of information.



What was the Oslo Accords supposed to achieve?
What was each side's role in it?
What, if anything has each side achieved since it was signed?
What are the advantages of keeping the Accords alive for each side, good or bad?
Was it done in good faith by both sides?
What was it like before the Accords?
What is it like now?
Is it best to keep it as is, or put an end to it?
What would be the consequences of ending it for each side?

Where did it go wrong?


nobody cares. ..i mean about the conflict. not the accord guy, arafat and abbass



"Israeli propaganda . . . their only source of information..."



sources ...ok, you brought it up...sources of inspiration













i guess you had to be there!​

 
OP
Sixties Fan

Sixties Fan

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
19,141
Reaction score
1,504
Points
390
As an alleged antidote to ruinous “ambiguity", Wilf suggests replacing it with “specificity”. She writes: “In place of destructive ambiguity, we need constructive specificity. Serious peacemakers need to let go of vague and nebulous concepts such as ‘trust’ and ‘confidence building’, and…spell out every detail”.

So instead of delaying agreement on intractable core issues for later resolution, Wilf proposes resolving them immediatelyi.e. Israel should agree, posthaste, to Palestinian demands for the physical establishment of a Palestinian state, the physical division of Jerusalem, the physical demolition of Jewish communities, and the physical influx of potentially hostile hordes into the territory abutting and overlooking Israel’s coastal megatropolis—all this in exchange for an ephemeral pledge by the Palestinian-Arabs not to covet any territory across the pre-1967 lines--a pledge they are clearly unable/unwilling to make, and even if made, would be of highly dubious credibility.


Accordingly, translated into plain English, Wilf’s proposal is indistinguishable from saying that the sides should agree on what they disagree so that they can agree. Gee! What a splendid idea.

(full article online)

INTO THE FRAY: Obsessing over Oslo – Einat Wilf in “The Atlantic"
 

MJB12741

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2012
Messages
12,491
Reaction score
1,973
Points
280
I really miss 'ole Yasser. He took his Palestinians from the toilet to the sewer, got them massacred over & over again by their own Arab brothers, embezzled their money, died of AIDS & left them in ignorance & near starvation with no hope for a Palestinian state. Is it any wonder this great leader received a Nobel peace prize?
 
OP
Sixties Fan

Sixties Fan

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
19,141
Reaction score
1,504
Points
390
1. The first one was issued in September 2017, having covered 201 books of various school subjects.

2. An additional 118 books mostly published in 2017 were examined during 2018 in a separate study.

3. The present study covers 45 books published in 2017-2018 for grades 11 and 12 in the various streams.

Some of these latter books are final editions that have replaced draft editions for grade 12 and contained a few changes for both better and worse.

http://israelbehindthenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/ComplementaryStudy.pdf


(full article online)

Palestinian Authority textbooks and the lessons they teach
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top