Consider The Facts

[Shusha]

Let's get this part straight first. You would expel Muslim inhabitents of West Bank even though they'd lived there for generations - hundreds if not thousands of years?

You do realize that the Arab Muslim countries did exactly that to the Jewish people, don't you? Consider it an exchange of populations. It happened alot post WWII. And it happened in order to create an ethnic and cultural cohesiveness which, in turn, created peace.

 

[Coyote]

The reason it should be, as you like to put it "carved out of Israel" is that that is there native land.

Its the Jewish people's native land as well. When can we be done carving? At what point does the carving stop?

Yes. It is. It legitimately belongs to two sets of people who've lived there for eons. If they both have rights, then there needs to be a way to divide it. No one is going to be entirely happy.

Actually, the Palestinians do have their own unique cultural aspects that differentiate them from other Arabicized cultures (I posted that earlier).

I'm not at all convinced that you demonstrated any difference between Palestinians as distinct from Jordanians.

I pointed out distinct differences that were uniquely Palestinian. Are you going to move the goalposts?

What do you propose to do with Gaza? No way to hook it up to any of the West Bank while meeting Israel's needs for security and both their needs for continuity.

Gaza sort of took care of that itself by electing Hamas. But there is no "need" for contiguity. Or Alaska should be in Canada.

[/QUOTE]

I think a lack of contiguity causes problems more often than not - Alaska is more of an anomoly isn't it? There are also enough differences between Gazan's and Palestinians in the Westbank to cause difficulties in creating one nation amongst them.

 

[Shusha]

I pointed out distinct differences that were uniquely Palestinian. Are you going to move the goalposts?

Not at all. I am leaving the goalposts EXACTLY where they have always been. Showing that "Palestinian" culture is different from Syrian, Iraqi and Lebanese culture is not enough to make a distinction between Jordanian culture and a separate, distinct Palestinian culture. Its not enough to warrant two nations instead of one. And THAT is and always has been the argument. There is no significant cultural differences between Jordan and "Palestine" thus culture is not a valid criteria for Palestinian statehood.

 

[Coyote]

Let's get this part straight first. You would expel Muslim inhabitents of West Bank even though they'd lived there for generations - hundreds if not thousands of years?

You do realize that the Arab Muslim countries did exactly that to the Jewish people, don't you? Consider it an exchange of populations. It happened alot post WWII. And it happened in order to create an ethnic and cultural cohesiveness which, in turn, created peace.

...that happened over 50 years ago... you'd think we'd have learned something, but hell no. So a people, who had some of the most horrendous things done to them, will now turn around and justify the same? Expelling 4.4 million people....in addition to the 5 million or so residing in refugee camps from previous expulsions and exodus due to conflict? 900,000 Jews expelled from a variety of countries justifies expelling 4.4 million. Some things don't change.

Unfortunately - unlike the Jews - there is no Palestinian "Israel" to take them.

 

[Coyote]

I pointed out distinct differences that were uniquely Palestinian. Are you going to move the goalposts?

Not at all. I am leaving the goalposts EXACTLY where they have always been. Showing that "Palestinian" culture is different from Syrian, Iraqi and Lebanese culture is not enough to make a distinction between Jordanian culture and a separate, distinct Palestinian culture. Its not enough to warrant two nations instead of one. And THAT is and always has been the argument. There is no significant cultural differences between Jordan and "Palestine" thus culture is not a valid criteria for Palestinian statehood.

The articles I quoted showed distinct Palestinian differences - I'm satisfied with it and I also don't happen to consider a distinct culture a necessary requirement for the creation of a nation. Oddly - this sort of propoganda only seems to matter when it comes to the Palestinians and the resulting need to insist they aren't a real people.

 

[Boston1]

i-n-d-i-g-e-n-o-u-s

I'm a lousy speller.

Is that a problem for you?

No worries, English is a difficult language.

The deal is you have yet to substantiate your claim that there is some difference between the Arab Mulsim colonists existing ( according to you ) within 100 feet or so of each other for all of known history, are somehow a distinctive cultural group deserving of some homeland, particularly carved out of Israel rather than Jordan.

My contention is there is absolutely not a shred of science to support your view.

There is nothing that says a people must be "unique" to be deserving of a nation. Nothing. I can point out multiple examples of nations where there is little unique difference between inhabitants. I think that is a distraction.

The reason it should be, as you like to put it "carved out of Israel" is that that is there native land.

Your solution is mass expulsions. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

How will you accomplish that?

The Arab Muslim colonists on the east bank of the Jordan in no way different from the Arab Muslim colonists on the west side ( about 100' away ).

Ergo the Arab Muslim colonists within the mandated area already have a state. A 75% stake actually within the mandated area, the Judaic peope, 25%. The two state solution

So how is a third or actually a fourth ( if you include Gaza ) state solution going to help ?

And why should any additional states be carved out of the 25% of the mandate awarded to Israel rather than the 75% awarded to the Arab Muslim colonists.

Actually, the Palestinians do have their own unique cultural aspects that differentiate them from other Arabicized cultures (I posted that earlier).

What do you propose to do with Gaza? No way to hook it up to any of the West Bank while meeting Israel's needs for security and both their needs for continuity.

I wouldn't "do" anything with Gaza, Israel already relinquished that part of its land to the Arab Muslim colonists and I can't imagine they'd want ti back. Particularly after building such a nice fence around it ;--)

As for the Arab Muslim colonists in Judea and Samaria I'd expel only those that weren't legitimate refugees.

Let's get this part straight first. You would expel Muslim inhabitents of West Bank even though they'd lived there for generations - hundreds if not thousands of years?

NO.

I'd detain and expel enemy combatants exactly as defined within the Geneva conventions.

 

[Shusha]

...that happened over 50 years ago... you'd think we'd have learned something, but hell no. So a people, who had some of the most horrendous things done to them, will now turn around and justify the same? Expelling 4.4 million people....in addition to the 5 million or so residing in refugee camps from previous expulsions and exodus due to conflict? 900,000 Jews expelled from a variety of countries justifies expelling 4.4 million. Some things don't change.

Unfortunately - unlike the Jews - there is no Palestinian "Israel" to take them.

It happened during the SAME EVENT. Israel should be commended that at a time when it was NORMAL to expel populations because of ethnic, cultural and political differences in times of war or in times immediately after war it chose not to do so. That was far and away morally superior to what happened elsewhere in the world. And yet elsewhere in the world we have peace exactly BECAUSE the populations were made cohesive. In the end, which do you think made for fewer deaths and fewer conflicts?

Those who are willing to stay and be at peace with Israel are welcome. They always have been. This is why Israel has the vibrant multi-ethnic culture that it does. Its only the HOSTILE population who wishes to destroy Israel that should leave.

And there IS a Palestinian country to take them. They don't want them, of course.

 

[Boston1]

Yes. It is. It legitimately belongs to two sets of people who've lived there for eons. If they both have rights, then there needs to be a way to divide it. No one is going to be entirely happy.

Can you prove it "legitimately" belongs to both people?

First you'd have to prove that the Arab Muslim colonizers had a legal right. If you recall the Arabs rejected every attempt to give it to them, instead they insisted on it all. Then you'd have to find a legal instrument which exactly defines the borders. Then you'd have to argue that acts of aggression do not give the defending nation a claim to territory necessary to its own defense. And of course you'd have to argue that there is no war and that martial law isn't enforceable.

Also you claim to have provided evidence of the Arab Muslim colonists on one side of the Jordan ( about 100' away from each other ) are somehow unique from Arab Muslim colonists on the other side.

If you could repeat that information, I'd appreciate it, I must have missed it.

 

[Shusha]

The articles I quoted showed distinct Palestinian differences -

Distinct differences between who?

 

[Boston1]

I think Coyote's referencing that genetic study that didn't include any information about who was studied. As a family history would be critical to any such study, particularly given that he's got a whole different view of what an Arab Muslim colonist is than I do.

Also when considering genetic studies its imperative to discriminate markers very carefully, after all we also have 99% of our genetic code in common with Chimpanzees, but I wouldn't suggest returning Chimps to their native homeland in Meca.

There's very little to say the markers he's considering have more to do with hair color than they do with anything indicative of race.

In short the genetic studies are very tricky, unless you really know genetics, its just about impossible to make a fair determination based on such esoteric information.

 

[MJB12741]

i-n-d-i-g-e-n-o-u-s

I'm a lousy speller.

Is that a problem for you?

No worries, English is a difficult language.

The deal is you have yet to substantiate your claim that there is some difference between the Arab Mulsim colonists existing ( according to you ) within 100 feet or so of each other for all of known history, are somehow a distinctive cultural group deserving of some homeland, particularly carved out of Israel rather than Jordan.

My contention is there is absolutely not a shred of science to support your view.

The Arab Muslim colonists on the east bank of the Jordan in no way different from the Arab Muslim colonists on the west side ( about 100' away ).

Ergo the Arab Muslim colonists within the mandated area already have a state. A 75% stake actually within the mandated area, the Judaic peope, 25%. The two state solution

So how is a third or actually a fourth ( if you include Gaza ) state solution going to help ?

And why should any additional states be carved out of the 25% of the mandate awarded to Israel rather than the 75% awarded to the Arab Muslim colonists.

Unless & until Palestinian leadership accepts the fact that Israel is there to stay, threre will no peace & no reason for peace negotiations.

I agree. And I would add to that that unless the Israeli leadership accepts the Palestinians are there to stay, there will be no peace nor reason for negotiations. As Netanyahu said: no Palestinian state ever.

That is true. Both sides must accept the fact that both sides have people who are there to stay, barring some total genocide which cannot possibly happen as the people on both sides are too intermingled. As for your comment on Netanyahu, that was not his original position. It changed through necessity in that all previous attemps for peace offered by Israel have been thanked with jihads & intifadas killing Israeli's.

 

[Boston1]

Peace will only occur when two things happen. The UN stops supporting active terrorists and combatants in the mandated area for the creation of a national Jewish homeland and when the Israeli's exorcize their rights under international law and expel the terrorists and combatants to their native states. Jordan and or the rest of the Arab League.

 

[aris2chat]

i-n-d-i-g-e-n-o-u-s

I'm a lousy speller.

Is that a problem for you?

No worries, English is a difficult language.

The deal is you have yet to substantiate your claim that there is some difference between the Arab Mulsim colonists existing ( according to you ) within 100 feet or so of each other for all of known history, are somehow a distinctive cultural group deserving of some homeland, particularly carved out of Israel rather than Jordan.

My contention is there is absolutely not a shred of science to support your view.

There is nothing that says a people must be "unique" to be deserving of a nation. Nothing. I can point out multiple examples of nations where there is little unique difference between inhabitants. I think that is a distraction.

The reason it should be, as you like to put it "carved out of Israel" is that that is there native land.

Your solution is mass expulsions. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

How will you accomplish that?

The Arab Muslim colonists on the east bank of the Jordan in no way different from the Arab Muslim colonists on the west side ( about 100' away ).

Ergo the Arab Muslim colonists within the mandated area already have a state. A 75% stake actually within the mandated area, the Judaic peope, 25%. The two state solution

So how is a third or actually a fourth ( if you include Gaza ) state solution going to help ?

And why should any additional states be carved out of the 25% of the mandate awarded to Israel rather than the 75% awarded to the Arab Muslim colonists.

Actually, the Palestinians do have their own unique cultural aspects that differentiate them from other Arabicized cultures (I posted that earlier).

What do you propose to do with Gaza? No way to hook it up to any of the West Bank while meeting Israel's needs for security and both their needs for continuity.

I wouldn't "do" anything with Gaza, Israel already relinquished that part of its land to the Arab Muslim colonists and I can't imagine they'd want ti back. Particularly after building such a nice fence around it ;--)

As for the Arab Muslim colonists in Judea and Samaria I'd expel only those that weren't legitimate refugees.

Let's get this part straight first. You would expel Muslim inhabitents of West Bank even though they'd lived there for generations - hundreds if not thousands of years?

There are migrants, workers and illegals living in the US, but that does not make them american citizens or mean they have he right to be here permanently.
People might have lived and worked land but if they did not own the land, they have no rights after the and is sold. Some were offered a chance to register land and pay taxes for the land, many did not want want to or have the money to.
You can have a home for generation but if don't pay taxes or have a valid deed, you will loose the home. If you sell it and years later for "sentimental reason" want to have the sale nullified because it was your grandfathers, you will be laughed out of court. If for some reason it is offered back if you return the money and you don't have it, no one is going to give it back.

Your family might have lived for generation in an apartment, but if you don't pay rent or the building goes condo and you can't buy it, you have to leave.

Palestinians did not have to leave, the arab told them to and it was there choice to close their doors and hit the road so the land could be bathed in jewish blood. If they did not want to be Israelis, why should they be allowed back just because their grandmother was born there. When people migrate to the US and become citizens, just because your great great grandmother came from italy, does not mean you go the front of the line for italian citizenship.

Many countries require you to pick your country by age 18 if you are born in one country but one or both of your parents are born elsewhere. Some allow duel citizenship, it is not the same everywhere.

Parents, grandparents, great grandparents left, why should the children of today be allowed to claim land they have no deed or tax payment for? Why should they return as palestinians if the country is now Israel? Do they have money to buy land? Do they want to become citizens, learn the language, do army or community service, find a job and pay taxes as an Israeli?

Israel bought land in the WB and G in the 19th to mid 20th C. that they were forced to leave and tried to reclaim, with great hostility. Why were palestinians, arabs, churches willing to take their money and then think they will just give up and walk away?

Ottomans (before the young turks), LoN, Mandate and UN offered the jews a return to their historic and religious homeland. The land was greatly under populated, under developed, swamp and desert, but jews were willing to pay for and build.

Why should palestinians who were not born in Israel, perhaps not even their grandparents, have the gates of Israel swung open for them, when they still seek to wipe Israel off the global maps and out of history? Why?

Thousands have been allowed to reunite families and to get legal cases and land claims heard so they can return.

Why should all the others be allowed to enter, just "because"? Palestinians can't live in peace side by side with the Israeli state, why should they be let in?

Why?

PA and G did not want them. Even refugees being killed were not welcome in the WB or G. UN can't afford to support them any longer and limited funds are needed for those in even greater need, they are limited in even funding the very minimal needs for them. It is unfortunate but refugees have become a threat for nations that tried to open the door for them, why should Israel endanger it's people more than they are now?

The whole middle east and most of the world became "created" states. Populations, were brutally oppressed, moved, were forced to leave, were killed off, were renamed. Is india going to allow all the pakistanis back? Is China going to allow all the tibet buddhists to reestablish their government, give them back all their land? Are all the sikhs going to be allowed to their land without persecution by muslims? Are the armeneans and kurds going to be given back all their historic land and be allowed to live in peace?

Jews were offered a homeland in the early to mid 19th C. They were offered a homeland in the early 20th C. Israel has been forced to fight for their very existence ever since, why should they allow an enemy in if thee is no peace or disarmament? No willingness to become Israelis instead of palestinians?

If the palestinians wanted a homeland, why have they refused it so many times?

 

[MJB12741]

I'm a lousy speller.

Is that a problem for you?

No worries, English is a difficult language.

The deal is you have yet to substantiate your claim that there is some difference between the Arab Mulsim colonists existing ( according to you ) within 100 feet or so of each other for all of known history, are somehow a distinctive cultural group deserving of some homeland, particularly carved out of Israel rather than Jordan.

My contention is there is absolutely not a shred of science to support your view.

There is nothing that says a people must be "unique" to be deserving of a nation. Nothing. I can point out multiple examples of nations where there is little unique difference between inhabitants. I think that is a distraction.

The reason it should be, as you like to put it "carved out of Israel" is that that is there native land.

Your solution is mass expulsions. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

How will you accomplish that?

The Arab Muslim colonists on the east bank of the Jordan in no way different from the Arab Muslim colonists on the west side ( about 100' away ).

Ergo the Arab Muslim colonists within the mandated area already have a state. A 75% stake actually within the mandated area, the Judaic peope, 25%. The two state solution

So how is a third or actually a fourth ( if you include Gaza ) state solution going to help ?

And why should any additional states be carved out of the 25% of the mandate awarded to Israel rather than the 75% awarded to the Arab Muslim colonists.

Actually, the Palestinians do have their own unique cultural aspects that differentiate them from other Arabicized cultures (I posted that earlier).

What do you propose to do with Gaza? No way to hook it up to any of the West Bank while meeting Israel's needs for security and both their needs for continuity.

I wouldn't "do" anything with Gaza, Israel already relinquished that part of its land to the Arab Muslim colonists and I can't imagine they'd want ti back. Particularly after building such a nice fence around it ;--)

As for the Arab Muslim colonists in Judea and Samaria I'd expel only those that weren't legitimate refugees.

Let's get this part straight first. You would expel Muslim inhabitents of West Bank even though they'd lived there for generations - hundreds if not thousands of years?

There are migrants, workers and illegals living in the US, but that does not make them american citizens or mean they have he right to be here permanently.
People might have lived and worked land but if they did not own the land, they have no rights after the and is sold. Some were offered a chance to register land and pay taxes for the land, many did not want want to or have the money to.
You can have a home for generation but if don't pay taxes or have a valid deed, you will loose the home. If you sell it and years later for "sentimental reason" want to have the sale nullified because it was your grandfathers, you will be laughed out of court. If for some reason it is offered back if you return the money and you don't have it, no one is going to give it back.

Your family might have lived for generation in an apartment, but if you don't pay rent or the building goes condo and you can't buy it, you have to leave.

Palestinians did not have to leave, the arab told them to and it was there choice to close their doors and hit the road so the land could be bathed in jewish blood. If they did not want to be Israelis, why should they be allowed back just because their grandmother was born there. When people migrate to the US and become citizens, just because your great great grandmother came from italy, does not mean you go the front of the line for italian citizenship.

Many countries require you to pick your country by age 18 if you are born in one country but one or both of your parents are born elsewhere. Some allow duel citizenship, it is not the same everywhere.

Parents, grandparents, great grandparents left, why should the children of today be allowed to claim land they have no deed or tax payment for? Why should they return as palestinians if the country is now Israel? Do they have money to buy land? Do they want to become citizens, learn the language, do army or community service, find a job and pay taxes as an Israeli?

Israel bought land in the WB and G in the 19th to mid 20th C. that they were forced to leave and tried to reclaim, with great hostility. Why were palestinians, arabs, churches willing to take their money and then think they will just give up and walk away?

Ottomans (before the young turks), LoN, Mandate and UN offered the jews a return to their historic and religious homeland. The land was greatly under populated, under developed, swamp and desert, but jews were willing to pay for and build.

Why should palestinians who were not born in Israel, perhaps not even their grandparents, have the gates of Israel swung open for them, when they still seek to wipe Israel off the global maps and out of history? Why?

Thousands have been allowed to reunite families and to get legal cases and land claims heard so they can return.

Why should all the others be allowed to enter, just "because"? Palestinians can't live in peace side by side with the Israeli state, why should they be let in?

Why?

PA and G did not want them. Even refugees being killed were not welcome in the WB or G. UN can't afford to support them any longer and limited funds are needed for those in even greater need, they are limited in even funding the very minimal needs for them. It is unfortunate but refugees have become a threat for nations that tried to open the door for them, why should Israel endanger it's people more than they are now?

The whole middle east and most of the world became "created" states. Populations, were brutally oppressed, moved, were forced to leave, were killed off, were renamed. Is india going to allow all the pakistanis back? Is China going to allow all the tibet buddhists to reestablish their government, give them back all their land? Are all the sikhs going to be allowed to their land without persecution by muslims? Are the armeneans and kurds going to be given back all their historic land and be allowed to live in peace?

Jews were offered a homeland in the early to mid 19th C. They were offered a homeland in the early 20th C. Israel has been forced to fight for their very existence ever since, why should they allow an enemy in if thee is no peace or disarmament? No willingness to become Israelis instead of palestinians?

If the palestinians wanted a homeland, why have they refused it so many times?

Better the Palestinians have Israel around to suck off of to provide for them.

 

[Coyote]

I'm a lousy speller.

Is that a problem for you?

No worries, English is a difficult language.

The deal is you have yet to substantiate your claim that there is some difference between the Arab Mulsim colonists existing ( according to you ) within 100 feet or so of each other for all of known history, are somehow a distinctive cultural group deserving of some homeland, particularly carved out of Israel rather than Jordan.

My contention is there is absolutely not a shred of science to support your view.

There is nothing that says a people must be "unique" to be deserving of a nation. Nothing. I can point out multiple examples of nations where there is little unique difference between inhabitants. I think that is a distraction.

The reason it should be, as you like to put it "carved out of Israel" is that that is there native land.

Your solution is mass expulsions. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

How will you accomplish that?

The Arab Muslim colonists on the east bank of the Jordan in no way different from the Arab Muslim colonists on the west side ( about 100' away ).

Ergo the Arab Muslim colonists within the mandated area already have a state. A 75% stake actually within the mandated area, the Judaic peope, 25%. The two state solution

So how is a third or actually a fourth ( if you include Gaza ) state solution going to help ?

And why should any additional states be carved out of the 25% of the mandate awarded to Israel rather than the 75% awarded to the Arab Muslim colonists.

Actually, the Palestinians do have their own unique cultural aspects that differentiate them from other Arabicized cultures (I posted that earlier).

What do you propose to do with Gaza? No way to hook it up to any of the West Bank while meeting Israel's needs for security and both their needs for continuity.

I wouldn't "do" anything with Gaza, Israel already relinquished that part of its land to the Arab Muslim colonists and I can't imagine they'd want ti back. Particularly after building such a nice fence around it ;--)

As for the Arab Muslim colonists in Judea and Samaria I'd expel only those that weren't legitimate refugees.

Let's get this part straight first. You would expel Muslim inhabitents of West Bank even though they'd lived there for generations - hundreds if not thousands of years?

There are migrants, workers and illegals living in the US, but that does not make them american citizens or mean they have he right to be here permanently.
People might have lived and worked land but if they did not own the land, they have no rights after the and is sold. Some were offered a chance to register land and pay taxes for the land, many did not want want to or have the money to.
You can have a home for generation but if don't pay taxes or have a valid deed, you will loose the home. If you sell it and years later for "sentimental reason" want to have the sale nullified because it was your grandfathers, you will be laughed out of court. If for some reason it is offered back if you return the money and you don't have it, no one is going to give it back.

Your family might have lived for generation in an apartment, but if you don't pay rent or the building goes condo and you can't buy it, you have to leave.

Palestinians did not have to leave, the arab told them to and it was there choice to close their doors and hit the road so the land could be bathed in jewish blood. If they did not want to be Israelis, why should they be allowed back just because their grandmother was born there. When people migrate to the US and become citizens, just because your great great grandmother came from italy, does not mean you go the front of the line for italian citizenship.

Many countries require you to pick your country by age 18 if you are born in one country but one or both of your parents are born elsewhere. Some allow duel citizenship, it is not the same everywhere.

Parents, grandparents, great grandparents left, why should the children of today be allowed to claim land they have no deed or tax payment for? Why should they return as palestinians if the country is now Israel? Do they have money to buy land? Do they want to become citizens, learn the language, do army or community service, find a job and pay taxes as an Israeli?

Israel bought land in the WB and G in the 19th to mid 20th C. that they were forced to leave and tried to reclaim, with great hostility. Why were palestinians, arabs, churches willing to take their money and then think they will just give up and walk away?

Ottomans (before the young turks), LoN, Mandate and UN offered the jews a return to their historic and religious homeland. The land was greatly under populated, under developed, swamp and desert, but jews were willing to pay for and build.

Why should palestinians who were not born in Israel, perhaps not even their grandparents, have the gates of Israel swung open for them, when they still seek to wipe Israel off the global maps and out of history? Why?

Thousands have been allowed to reunite families and to get legal cases and land claims heard so they can return.

Why should all the others be allowed to enter, just "because"? Palestinians can't live in peace side by side with the Israeli state, why should they be let in?

Why?

PA and G did not want them. Even refugees being killed were not welcome in the WB or G. UN can't afford to support them any longer and limited funds are needed for those in even greater need, they are limited in even funding the very minimal needs for them. It is unfortunate but refugees have become a threat for nations that tried to open the door for them, why should Israel endanger it's people more than they are now?

The whole middle east and most of the world became "created" states. Populations, were brutally oppressed, moved, were forced to leave, were killed off, were renamed. Is india going to allow all the pakistanis back? Is China going to allow all the tibet buddhists to reestablish their government, give them back all their land? Are all the sikhs going to be allowed to their land without persecution by muslims? Are the armeneans and kurds going to be given back all their historic land and be allowed to live in peace?

Jews were offered a homeland in the early to mid 19th C. They were offered a homeland in the early 20th C. Israel has been forced to fight for their very existence ever since, why should they allow an enemy in if thee is no peace or disarmament? No willingness to become Israelis instead of palestinians?

If the palestinians wanted a homeland, why have they refused it so many times?

We've been back and forth on this before...


You know, don't you - that Israel is one of those created states? So, now that they have their state they can sit back and deny another?

But I think your missing the point. No one is talking about the "right of return" - Israel accepting them all. There IS contested territory - Occupied Territories. That is what we're talking about. That and allowing a state for a STATELESS people. Give it to them and if they F it up, they suffer the international consequences. There is NO OTHER people I can think of who's existence is defined by the propoganda of another state, who's ability to have a state is contingent upon upteen requirements of that other state. Israel was won in blood and terrorism. They have their state. Now, their opponents, wanting the same thing and using the same methods are held to a higher standard. Why? So Israel can claim the entire enchilada?

What would you do with the Palestinians Aris? You seem to think the Israeli's are angels who do no wrong. So would you expel them from the West Bank and Gaza? Where would you send over 4 million people that the pro-Israeli's want to pretend aren't "a people"?

 

[Coyote]

Peace will only occur when two things happen. The UN stops supporting active terrorists and combatants in the mandated area for the creation of a national Jewish homeland and when the Israeli's exorcize their rights under international law and expel the terrorists and combatants to their native states. Jordan and or the rest of the Arab League.

Addendum:

When Israel recognizes that the Palestinians are a legitimate people with a legitimate grievance and when Israel stops it's program of building settlements in contested territory.

 

[Coyote]

i-n-d-i-g-e-n-o-u-s

I'm a lousy speller.

Is that a problem for you?

No worries, English is a difficult language.

The deal is you have yet to substantiate your claim that there is some difference between the Arab Mulsim colonists existing ( according to you ) within 100 feet or so of each other for all of known history, are somehow a distinctive cultural group deserving of some homeland, particularly carved out of Israel rather than Jordan.

My contention is there is absolutely not a shred of science to support your view.

The Arab Muslim colonists on the east bank of the Jordan in no way different from the Arab Muslim colonists on the west side ( about 100' away ).

Ergo the Arab Muslim colonists within the mandated area already have a state. A 75% stake actually within the mandated area, the Judaic peope, 25%. The two state solution

So how is a third or actually a fourth ( if you include Gaza ) state solution going to help ?

And why should any additional states be carved out of the 25% of the mandate awarded to Israel rather than the 75% awarded to the Arab Muslim colonists.

Unless & until Palestinian leadership accepts the fact that Israel is there to stay, threre will no peace & no reason for peace negotiations.

I agree. And I would add to that that unless the Israeli leadership accepts the Palestinians are there to stay, there will be no peace nor reason for negotiations. As Netanyahu said: no Palestinian state ever.

That is true. Both sides must accept the fact that both sides have people who are there to stay, barring some total genocide which cannot possibly happen as the people on both sides are too intermingled. As for your comment on Netanyahu, that was not his original position. It changed through necessity in that all previous attemps for peace offered by Israel have been thanked with jihads & intifadas killing Israeli's.

I disagree. Looking at his record in the "peace process" and the flaunting of any attempts to halt settlements - I think that statement reflected his REAL intent.

 

[Coyote]

I'm a lousy speller.

Is that a problem for you?

No worries, English is a difficult language.

The deal is you have yet to substantiate your claim that there is some difference between the Arab Mulsim colonists existing ( according to you ) within 100 feet or so of each other for all of known history, are somehow a distinctive cultural group deserving of some homeland, particularly carved out of Israel rather than Jordan.

My contention is there is absolutely not a shred of science to support your view.

There is nothing that says a people must be "unique" to be deserving of a nation. Nothing. I can point out multiple examples of nations where there is little unique difference between inhabitants. I think that is a distraction.

The reason it should be, as you like to put it "carved out of Israel" is that that is there native land.

Your solution is mass expulsions. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

How will you accomplish that?

The Arab Muslim colonists on the east bank of the Jordan in no way different from the Arab Muslim colonists on the west side ( about 100' away ).

Ergo the Arab Muslim colonists within the mandated area already have a state. A 75% stake actually within the mandated area, the Judaic peope, 25%. The two state solution

So how is a third or actually a fourth ( if you include Gaza ) state solution going to help ?

And why should any additional states be carved out of the 25% of the mandate awarded to Israel rather than the 75% awarded to the Arab Muslim colonists.

Actually, the Palestinians do have their own unique cultural aspects that differentiate them from other Arabicized cultures (I posted that earlier).

What do you propose to do with Gaza? No way to hook it up to any of the West Bank while meeting Israel's needs for security and both their needs for continuity.

I wouldn't "do" anything with Gaza, Israel already relinquished that part of its land to the Arab Muslim colonists and I can't imagine they'd want ti back. Particularly after building such a nice fence around it ;--)

As for the Arab Muslim colonists in Judea and Samaria I'd expel only those that weren't legitimate refugees.

Let's get this part straight first. You would expel Muslim inhabitents of West Bank even though they'd lived there for generations - hundreds if not thousands of years?

NO.

I'd detain and expel enemy combatants exactly as defined within the Geneva conventions.

That is not what you said - what you said was: As for the Arab Muslim colonists in Judea and Samaria I'd expel only those that weren't legitimate refugees.

 

[Coyote]

...that happened over 50 years ago... you'd think we'd have learned something, but hell no. So a people, who had some of the most horrendous things done to them, will now turn around and justify the same? Expelling 4.4 million people....in addition to the 5 million or so residing in refugee camps from previous expulsions and exodus due to conflict? 900,000 Jews expelled from a variety of countries justifies expelling 4.4 million. Some things don't change.

Unfortunately - unlike the Jews - there is no Palestinian "Israel" to take them.

It happened during the SAME EVENT. Israel should be commended that at a time when it was NORMAL to expel populations because of ethnic, cultural and political differences in times of war or in times immediately after war it chose not to do so. That was far and away morally superior to what happened elsewhere in the world. And yet elsewhere in the world we have peace exactly BECAUSE the populations were made cohesive. In the end, which do you think made for fewer deaths and fewer conflicts?

Is it NORMAL today?

If there is no nation to take them...how is it morally superior?

How is generations growing up in refugee camps for the sake of "cohesive" populations something to strive for? Doesn't that sound rather like what Hitler was trying to achieve? Except, then - no one would take the Jews.

Those who are willing to stay and be at peace with Israel are welcome. They always have been. This is why Israel has the vibrant multi-ethnic culture that it does. Its only the HOSTILE population who wishes to destroy Israel that should leave.

And there IS a Palestinian country to take them. They don't want them, of course.

There is no Palestinian country to take them - that's just an excuse for ethnic cleansing - for forceably removing people from a land they have occupied for centuries.

You think this is a good thing - something we should support and be greatful for?

I disagree. Totally and unequivocably (and spelling be damned). There is no humanity or justness in that outlook. It is regressive.

 

[Boston1]

Peace will only occur when two things happen. The UN stops supporting active terrorists and combatants in the mandated area for the creation of a national Jewish homeland and when the Israeli's exorcize their rights under international law and expel the terrorists and combatants to their native states. Jordan and or the rest of the Arab League.

Addendum:

When Israel recognizes that the Palestinians are a legitimate people with a legitimate grievance and when Israel stops it's program of building settlements in contested territory.

Who'm you call the palestinians are no different than who the rest of us call Jordanians. As such they have already been awarded 75% + of the mandated area and are not entitled to one more inch.

PS
There is no requirement for moral superiority but their is an obligation to provide peace. If the Arab Muslim colonists wanted peace, they wouldn't in the pickle they're in today.