Be clear

[Lipush]

I think all of the posters should make clear if they are for a 2-state solution, one Palestine (Gd forbid) or one Israel. Even Norman Finklestein has come come to the realization that most pro-Palestinians want ALL of Israel. I think this is where we all stand:
pbel-2 states
monte-all Palestine
Billo reilly-2 states
Joe-all Palestine
toastman-2 states
Roudy-all Israel
Penelope-all Palestine

WTF is "Palestine"?

 

[rhodescholar]

I have stated before that Israel should have annexed all territory captured in 1967. It would have saved them a world of grief.

One state, of Israel.

rhodescholar: one state, israel - most arab muslims deported back to egypt, jordan and syria.

 

[rhodescholar]

Actually solving the I/P Conflict is probably one of the biggest achievements for mediating between the Western world and the M.E./Arab Muslims that would impact the rest of the world indirectly - Something Obama and Kerry knows very well. Having a solution - even a temporarily real status quo - could lead to one of the biggest revolutions in the world in terms of economy, war on terrorism, ethnic tolerance, and human perspective. It probably won't be the cure to all of our problems, but it could be a major milestone on the road to a better world.

I disagree, it would have zero effect on anything. The world was at war before israel was founded in 1948, and has been constantly at war since. Israel is merely a fig leaf the muslims hide behind to try and use as a grievance for sympathy from useful idiot Westerners lacking a full historical presentation and understanding of the conflicts in the region. It would have absolutely no effect on africa, sunni muslim-vs-shia muslim violence throughout the mideast, chinese conflict with uighars, mindanao muslim problems in the phillippines, the wars in the caucuses, afghanistan, pakistan/India, etc.

 

[Phoenall]

I think all of the posters should make clear if they are for a 2-state solution, one Palestine (Gd forbid) or one Israel. Even Norman Finklestein has come come to the realization that most pro-Palestinians want ALL of Israel. I think this is where we all stand:
pbel-2 states
monte-all Palestine
Billo reilly-2 states
Joe-all Palestine
toastman-2 states
Roudy-all Israel
Penelope-all Palestine

Tinmore-all Palestine
Humanity-2 states

The two state solution was first thrown on the table in 1937. According to the hype, it is the only solution. Most people favor it.

Almost 80 years later it is farther away than ever. What is the problem?

The arab muslims refusal to negotiate in good faith, every set of talks the arab muslims have made demands that must be filled before they will talk about anything.

 

[Phoenall]

I have stated before that Israel should have annexed all territory captured in 1967. It would have saved them a world of grief.

One state, of Israel.

Your point re: annexation is a valid one. I know of not even one Palestinian citizen of Israel who has opted to leave Israel to go live in some Arab country. Is there ANYONE who disagrees with this?

Why should they leave their homeland and live elsewhere?

What you refer to as "their homeland" is stolen land by the overwhelming majority of Palestinians without any titles or deeds whatsoever to the land they have been squatting on for generations.

As usual you are just shoveling Israeli bullshit.

6. The question of the availability of State Domain for Jewish settlement requires some explanation. It cannot be maintained that the Palestine Government has the free disposal of such lands, cultivable as well as waste, or that the Arab inhabitants have no claims in their apportionment.

Most of the cultivable State lands had been in occupation and under cultivation by Arabs for generations. They had owned the lands before the Ottoman Land Code was enacted, and, although, comparatively recently the Sultan acquired the titular ownership, the original possessors were not ousted and their position became that of tenants in perpetuity. They were allowed to sell their tenancy rights, and those rights were transmitted by inheritance to their descendants. Their position vis-à-vis the Sultan and, on his deposition, vis-à-vis the Turkish Government, was in some degree analogous to that of owners of ordinary Miri land.

Another question that has aroused considerable discussion is that of the Ghor Mudawwara Agreement of 1921, relating to the Baisan lands. It may be observed in regard to this question that it would not have been possible to grant Jewish settlers a share in the Baisan lands without buying out the rights of the Arabs, with their consent. That consent was not likely to have been obtained; nor could public funds have been applied to such a purpose. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations 31 December 1930 ​

Did you see this in the header

As is" reference - not a United Nations document

 

[Phoenall]

I think all of the posters should make clear if they are for a 2-state solution, one Palestine (Gd forbid) or one Israel. Even Norman Finklestein has come come to the realization that most pro-Palestinians want ALL of Israel. I think this is where we all stand:
pbel-2 states
monte-all Palestine
Billo reilly-2 states
Joe-all Palestine
toastman-2 states
Roudy-all Israel
Penelope-all Palestine

Too late for a two state since the hawkish jews have stole so much land and built on it, unless of course the Jews want to return the land?? Another issue the jews there are mainly atheist, secular, and really don't get along with the religious jews so there in you have another problem.

I think if I lived in Israel (God forbid) I'd live in Palestine, gaza , as far away from the jews as can be, I'd rather live with oppressed Palestinians that the arrogant ungodly jews.

Do you mean return it to themselves because they bought it prior to 1948

 

[Phoenall]

I think all of the posters should make clear if they are for a 2-state solution, one Palestine (Gd forbid) or one Israel. Even Norman Finklestein has come come to the realization that most pro-Palestinians want ALL of Israel. I think this is where we all stand:
pbel-2 states
monte-all Palestine
Billo reilly-2 states
Joe-all Palestine
toastman-2 states
Roudy-all Israel
Penelope-all Palestine

Too late for a two state since the hawkish jews have stole so much land and built on it, unless of course the Jews want to return the land?? Another issue the jews there are mainly atheist, secular, and really don't get along with the religious jews so there in you have another problem.

I think if I lived in Israel (God forbid) I'd live in Palestine, gaza , as far away from the jews as can be, I'd rather live with oppressed Palestinians that the arrogant ungodly jews.

Do you mean return it to themselves because they bought it prior to 1948

 

[Penelope]

Too late for a two state since the hawkish jews have stole so much land and built on it, unless of course the Jews want to return the land?? Another issue the jews there are mainly atheist, secular, and really don't get along with the religious jews so there in you have another problem.

I think if I lived in Israel (God forbid) I'd live in Palestine, gaza , as far away from the jews as can be, I'd rather live with oppressed Palestinians that the arrogant ungodly jews.[/QUOTE]






Do you mean return it to themselves because they bought it prior to 1948[/QUOTE]

Give the land back that was stolen, but Israel wont. This will go on till Israel has it all. They are rewriting history as it is, one can't find a WWII movie not bias towards the Jews. The NG and History channels might as well be called "Hitler". I imagine in say 50 years, Palestinians, who were they, just like the Canaanites, just a distance memory. Jews still believe in Yahweh, their war god.

 

[MJB12741]

I think all of the posters should make clear if they are for a 2-state solution, one Palestine (Gd forbid) or one Israel. Even Norman Finklestein has come come to the realization that most pro-Palestinians want ALL of Israel. I think this is where we all stand:
pbel-2 states
monte-all Palestine
Billo reilly-2 states
Joe-all Palestine
toastman-2 states
Roudy-all Israel
Penelope-all Palestine

Tinmore-all Palestine
Humanity-2 states

The two state solution was first thrown on the table in 1937. According to the hype, it is the only solution. Most people favor it.

Almost 80 years later it is farther away than ever. What is the problem?

OUTSTANDING QUESTION! The "problem" is the elected Palestinian leadership Israel is expected to negotiate with.

 

[Phoenall]

Too late for a two state since the hawkish jews have stole so much land and built on it, unless of course the Jews want to return the land?? Another issue the jews there are mainly atheist, secular, and really don't get along with the religious jews so there in you have another problem.

I think if I lived in Israel (God forbid) I'd live in Palestine, gaza , as far away from the jews as can be, I'd rather live with oppressed Palestinians that the arrogant ungodly jews.

Do you mean return it to themselves because they bought it prior to 1948[/QUOTE]

Give the land back that was stolen, but Israel wont. This will go on till Israel has it all. They are rewriting history as it is, one can't find a WWII movie not bias towards the Jews. The NG and History channels might as well be called "Hitler". I imagine in say 50 years, Palestinians, who were they, just like the Canaanites, just a distance memory. Jews still believe in Yahweh, their war god.[/QUOTE]





The land is Jewish under International law, and in 1949 the arab muslims forcibly evicted the Jews and took their land. It is detailed in the Jordanian law books if you look. So the facts show that you are talking shite.

 

[Penelope]

Too late for a two state since the hawkish jews have stole so much land and built on it, unless of course the Jews want to return the land?? Another issue the jews there are mainly atheist, secular, and really don't get along with the religious jews so there in you have another problem.

I think if I lived in Israel (God forbid) I'd live in Palestine, gaza , as far away from the jews as can be, I'd rather live with oppressed Palestinians that the arrogant ungodly jews.

Do you mean return it to themselves because they bought it prior to 1948

Give the land back that was stolen, but Israel wont. This will go on till Israel has it all. They are rewriting history as it is, one can't find a WWII movie not bias towards the Jews. The NG and History channels might as well be called "Hitler". I imagine in say 50 years, Palestinians, who were they, just like the Canaanites, just a distance memory. Jews still believe in Yahweh, their war god.[/QUOTE]





The land is Jewish under International law, and in 1949 the arab muslims forcibly evicted the Jews and took their land. It is detailed in the Jordanian law books if you look. So the facts show that you are talking shite.[/QUOTE]

No I'm sorry, The Arabs fought the Jews when they encroached on their land and well the Indians did the same with the white man. The Jews could of went on their own, a few at a time, but they had to create WWII to have a reason and some money to do mass immigration to Palestine. The secular jews did not care about the polish religious, aged or young jews, they wanted the poor ones to work the land , and young men, who could fight. By the time the war started most German jews had fled to Africa, the US and Britain.

 

[Coyote]

Two states.

 

[Coyote]

The one state idea is intriguing and there are those who think it could work. I'm skeptical - the hate, fear and mistrust on both sides has only hardened. Both have their extremists that are unwilling to bend. The only way it could work would be to have a Nelson Mandella type figure and a truth & reconciliation type of plan but there is nothing remotely like that on the horizon.

 

[Daniyel]

Actually solving the I/P Conflict is probably one of the biggest achievements for mediating between the Western world and the M.E./Arab Muslims that would impact the rest of the world indirectly - Something Obama and Kerry knows very well. Having a solution - even a temporarily real status quo - could lead to one of the biggest revolutions in the world in terms of economy, war on terrorism, ethnic tolerance, and human perspective. It probably won't be the cure to all of our problems, but it could be a major milestone on the road to a better world.

I disagree, it would have zero effect on anything. The world was at war before israel was founded in 1948, and has been constantly at war since. Israel is merely a fig leaf the muslims hide behind to try and use as a grievance for sympathy from useful idiot Westerners lacking a full historical presentation and understanding of the conflicts in the region. It would have absolutely no effect on africa, sunni muslim-vs-shia muslim violence throughout the mideast, chinese conflict with uighars, mindanao muslim problems in the phillippines, the wars in the caucuses, afghanistan, pakistan/India, etc.

I was referring to Israel-US-Palestinians if we speaking in regard of Sonny Clark pos.
The rest of the Muslim world would be influenced all one step at a time, could firstly be Egypt, maybe later on Saudi Arabia, hopefully Turkey next, and beyond that I think maybe the world would be more attending to other conflicts - possibly Pakistan - India.
The most important benefit would be in breaking the mental barrier of human perspective.
Maybe I'm just an optimist but this is what I believe in, changing the world is by changing human nature.

 

[Coyote]

Actually solving the I/P Conflict is probably one of the biggest achievements for mediating between the Western world and the M.E./Arab Muslims that would impact the rest of the world indirectly - Something Obama and Kerry knows very well. Having a solution - even a temporarily real status quo - could lead to one of the biggest revolutions in the world in terms of economy, war on terrorism, ethnic tolerance, and human perspective. It probably won't be the cure to all of our problems, but it could be a major milestone on the road to a better world.

I disagree, it would have zero effect on anything. The world was at war before israel was founded in 1948, and has been constantly at war since. Israel is merely a fig leaf the muslims hide behind to try and use as a grievance for sympathy from useful idiot Westerners lacking a full historical presentation and understanding of the conflicts in the region. It would have absolutely no effect on africa, sunni muslim-vs-shia muslim violence throughout the mideast, chinese conflict with uighars, mindanao muslim problems in the phillippines, the wars in the caucuses, afghanistan, pakistan/India, etc.

I was referring to Israel-US-Palestinians if we speaking in regard of Sonny Clark pos.
The rest of the Muslim world would be influenced all one step at a time, could firstly be Egypt, maybe later on Saudi Arabia, hopefully Turkey next, and beyond that I think maybe the world would be more attending to other conflicts - possibly Pakistan - India.
The most important benefit would be in breaking the mental barrier of human perspective.
Maybe I'm just an optimist but this is what I believe in, changing the world is by changing human nature.

I totally agree.

 

[Daniyel]

The one state idea is intriguing and there are those who think it could work. I'm skeptical - the hate, fear and mistrust on both sides has only hardened. Both have their extremists that are unwilling to bend. The only way it could work would be to have a Nelson Mandella type figure and a truth & reconciliation type of plan but there is nothing remotely like that on the horizon.

Actually I'm more aligning to a "three(or two and a half)" states solution.

 

[Coyote]

The one state idea is intriguing and there are those who think it could work. I'm skeptical - the hate, fear and mistrust on both sides has only hardened. Both have their extremists that are unwilling to bend. The only way it could work would be to have a Nelson Mandella type figure and a truth & reconciliation type of plan but there is nothing remotely like that on the horizon.

Actually I'm more aligning to a "three(or two and a half)" states solution.

I don't think a half state is doable - it isn't working now is it? Are you thinking states of Gaza and Israel and WB half state?

 

[P F Tinmore]

I have stated before that Israel should have annexed all territory captured in 1967. It would have saved them a world of grief.

One state, of Israel.

Your point re: annexation is a valid one. I know of not even one Palestinian citizen of Israel who has opted to leave Israel to go live in some Arab country. Is there ANYONE who disagrees with this?

Why should they leave their homeland and live elsewhere?

What you refer to as "their homeland" is stolen land by the overwhelming majority of Palestinians without any titles or deeds whatsoever to the land they have been squatting on for generations.

As usual you are just shoveling Israeli bullshit.

6. The question of the availability of State Domain for Jewish settlement requires some explanation. It cannot be maintained that the Palestine Government has the free disposal of such lands, cultivable as well as waste, or that the Arab inhabitants have no claims in their apportionment.

Most of the cultivable State lands had been in occupation and under cultivation by Arabs for generations. They had owned the lands before the Ottoman Land Code was enacted, and, although, comparatively recently the Sultan acquired the titular ownership, the original possessors were not ousted and their position became that of tenants in perpetuity. They were allowed to sell their tenancy rights, and those rights were transmitted by inheritance to their descendants. Their position vis-à-vis the Sultan and, on his deposition, vis-à-vis the Turkish Government, was in some degree analogous to that of owners of ordinary Miri land.

Another question that has aroused considerable discussion is that of the Ghor Mudawwara Agreement of 1921, relating to the Baisan lands. It may be observed in regard to this question that it would not have been possible to grant Jewish settlers a share in the Baisan lands without buying out the rights of the Arabs, with their consent. That consent was not likely to have been obtained; nor could public funds have been applied to such a purpose. - See more at: Mandate for Palestine - Report of the Mandatory to the League of Nations 31 December 1930 ​

Did you see this in the header

As is" reference - not a United Nations document

Source: League of Nations 1930.

 

[P F Tinmore]

 

[toastman]

I think all of the posters should make clear if they are for a 2-state solution, one Palestine (Gd forbid) or one Israel. Even Norman Finklestein has come come to the realization that most pro-Palestinians want ALL of Israel. I think this is where we all stand:
pbel-2 states
monte-all Palestine
Billo reilly-2 states
Joe-all Palestine
toastman-2 states
Roudy-all Israel
Penelope-all Palestine

Too late for a two state since the hawkish jews have stole so much land and built on it, unless of course the Jews want to return the land?? Another issue the jews there are mainly atheist, secular, and really don't get along with the religious jews so there in you have another problem.

I think if I lived in Israel (God forbid) I'd live in Palestine, gaza , as far away from the jews as can be, I'd rather live with oppressed Palestinians that the arrogant ungodly jews.

Good, no one in Israel would want a scum Nazi like you anyway. But if you do go to Gaza, make sure there is a psychiatric hospital for you to live in.