Honestly Carter Never Sounded So Smart

[GHook93]

Look he was a bad bad president, even worse than Bush! But he has a point. A free independent Palestine is Israel's only option! They must take it or time will seal their fate to be ruled by the Palestinians! The Palestinians with the dispora, refugees (3 million in the ME and outside Israel) and 4 mill in Gaza and WB and 1.1 million in Israel, combine that with the Palestinian rabbit like birth rates. Now if you only took Gaza, WB and Israeli Arabs you have 5.1 mil to 6 mil Jews! If would only be a matter of time before the Palestinians well outnumbered the Jews.

He says Israel has 3 options with the one state solution:
(1) Expel a large number of Palestinians! If so where do you send them. You need a willing partner to take them and none of Israel's neighbors will help. This move would anger (and justifiably so) the whole world. Even the US would turn on Israel. Note: without the US and EU support Israel would be finished!

(2) Apartheid: Take away the eventual rights of Palestinians aka the South African Blacks. Again the Palestinians would inevitable become the majority. Apartheid regime don't have a long life and if Israel took this option, then again the whole world would turn on them. There would be inevitable Palestinian uprising, with help from her Arab neighbors. The Israel government would inevitably fall and Israel would be wiped off the map!

(3) Keep the Democracy and give equal rights the way they currently give the Israel Arabs: The Palestinian would unit and become the majority and simply vote away Israel.

None of these options for a one state solution is very good if your an Israeli Jew! Carter also points out that going back the '67 lines is also not an option. He agrees that Israel should give equal land for equal land taken, including a corridor. Israel MUST remove many settlements. This means taking on many of their own citizens, but its going to be necessary, but tough. Too bad they don't have a strong and committed leader like Sharon. Sharon knew that the only way for peace is to evacuate Gaza and eventually the West Bank. The opposition was strong, but he succeed!

The Palestinians are not off the hook either. They have to stop their love of terror. They must accept the fact that equal land given for equal land taken is not a bad offer (especially when your going to get 98% of the original land you wanted). And stop the ignorant rhetoric that Israel must take the Palestinian refugees. No country would be willing to take on millions of enemies of the state.

I personally time is not on Israel's side. There is no way status quo will last forever!
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1232643757420&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

"If we look toward a one-state solution, which seems to be the trend - I hope not inexorable - it would be a catastrophe for Israel, because there would be only three options in that case," Carter said.

Those would be to expel large numbers of Palestinians, deprive the Palestinians of equal voting rights, or to give them equal voting rights and therefore the majority, he said. "And you would no longer have a Jewish state," Carter predicted.

"The basic decisions would be made by the Palestinians, who would almost very likely vote in a bloc, whereas you would have some sharp divisions among the Israelis, because the Israelis always have different points of view," he said.

On the other hand, the other two options would amount to "ethnic cleansing" in the first case, or "apartheid" in the second.

Carter's wording was not new. His 2006 book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," provoked a hail of criticism, particularly from Jewish-Americans who felt it unfairly compared Israeli treatment of Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza to the legalized racial oppression that once existed in South Africa.

Carter spoke to The Associated Press as his new book, "We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land," was released.

Carter still believes a two-state solution is the best option, with Israel's right to exist in peace being recognized by all its Arab neighbors, and Israel withdrawing from most of the land it captured in the 1967 Six Day War to create an independent Palestine.

This is "almost completely compatible" with UN resolutions, US official policy, and an Arab peace proposal that called for a land-for-peace swap, Carter said.

A complete return to the 1967 borders would be impossible, he said, but Israel should swap some land with the Palestinians, either east of the Gaza Strip or in a corridor between the Gaza and the West Bank.

This corridor "would still be controlled by Israel, but it would give a passageway for Palestinians to go back and forth between the two parts of their county," from Gaza to the West Bank, he said.

Carter said that "nobody that I know of" in the Middle East currently has the stature and courage to take a risk for peace.

 

[Sunni Man]

I am No fan of Carter

But I heard this interveiw on TV

His ideas need to be listened to and acted upon

 

[sealybobo]

Carter was set up to fail. He was too liberal to be president. The GOP fucked him. That's why Clinton was a Centrist and that is also why most people assume Obama will be too.

But now the Dems own all three branches of gov. This is our time to really take special interest out of politics.

Corporations will always lobby our politicians, but right now they have too much power.

The Federal Reserve has too much power. The oil companies have too much power. Healthcare has too much power.

We need to socialize these things.

Carter was too good of a man to be president. The GOP and Corporations didn't like him so they sabotaged him.

If you look back at the things Carter did do in his 4 years, he was a great great honest/good/caring man.

I'm hoping Obama is better at playing politics than Carter, but also hoping Obama is as good of a person as Carter was. I believe he is.

And he's more than capable of handling the Washington insiders.

Now lets see if Obama can tame corporate America or will they tame him.

 

[toomuchtime_]

Look he was a bad bad president, even worse than Bush! But he has a point. A free independent Palestine is Israel's only option! They must take it or time will seal their fate to be ruled by the Palestinians! The Palestinians with the dispora, refugees (3 million in the ME and outside Israel) and 4 mill in Gaza and WB and 1.1 million in Israel, combine that with the Palestinian rabbit like birth rates. Now if you only took Gaza, WB and Israeli Arabs you have 5.1 mil to 6 mil Jews! If would only be a matter of time before the Palestinians well outnumbered the Jews.

He says Israel has 3 options with the one state solution:
(1) Expel a large number of Palestinians! If so where do you send them. You need a willing partner to take them and none of Israel's neighbors will help. This move would anger (and justifiably so) the whole world. Even the US would turn on Israel. Note: without the US and EU support Israel would be finished!

(2) Apartheid: Take away the eventual rights of Palestinians aka the South African Blacks. Again the Palestinians would inevitable become the majority. Apartheid regime don't have a long life and if Israel took this option, then again the whole world would turn on them. There would be inevitable Palestinian uprising, with help from her Arab neighbors. The Israel government would inevitably fall and Israel would be wiped off the map!

(3) Keep the Democracy and give equal rights the way they currently give the Israel Arabs: The Palestinian would unit and become the majority and simply vote away Israel.

None of these options for a one state solution is very good if your an Israeli Jew! Carter also points out that going back the '67 lines is also not an option. He agrees that Israel should give equal land for equal land taken, including a corridor. Israel MUST remove many settlements. This means taking on many of their own citizens, but its going to be necessary, but tough. Too bad they don't have a strong and committed leader like Sharon. Sharon knew that the only way for peace is to evacuate Gaza and eventually the West Bank. The opposition was strong, but he succeed!

The Palestinians are not off the hook either. They have to stop their love of terror. They must accept the fact that equal land given for equal land taken is not a bad offer (especially when your going to get 98% of the original land you wanted). And stop the ignorant rhetoric that Israel must take the Palestinian refugees. No country would be willing to take on millions of enemies of the state.

I personally time is not on Israel's side. There is no way status quo will last forever!
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1232643757420&pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull

"If we look toward a one-state solution, which seems to be the trend - I hope not inexorable - it would be a catastrophe for Israel, because there would be only three options in that case," Carter said.

Those would be to expel large numbers of Palestinians, deprive the Palestinians of equal voting rights, or to give them equal voting rights and therefore the majority, he said. "And you would no longer have a Jewish state," Carter predicted.

"The basic decisions would be made by the Palestinians, who would almost very likely vote in a bloc, whereas you would have some sharp divisions among the Israelis, because the Israelis always have different points of view," he said.

On the other hand, the other two options would amount to "ethnic cleansing" in the first case, or "apartheid" in the second.

Carter's wording was not new. His 2006 book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," provoked a hail of criticism, particularly from Jewish-Americans who felt it unfairly compared Israeli treatment of Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza to the legalized racial oppression that once existed in South Africa.

Carter spoke to The Associated Press as his new book, "We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land," was released.

Carter still believes a two-state solution is the best option, with Israel's right to exist in peace being recognized by all its Arab neighbors, and Israel withdrawing from most of the land it captured in the 1967 Six Day War to create an independent Palestine.

This is "almost completely compatible" with UN resolutions, US official policy, and an Arab peace proposal that called for a land-for-peace swap, Carter said.

A complete return to the 1967 borders would be impossible, he said, but Israel should swap some land with the Palestinians, either east of the Gaza Strip or in a corridor between the Gaza and the West Bank.

This corridor "would still be controlled by Israel, but it would give a passageway for Palestinians to go back and forth between the two parts of their county," from Gaza to the West Bank, he said.

Carter said that "nobody that I know of" in the Middle East currently has the stature and courage to take a risk for peace.

Carter is wrong. First off, no two state solution is possible unless the Palestinians can form a government that is able and willing to guarantee peace to Israel and that is not going to happen anytime in the foreseeable future. It's a feel good idea but not a real option. Second, the Palestinians are not just Israel's problem as we can see from Egypt's frantic efforts to counter Hamas' influence in Gaza and Jordan's efforts to help the PA control the militants in the West Bank. As the Palestinian population continues to grow, it will become an increasingly destabilizing influence in Jordan and Egypt, and these countries will become just as eager as Israel to find a arrangement that will relieve this pressure and will likely be willing to share this responsibility with Israel; they already are to some extent. As this cooperation continues to grow, the logical solution will be for Israel to pull back to its 1967 borders plus the major settlements, only 6% or the West Bank, and for Egypt to absorb Gaza and Jordan to reabsorb the West Bank.

If we look backward at the history of the region, this may seem an unlikely outcome, but it is no more unlikely than that the Palestinians will be able to unite behind a government that will be willing and able to guarantee peace to Israel, and it makes more sense for the Arabs in the territories to become part of Arab states as to become part of the Jewish state of Israel. We should recall that this problem was created by Egypt, Jordan and Syria by first radicalizing the Palestinians and then bringing the 1967 war that put the Palestinians under Israeli jurisdiction and then refusing Israel's offer of land for peace for all these years. Only the most biased observer would conclude that the responsibility for what happens to the Palestinians in the future should fall only on Israel.

 

[Sunni Man]

Look he was a bad bad president, even worse than Bush! But he has a point. A free independent Palestine is Israel's only option! They must take it or time will seal their fate to be ruled by the Palestinians! The Palestinians with the dispora, refugees (3 million in the ME and outside Israel) and 4 mill in Gaza and WB and 1.1 million in Israel, combine that with the Palestinian rabbit like birth rates. Now if you only took Gaza, WB and Israeli Arabs you have 5.1 mil to 6 mil Jews! If would only be a matter of time before the Palestinians well outnumbered the Jews.

He says Israel has 3 options with the one state solution:
(1) Expel a large number of Palestinians! If so where do you send them. You need a willing partner to take them and none of Israel's neighbors will help. This move would anger (and justifiably so) the whole world. Even the US would turn on Israel. Note: without the US and EU support Israel would be finished!

(2) Apartheid: Take away the eventual rights of Palestinians aka the South African Blacks. Again the Palestinians would inevitable become the majority. Apartheid regime don't have a long life and if Israel took this option, then again the whole world would turn on them. There would be inevitable Palestinian uprising, with help from her Arab neighbors. The Israel government would inevitably fall and Israel would be wiped off the map!

(3) Keep the Democracy and give equal rights the way they currently give the Israel Arabs: The Palestinian would unit and become the majority and simply vote away Israel.

None of these options for a one state solution is very good if your an Israeli Jew! Carter also points out that going back the '67 lines is also not an option. He agrees that Israel should give equal land for equal land taken, including a corridor. Israel MUST remove many settlements. This means taking on many of their own citizens, but its going to be necessary, but tough. Too bad they don't have a strong and committed leader like Sharon. Sharon knew that the only way for peace is to evacuate Gaza and eventually the West Bank. The opposition was strong, but he succeed!

The Palestinians are not off the hook either. They have to stop their love of terror. They must accept the fact that equal land given for equal land taken is not a bad offer (especially when your going to get 98% of the original land you wanted). And stop the ignorant rhetoric that Israel must take the Palestinian refugees. No country would be willing to take on millions of enemies of the state.

I personally time is not on Israel's side. There is no way status quo will last forever!
Carter: No Palestine, catastrophe for Israel | Israel | Jerusalem Post

"If we look toward a one-state solution, which seems to be the trend - I hope not inexorable - it would be a catastrophe for Israel, because there would be only three options in that case," Carter said.

Those would be to expel large numbers of Palestinians, deprive the Palestinians of equal voting rights, or to give them equal voting rights and therefore the majority, he said. "And you would no longer have a Jewish state," Carter predicted.

"The basic decisions would be made by the Palestinians, who would almost very likely vote in a bloc, whereas you would have some sharp divisions among the Israelis, because the Israelis always have different points of view," he said.

On the other hand, the other two options would amount to "ethnic cleansing" in the first case, or "apartheid" in the second.

Carter's wording was not new. His 2006 book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," provoked a hail of criticism, particularly from Jewish-Americans who felt it unfairly compared Israeli treatment of Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza to the legalized racial oppression that once existed in South Africa.

Carter spoke to The Associated Press as his new book, "We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land," was released.

Carter still believes a two-state solution is the best option, with Israel's right to exist in peace being recognized by all its Arab neighbors, and Israel withdrawing from most of the land it captured in the 1967 Six Day War to create an independent Palestine.

This is "almost completely compatible" with UN resolutions, US official policy, and an Arab peace proposal that called for a land-for-peace swap, Carter said.

A complete return to the 1967 borders would be impossible, he said, but Israel should swap some land with the Palestinians, either east of the Gaza Strip or in a corridor between the Gaza and the West Bank.

This corridor "would still be controlled by Israel, but it would give a passageway for Palestinians to go back and forth between the two parts of their county," from Gaza to the West Bank, he said.

Carter said that "nobody that I know of" in the Middle East currently has the stature and courage to take a risk for peace.

Carter is wrong. First off, no two state solution is possible unless the Palestinians can form a government that is able and willing to guarantee peace to Israel and that is not going to happen anytime in the foreseeable future. It's a feel good idea but not a real option. Second, the Palestinians are not just Israel's problem as we can see from Egypt's frantic efforts to counter Hamas' influence in Gaza and Jordan's efforts to help the PA control the militants in the West Bank. As the Palestinian population continues to grow, it will become an increasingly destabilizing influence in Jordan and Egypt, and these countries will become just as eager as Israel to find a arrangement that will relieve this pressure and will likely be willing to share this responsibility with Israel; they already are to some extent. As this cooperation continues to grow, the logical solution will be for Israel to pull back to its 1967 borders plus the major settlements, only 6% or the West Bank, and for Egypt to absorb Gaza and Jordan to reabsorb the West Bank.

If we look backward at the history of the region, this may seem an unlikely outcome, but it is no more unlikely than that the Palestinians will be able to unite behind a government that will be willing and able to guarantee peace to Israel, and it makes more sense for the Arabs in the territories to become part of Arab states as to become part of the Jewish state of Israel. We should recall that this problem was created by Egypt, Jordan and Syria by first radicalizing the Palestinians and then bringing the 1967 war that put the Palestinians under Israeli jurisdiction and then refusing Israel's offer of land for peace for all these years. Only the most biased observer would conclude that the responsibility for what happens to the Palestinians in the future should fall only on Israel.

Thanks for the "bizarro world fantasy history lesson"

 

[Shogun]

All of a sudden the zionists are paying attention beyond the reflexing knee jerk reaction to criticism, eh? Stunning, lemme tellya.


Ironically, The above Carter observations are no different than what people like myself have been sayin gover and over and over and over and over again. Notive the words ETHNIC CLEANSE and APARTEID. And, heaven fucking forbid, the third option that puts democracy above ethnic state based racism.. GOOD HEAVENS! THINK OF THE ANTISEMITISM INVOLVED WITH *GASP* TREATING A FUCKING DIRTY ASS ARAB EQUALLY TO A JEW!



silly, racist bastards.

 

[GHook93]

I am No fan of Carter

But I heard this interveiw on TV

His ideas need to be listened to and acted upon

For once I agree with you! It's going to be tough for both sides, since the Hamas seems not willing to talk, negotiate or listen to reason. They care more about making their children bombs and pawns in a deadly PR game against Israel. Rather than rationally seeking peace. They have to give up the highly irrational demand of the refugees going to Israel.

However the Israel needs to make some serious concession and confront a powerful segment of their population - the settlers and their supporters inside Israel. We saw the magnitude of resistence the settlers would bring from the Gaza evacuation, the WB will be 100 fold worse. Sunni you hated Sharon, but he was the only one who would have had the balls to be able to evacuate the WB and confront the settlers!

 

[elvis]

Look he was a bad bad president, even worse than Bush! But he has a point. A free independent Palestine is Israel's only option! They must take it or time will seal their fate to be ruled by the Palestinians! The Palestinians with the dispora, refugees (3 million in the ME and outside Israel) and 4 mill in Gaza and WB and 1.1 million in Israel, combine that with the Palestinian rabbit like birth rates. Now if you only took Gaza, WB and Israeli Arabs you have 5.1 mil to 6 mil Jews! If would only be a matter of time before the Palestinians well outnumbered the Jews.

He says Israel has 3 options with the one state solution:
(1) Expel a large number of Palestinians! If so where do you send them. You need a willing partner to take them and none of Israel's neighbors will help. This move would anger (and justifiably so) the whole world. Even the US would turn on Israel. Note: without the US and EU support Israel would be finished!

(2) Apartheid: Take away the eventual rights of Palestinians aka the South African Blacks. Again the Palestinians would inevitable become the majority. Apartheid regime don't have a long life and if Israel took this option, then again the whole world would turn on them. There would be inevitable Palestinian uprising, with help from her Arab neighbors. The Israel government would inevitably fall and Israel would be wiped off the map!

(3) Keep the Democracy and give equal rights the way they currently give the Israel Arabs: The Palestinian would unit and become the majority and simply vote away Israel.

None of these options for a one state solution is very good if your an Israeli Jew! Carter also points out that going back the '67 lines is also not an option. He agrees that Israel should give equal land for equal land taken, including a corridor. Israel MUST remove many settlements. This means taking on many of their own citizens, but its going to be necessary, but tough. Too bad they don't have a strong and committed leader like Sharon. Sharon knew that the only way for peace is to evacuate Gaza and eventually the West Bank. The opposition was strong, but he succeed!

The Palestinians are not off the hook either. They have to stop their love of terror. They must accept the fact that equal land given for equal land taken is not a bad offer (especially when your going to get 98% of the original land you wanted). And stop the ignorant rhetoric that Israel must take the Palestinian refugees. No country would be willing to take on millions of enemies of the state.

I personally time is not on Israel's side. There is no way status quo will last forever!
Carter: No Palestine, catastrophe for Israel | Israel | Jerusalem Post

"If we look toward a one-state solution, which seems to be the trend - I hope not inexorable - it would be a catastrophe for Israel, because there would be only three options in that case," Carter said.

Those would be to expel large numbers of Palestinians, deprive the Palestinians of equal voting rights, or to give them equal voting rights and therefore the majority, he said. "And you would no longer have a Jewish state," Carter predicted.

"The basic decisions would be made by the Palestinians, who would almost very likely vote in a bloc, whereas you would have some sharp divisions among the Israelis, because the Israelis always have different points of view," he said.

On the other hand, the other two options would amount to "ethnic cleansing" in the first case, or "apartheid" in the second.

Carter's wording was not new. His 2006 book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," provoked a hail of criticism, particularly from Jewish-Americans who felt it unfairly compared Israeli treatment of Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza to the legalized racial oppression that once existed in South Africa.

Carter spoke to The Associated Press as his new book, "We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land," was released.

Carter still believes a two-state solution is the best option, with Israel's right to exist in peace being recognized by all its Arab neighbors, and Israel withdrawing from most of the land it captured in the 1967 Six Day War to create an independent Palestine.

This is "almost completely compatible" with UN resolutions, US official policy, and an Arab peace proposal that called for a land-for-peace swap, Carter said.

A complete return to the 1967 borders would be impossible, he said, but Israel should swap some land with the Palestinians, either east of the Gaza Strip or in a corridor between the Gaza and the West Bank.

This corridor "would still be controlled by Israel, but it would give a passageway for Palestinians to go back and forth between the two parts of their county," from Gaza to the West Bank, he said.

Carter said that "nobody that I know of" in the Middle East currently has the stature and courage to take a risk for peace.

Carter is an antisemetic Jew hater. Just ask David.

 

[toomuchtime_]

I am No fan of Carter

But I heard this interveiw on TV

His ideas need to be listened to and acted upon

For once I agree with you! It's going to be tough for both sides, since the Hamas seems not willing to talk, negotiate or listen to reason. They care more about making their children bombs and pawns in a deadly PR game against Israel. Rather than rationally seeking peace. They have to give up the highly irrational demand of the refugees going to Israel.

However the Israel needs to make some serious concession and confront a powerful segment of their population - the settlers and their supporters inside Israel. We saw the magnitude of resistence the settlers would bring from the Gaza evacuation, the WB will be 100 fold worse. Sunni you hated Sharon, but he was the only one who would have had the balls to be able to evacuate the WB and confront the settlers!

Whether you like the settlers or not, the major West Bank settlements, about 6% of the West Bank, are not an obstacle to a final peace deal. Israel has offered to exchange pre 1967 Israeli land in exchange for the land the settlements are on, and if the Palestinians are serious about wanting peace, they will see that as a fair compromise. Livni and Olmert have both said they would evacuate the outlying settlements, the ones 60 Minutes showed, and Netanyahu has said he would not allow any expansion beyond the major settlements, so this is really a non issue.

The real obstacles to a final agreement are the unwillingness of either side to give up Jerusalem and probably even to share jurisdiction, the right of return, which has no support among Israelis and inability of the Palestinians to form a unified government that is able and willing to guarantee peace to Israel.

 

[del]

Carter was set up to fail. He was too liberal to be president. The GOP fucked him. That's why Clinton was a Centrist and that is also why most people assume Obama will be too.

But now the Dems own all three branches of gov. This is our time to really take special interest out of politics.

Corporations will always lobby our politicians, but right now they have too much power.

The Federal Reserve has too much power. The oil companies have too much power. Healthcare has too much power.

We need to socialize these things.

Carter was too good of a man to be president. The GOP and Corporations didn't like him so they sabotaged him.

If you look back at the things Carter did do in his 4 years, he was a great great honest/good/caring man.

I'm hoping Obama is better at playing politics than Carter, but also hoping Obama is as good of a person as Carter was. I believe he is.

And he's more than capable of handling the Washington insiders.

Now lets see if Obama can tame corporate America or will they tame him.

can you even NAME the three branches of government, bozo?

 

[sealybobo]

Carter was set up to fail. He was too liberal to be president. The GOP fucked him. That's why Clinton was a Centrist and that is also why most people assume Obama will be too.

But now the Dems own all three branches of gov. This is our time to really take special interest out of politics.

Corporations will always lobby our politicians, but right now they have too much power.

The Federal Reserve has too much power. The oil companies have too much power. Healthcare has too much power.

We need to socialize these things.

Carter was too good of a man to be president. The GOP and Corporations didn't like him so they sabotaged him.

If you look back at the things Carter did do in his 4 years, he was a great great honest/good/caring man.

I'm hoping Obama is better at playing politics than Carter, but also hoping Obama is as good of a person as Carter was. I believe he is.

And he's more than capable of handling the Washington insiders.

Now lets see if Obama can tame corporate America or will they tame him.

can you even NAME the three branches of government, bozo?

House, Senate, Congress, White House, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve & State Government. That's 3.

 

[Shogun]

Yea dude.. YOU give the benefit of the doubt to whomever wears the yarmulke.

Notice the nice "we're gonna kill you and the Palestinian" quote from these settlers who are "not an obsticle to pease"... or something..

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-bVIcRTwYg]YouTube - Drunk Jewish settler mouths off film crew..[/ame]

 

[toomuchtime_]

Look he was a bad bad president, even worse than Bush! But he has a point. A free independent Palestine is Israel's only option! They must take it or time will seal their fate to be ruled by the Palestinians! The Palestinians with the dispora, refugees (3 million in the ME and outside Israel) and 4 mill in Gaza and WB and 1.1 million in Israel, combine that with the Palestinian rabbit like birth rates. Now if you only took Gaza, WB and Israeli Arabs you have 5.1 mil to 6 mil Jews! If would only be a matter of time before the Palestinians well outnumbered the Jews.

He says Israel has 3 options with the one state solution:
(1) Expel a large number of Palestinians! If so where do you send them. You need a willing partner to take them and none of Israel's neighbors will help. This move would anger (and justifiably so) the whole world. Even the US would turn on Israel. Note: without the US and EU support Israel would be finished!

(2) Apartheid: Take away the eventual rights of Palestinians aka the South African Blacks. Again the Palestinians would inevitable become the majority. Apartheid regime don't have a long life and if Israel took this option, then again the whole world would turn on them. There would be inevitable Palestinian uprising, with help from her Arab neighbors. The Israel government would inevitably fall and Israel would be wiped off the map!

(3) Keep the Democracy and give equal rights the way they currently give the Israel Arabs: The Palestinian would unit and become the majority and simply vote away Israel.

None of these options for a one state solution is very good if your an Israeli Jew! Carter also points out that going back the '67 lines is also not an option. He agrees that Israel should give equal land for equal land taken, including a corridor. Israel MUST remove many settlements. This means taking on many of their own citizens, but its going to be necessary, but tough. Too bad they don't have a strong and committed leader like Sharon. Sharon knew that the only way for peace is to evacuate Gaza and eventually the West Bank. The opposition was strong, but he succeed!

The Palestinians are not off the hook either. They have to stop their love of terror. They must accept the fact that equal land given for equal land taken is not a bad offer (especially when your going to get 98% of the original land you wanted). And stop the ignorant rhetoric that Israel must take the Palestinian refugees. No country would be willing to take on millions of enemies of the state.

I personally time is not on Israel's side. There is no way status quo will last forever!
Carter: No Palestine, catastrophe for Israel | Israel | Jerusalem Post

"If we look toward a one-state solution, which seems to be the trend - I hope not inexorable - it would be a catastrophe for Israel, because there would be only three options in that case," Carter said.

Those would be to expel large numbers of Palestinians, deprive the Palestinians of equal voting rights, or to give them equal voting rights and therefore the majority, he said. "And you would no longer have a Jewish state," Carter predicted.

"The basic decisions would be made by the Palestinians, who would almost very likely vote in a bloc, whereas you would have some sharp divisions among the Israelis, because the Israelis always have different points of view," he said.

On the other hand, the other two options would amount to "ethnic cleansing" in the first case, or "apartheid" in the second.

Carter's wording was not new. His 2006 book, "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid," provoked a hail of criticism, particularly from Jewish-Americans who felt it unfairly compared Israeli treatment of Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza to the legalized racial oppression that once existed in South Africa.

Carter spoke to The Associated Press as his new book, "We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land," was released.

Carter still believes a two-state solution is the best option, with Israel's right to exist in peace being recognized by all its Arab neighbors, and Israel withdrawing from most of the land it captured in the 1967 Six Day War to create an independent Palestine.

This is "almost completely compatible" with UN resolutions, US official policy, and an Arab peace proposal that called for a land-for-peace swap, Carter said.

A complete return to the 1967 borders would be impossible, he said, but Israel should swap some land with the Palestinians, either east of the Gaza Strip or in a corridor between the Gaza and the West Bank.

This corridor "would still be controlled by Israel, but it would give a passageway for Palestinians to go back and forth between the two parts of their county," from Gaza to the West Bank, he said.

Carter said that "nobody that I know of" in the Middle East currently has the stature and courage to take a risk for peace.

Carter is an antisemetic Jew hater. Just ask David.

Perhaps not antisemitic, but clearly still bitter that Begin would not bend over for him no matter how much he blustered and threatened. Does Carter really not understand what a tremendously destabilizing force this growing Palestinian population would be for Jordan and Egypt? Does he really not understand what a tremendously destabilizing force a Palestinian state that could not or would not control its militants would be for Jordan and Egypt? Is he really not able to see this problem in a regional context?

 

[del]

Carter was set up to fail. He was too liberal to be president. The GOP fucked him. That's why Clinton was a Centrist and that is also why most people assume Obama will be too.

But now the Dems own all three branches of gov. This is our time to really take special interest out of politics.

Corporations will always lobby our politicians, but right now they have too much power.

The Federal Reserve has too much power. The oil companies have too much power. Healthcare has too much power.

We need to socialize these things.

Carter was too good of a man to be president. The GOP and Corporations didn't like him so they sabotaged him.

If you look back at the things Carter did do in his 4 years, he was a great great honest/good/caring man.

I'm hoping Obama is better at playing politics than Carter, but also hoping Obama is as good of a person as Carter was. I believe he is.

And he's more than capable of handling the Washington insiders.

Now lets see if Obama can tame corporate America or will they tame him.

can you even NAME the three branches of government, bozo?

House, Senate, Congress, White House, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve & State Government. That's 3.

 

[xsited1]

Honestly Carter Never Sounded Smart

Your thread title has been corrected.

 

[jillian]

House, Senate, Congress, White House, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve & State Government. That's 3.

please tell me you're kidding.

 

[del]

House, Senate, Congress, White House, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve & State Government. That's 3.

please tell me you're kidding.

i was afraid to ask

 

[sealybobo]

House, Senate, Congress, White House, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve & State Government. That's 3.

please tell me you're kidding.

I thought it was a trick question so I included some extra answers.


Hopefully 3 of my answers are correct.

And maybe I'll get extra credit for the extra answers.

 

[del]

House, Senate, Congress, White House, Supreme Court, Federal Reserve & State Government. That's 3.

please tell me you're kidding.

I thought it was a trick question so I included some extra answers.


Hopefully 3 of my answers are correct.

And maybe I'll get extra credit for the extra answers.

who's buried in grant's tomb?

 

[elvis]

please tell me you're kidding.

I thought it was a trick question so I included some extra answers.


Hopefully 3 of my answers are correct.

And maybe I'll get extra credit for the extra answers.

who's buried in grant's tomb?

That one's too hard. What color was George Washington's white horse?