Kerry: Door for 'Two-State Solution' May be Closing

[P F Tinmore]

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

 

[pbel]

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

A two State Solution needs to share sovereignty of Jerusalem and have the blessing of the Arab League.

A peace must ensure full acceptance, trade and recognition. I say trade is the most important because it feeds people. I have often heard on these boards how Arabs within Israel and occupied Jerusalem are satisfied with their lives. Full bellies are the antidote to violence.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Only because the Two-State Solution was rejected by the Palestinians and Arabs.

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

(COMMENT)

If the window of opportunity closes, it will be (for the most part) the fault of the Palestinian. And I'm not sure they understand the consequences. I'm not sure that anybody understands - or - has a handle on what will happen ---> or what the alternatives are.

But certainly, one of the possible alternatives is for Israel to annex all the territory west of the Jordan River that is not already covered by treaty (all the Occupied Territories; less Jerusalem).

While no one thinks that totally dispensing with the option of a Palestinian State is the optimum choice, the Palestinians have (without realizing it) chosen their own destiny; and nobody but the designated terrorist organizations like it. They have, in many eyes, elected a state of constant insurgency; war and death is their mantra. Soon, the 1948 War Generation will be gone. Soon, the teenagers of the 1967 War will be 60 years old (if not already). Already, the young adults (18 year olds) of the 1973 Yom Kipper War are as old as our youngest Vietnam War Veterans. The most recent poster boy for the Palestinian, Samer Issawi, was born years after the '73 War. Most of today's Palestinian insurgents and terrorists are much too young to have any personal knowledge of the original conflict or the subsequent major wars. The Palestinians pass-on the legacy of hardship, betrayal, and martyrdom like campfire horror stories, poisoning the minds of the children of each generation in a desperate attempt to continue a struggle started by old men of their great-great grandfathers time. In another decade, or less, with a life expectancy of about 70 years, it will be the rare Palestinian that remembers the five Arab nation attack on 15 May 1948. Only the hatred will remain, but the survivors will be gone. They wil have left the legacy of a nation that could have been, but never was because of their arrogance. They will be dead and leaving behind children, and their children, and their children's children, that have no memory of what they fight for, only convinced by bitter old men that it is more important to continue a lethal struggle than build a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[pbel]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Only because the Two-State Solution was rejected by the Palestinians and Arabs.

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

(COMMENT)

If the window of opportunity closes, it will be (for the most part) the fault of the Palestinian. And I'm not sure they understand the consequences. I'm not sure that anybody understands - or - has a handle on what will happen ---> or what the alternatives are.

But certainly, one of the possible alternatives is for Israel to annex all the territory west of the Jordan River that is not already covered by treaty (all the Occupied Territories; less Jerusalem).

While no one thinks that totally dispensing with the option of a Palestinian State is the optimum choice, the Palestinians have (without realizing it) chosen their own destiny; and nobody but the designated terrorist organizations like it. They have, in many eyes, elected a state of constant insurgency; war and death is their mantra. Soon, the 1948 War Generation will be gone. Soon, the teenagers of the 1967 War will be 60 years old (if not already). Already, the young adults (18 year olds) of the 1973 Yom Kipper War are as old as our youngest Vietnam War Veterans. The most recent poster boy for the Palestinian, Samer Issawi, was born years after the '73 War. Most of today's Palestinian insurgents and terrorists are much too young to have any personal knowledge of the original conflict or the subsequent major wars. The Palestinians pass-on the legacy of hardship, betrayal, and martyrdom like campfire horror stories, poisoning the minds of the children of each generation in a desperate attempt to continue a struggle started by old men of their great-great grandfathers time. In another decade, or less, with a life expectancy of about 70 years, it will be the rare Palestinian that remembers the five Arab nation attack on 15 May 1948. Only the hatred will remain, but the survivors will be gone. They wil have left the legacy of a nation that could have been, but never was because of their arrogance. They will be dead and leaving behind children, and their children, and their children's children, that have no memory of what they fight for, only convinced by bitter old men that it is more important to continue a lethal struggle than build a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

I agree with most of your assesment, but the blame for failure and hatred needs to be spread out to both sides. You can feel the hatred on these boards.

Yes generation after generation of both peoples have created a Mass Psychosis on both sides. We need someone with vision to untangle this festering hate.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Only because the Two-State Solution was rejected by the Palestinians and Arabs.

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

(COMMENT)

If the window of opportunity closes, it will be (for the most part) the fault of the Palestinian. And I'm not sure they understand the consequences. I'm not sure that anybody understands - or - has a handle on what will happen ---> or what the alternatives are.

But certainly, one of the possible alternatives is for Israel to annex all the territory west of the Jordan River that is not already covered by treaty (all the Occupied Territories; less Jerusalem).

While no one thinks that totally dispensing with the option of a Palestinian State is the optimum choice, the Palestinians have (without realizing it) chosen their own destiny; and nobody but the designated terrorist organizations like it. They have, in many eyes, elected a state of constant insurgency; war and death is their mantra. Soon, the 1948 War Generation will be gone. Soon, the teenagers of the 1967 War will be 60 years old (if not already). Already, the young adults (18 year olds) of the 1973 Yom Kipper War are as old as our youngest Vietnam War Veterans. The most recent poster boy for the Palestinian, Samer Issawi, was born years after the '73 War. Most of today's Palestinian insurgents and terrorists are much too young to have any personal knowledge of the original conflict or the subsequent major wars. The Palestinians pass-on the legacy of hardship, betrayal, and martyrdom like campfire horror stories, poisoning the minds of the children of each generation in a desperate attempt to continue a struggle started by old men of their great-great grandfathers time. In another decade, or less, with a life expectancy of about 70 years, it will be the rare Palestinian that remembers the five Arab nation attack on 15 May 1948. Only the hatred will remain, but the survivors will be gone. They wil have left the legacy of a nation that could have been, but never was because of their arrogance. They will be dead and leaving behind children, and their children, and their children's children, that have no memory of what they fight for, only convinced by bitter old men that it is more important to continue a lethal struggle than build a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

The problem with the two state solution is that it requires the Palestinians to give most of their country to foreigners.

No other people in the world would accept that but they have a double standard when it comes to Palestine.

 

[proudveteran06]

As I have said from the beginning; There will NEVER be a two State Solution.
Reasons are;

Israel will never go back to Borders that the Arabs themselves have never recognized or accepted

Israel will never be deprived of having access to E. Jerusalem again. Jordan was supposed to let the Israelis have access to it but of course didn't.

There will NEVER be " Right of Return". To " negotiate" about anything in life people have to make compromises. Abbas has made it clear he refuses to " negotiate" about anything

 

[P F Tinmore]

As I have said from the beginning; There will NEVER be a two State Solution.
Reasons are;

Israel will never go back to Borders that the Arabs themselves have never recognized or accepted

Israel will never be deprived of having access to E. Jerusalem again. Jordan was supposed to let the Israelis have access to it but of course didn't.

There will NEVER be " Right of Return". To " negotiate" about anything in life people have to make compromises. Abbas has made it clear he refuses to " negotiate" about anything

There is nothing left to negotiate. So there is no need for more fake peace talks.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You say this all the time.

The problem with the two state solution is that it requires the Palestinians to give most of their country to foreigners.

No other people in the world would accept that but they have a double standard when it comes to Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Oh, I'm probably confused again. I thought about 70%(+) of the British Mandate of Palestine went to Trans-Jordan (Arab Palestinians); nearly everything East of the Jordan River. Not to mention about 50% (or the remaining 30%) went to Israel.

The Mandate did not belong to the Palestinians as your assertion suggests: "most of their country to foreigners." It was territory under the control of the Allied Powers.

This idea that the Palestinians had a country prior or during the mandate is just incorrect, historically and factually. The Allied Powers knew better, and the Ottoman's knew better. In fact, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan are creations (out of the French and British Mandates) of the Allied Powers.

The idea of "foreigners" is an isolationist concept (involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against jewish immigrates). Tje immigrants embarked on a project to purchase a large number of land parcels. In addition to acquisitions by the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, the Palestine Land Development Company, and the Jewish National Fund, as well as individual purchasers, in the acquisition of land. But land ownership has nothing to do with the national sovereignty. It has everything to do with Palestinian intolerance, as they are trying to make ownership an issue for the 30% of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Dante]

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

A two State Solution needs to share sovereignty of Jerusalem and have the blessing of the Arab League.

A peace must ensure full acceptance, trade and recognition. I say trade is the most important because it feeds people. I have often heard on these boards how Arabs within Israel and occupied Jerusalem are satisfied with their lives. Full bellies are the antidote to violence.

Noon Jerusalem...and **** the Arab League. Allow the Palestinians in the territory to decide their own fate or let them go live in Arab League states

 

[sealadaigh]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Only because the Two-State Solution was rejected by the Palestinians and Arabs.

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

(COMMENT)

If the window of opportunity closes, it will be (for the most part) the fault of the Palestinian. And I'm not sure they understand the consequences. I'm not sure that anybody understands - or - has a handle on what will happen ---> or what the alternatives are.

But certainly, one of the possible alternatives is for Israel to annex all the territory west of the Jordan River that is not already covered by treaty (all the Occupied Territories; less Jerusalem).

While no one thinks that totally dispensing with the option of a Palestinian State is the optimum choice, the Palestinians have (without realizing it) chosen their own destiny; and nobody but the designated terrorist organizations like it. They have, in many eyes, elected a state of constant insurgency; war and death is their mantra. Soon, the 1948 War Generation will be gone. Soon, the teenagers of the 1967 War will be 60 years old (if not already). Already, the young adults (18 year olds) of the 1973 Yom Kipper War are as old as our youngest Vietnam War Veterans. The most recent poster boy for the Palestinian, Samer Issawi, was born years after the '73 War. Most of today's Palestinian insurgents and terrorists are much too young to have any personal knowledge of the original conflict or the subsequent major wars. The Palestinians pass-on the legacy of hardship, betrayal, and martyrdom like campfire horror stories, poisoning the minds of the children of each generation in a desperate attempt to continue a struggle started by old men of their great-great grandfathers time. In another decade, or less, with a life expectancy of about 70 years, it will be the rare Palestinian that remembers the five Arab nation attack on 15 May 1948. Only the hatred will remain, but the survivors will be gone. They wil have left the legacy of a nation that could have been, but never was because of their arrogance. They will be dead and leaving behind children, and their children, and their children's children, that have no memory of what they fight for, only convinced by bitter old men that it is more important to continue a lethal struggle than build a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

the two state solution has been a flop, as P F says, because zionists and jews are always pointing fingers as to whose fault it is that it isn't working., and their finger always points at the palestinians.

why don't you tell me how they are to build a nation on the scraps that israel leaves them as they continue to steal land rather than negotiate.

the hatred towards israel, and it is a spreading hatred, is well deserved, and it is they who need to begin honest negotiations if they want to continue to have a state.

 

[RoccoR]

Dante, et al,

Who is stopping them?

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

A two State Solution needs to share sovereignty of Jerusalem and have the blessing of the Arab League.

A peace must ensure full acceptance, trade and recognition. I say trade is the most important because it feeds people. I have often heard on these boards how Arabs within Israel and occupied Jerusalem are satisfied with their lives. Full bellies are the antidote to violence.

Noon Jerusalem...and **** the Arab League. Allow the Palestinians in the territory to decide their own fate or let them go live in Arab League states

(COMMENT)

Are the Western Powers or Israel stopping them from going to "live in Arab League states?"

What fate did the Palestinians decide at Camp David and Oslo? I'm confused.

Exactly why did Yassar Arafat get the Nobel Peace Prize for anyway?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[SAYIT]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Only because the Two-State Solution was rejected by the Palestinians and Arabs.

Senator John Kerry says he is worried the door for a "two-state solution" may be closing and that would be "disastrous".

Kerry: Door for Two States May be Closing - Middle East - News - Israel National News

----------------

The two state solution has been a flop for 75 years. What makes anyone think that the door was ever open.

(COMMENT)

If the window of opportunity closes, it will be (for the most part) the fault of the Palestinian. And I'm not sure they understand the consequences. I'm not sure that anybody understands - or - has a handle on what will happen ---> or what the alternatives are.

But certainly, one of the possible alternatives is for Israel to annex all the territory west of the Jordan River that is not already covered by treaty (all the Occupied Territories; less Jerusalem).

While no one thinks that totally dispensing with the option of a Palestinian State is the optimum choice, the Palestinians have (without realizing it) chosen their own destiny; and nobody but the designated terrorist organizations like it. They have, in many eyes, elected a state of constant insurgency; war and death is their mantra. Soon, the 1948 War Generation will be gone. Soon, the teenagers of the 1967 War will be 60 years old (if not already). Already, the young adults (18 year olds) of the 1973 Yom Kipper War are as old as our youngest Vietnam War Veterans. The most recent poster boy for the Palestinian, Samer Issawi, was born years after the '73 War. Most of today's Palestinian insurgents and terrorists are much too young to have any personal knowledge of the original conflict or the subsequent major wars. The Palestinians pass-on the legacy of hardship, betrayal, and martyrdom like campfire horror stories, poisoning the minds of the children of each generation in a desperate attempt to continue a struggle started by old men of their great-great grandfathers time. In another decade, or less, with a life expectancy of about 70 years, it will be the rare Palestinian that remembers the five Arab nation attack on 15 May 1948. Only the hatred will remain, but the survivors will be gone. They wil have left the legacy of a nation that could have been, but never was because of their arrogance. They will be dead and leaving behind children, and their children, and their children's children, that have no memory of what they fight for, only convinced by bitter old men that it is more important to continue a lethal struggle than build a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

I agree with most of your assesment, but the blame for failure and hatred needs to be spread out to both sides. You can feel the hatred on these boards.

Yes generation after generation of both peoples have created a Mass Psychosis on both sides. We need someone with vision to untangle this festering hate.

Thing is, I visit the region, mostly Israel, at least once a year. There is certainly animosity for Arabs in those whose families have been "touched" by Arab terrorism and some in those who have been taught to hate but it does not equal the across-the-board hate for Jews which is passed from gen to gen in the Arab World. There is a not insignificant minority in Israel, perhaps even a majority, who for various reasons want a just solution to the conflict that you just don't find anywhere in the Arab World. That said, Israelis certainly have a share of the blame for the situation but hardly and equal share.

 

[RoccoR]

reabhloideach, et al,

the two state solution has been a flop, as P F says, because zionists and jews are always pointing fingers as to whose fault it is that it isn't working., and their finger always points at the palestinians.

why don't you tell me how they are to build a nation on the scraps that israel leaves them as they continue to steal land rather than negotiate.

the hatred towards israel, and it is a spreading hatred, is well deserved, and it is they who need to begin honest negotiations if they want to continue to have a state.

(CONFUSION)

There are a bunch of "why's" here that I don't understand.

• What have the Arab States actually contributed?
• What responsibility does any other nation have in supporting the Palestinians?

Are the Arab states refusing to absorb the Palestinians, and and why has Kuwait (oil rich) expelled 450,000 Palestinians? Are Egypt, Lebanon, and Syria have refrained from giving the Palestinians citizenship? If so, why? Are they not the very group of states that attacked in 1948? I noticed that Saudi Arabia gave the Palestinians $100M just recently. What contributions have been made by the other Arab states.

Israel would probably assist the Palestinians if it did not have to, simultaneously, defend against them. More importantly, the Palestinians have ruined their credit with nearly every other state because nearly every dollar they get goes into weapons smuggling and to support the insurgency. There is no return on investment in that.

What is it that the Palestinians want, that is within reason? And what are they willing to do to get it? And returning to the pre-1967 borders (ie 1948 borders) is not reasonable. The Palestinians rejected that two-state solution --- then fought a war over it. We are where we are.

Like I said, the Palestinians and there problems are toxic to everyone. Even the other Arab nations don't want to get their hands dirty solving the issues. They want to destroy the Israeli State; that is their mantra.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You say this all the time.

The problem with the two state solution is that it requires the Palestinians to give most of their country to foreigners.

No other people in the world would accept that but they have a double standard when it comes to Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Oh, I'm probably confused again. I thought about 70%(+) of the British Mandate of Palestine went to Trans-Jordan (Arab Palestinians); nearly everything East of the Jordan River. Not to mention about 50% (or the remaining 30%) went to Israel.

Palestine and Transjordan were two separate defined states and under two different mandates although both mandates were administered by the British. Transjordan is irrelevant to the Palestinian issue.

The Mandate did not belong to the Palestinians as your assertion suggests: "most of their country to foreigners." It was territory under the control of the Allied Powers.

It was under the control but that was not ownership. Britain never annexed or otherwise claim ownership of the mandate. Britain was merely assigned to temporarily administer Palestine. Then who did own Palestine? The natives or foreigners?

This idea that the Palestinians had a country prior or during the mandate is just incorrect, historically and factually. The Allied Powers knew better, and the Ottoman's knew better. In fact, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan are creations (out of the French and British Mandates) of the Allied Powers.

None of those had ever been separate countries. Now they are.

That is a false argument.

The idea of "foreigners" is an isolationist concept

Of the 37 people who signed Israel's declaration of independence only one was born in Palestine and he was the son of immigrants. There was not a native in sight.

(involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against jewish immigrates). Tje immigrants embarked on a project to purchase a large number of land parcels. In addition to acquisitions by the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, the Palestine Land Development Company, and the Jewish National Fund, as well as individual purchasers, in the acquisition of land. But land ownership has nothing to do with the national sovereignty. It has everything to do with Palestinian intolerance, as they are trying to make ownership an issue for the 30% of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Connery]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Only because the Two-State Solution was rejected by the Palestinians and Arabs.


(COMMENT)

If the window of opportunity closes, it will be (for the most part) the fault of the Palestinian. And I'm not sure they understand the consequences. I'm not sure that anybody understands - or - has a handle on what will happen ---> or what the alternatives are.

But certainly, one of the possible alternatives is for Israel to annex all the territory west of the Jordan River that is not already covered by treaty (all the Occupied Territories; less Jerusalem).

While no one thinks that totally dispensing with the option of a Palestinian State is the optimum choice, the Palestinians have (without realizing it) chosen their own destiny; and nobody but the designated terrorist organizations like it. They have, in many eyes, elected a state of constant insurgency; war and death is their mantra. Soon, the 1948 War Generation will be gone. Soon, the teenagers of the 1967 War will be 60 years old (if not already). Already, the young adults (18 year olds) of the 1973 Yom Kipper War are as old as our youngest Vietnam War Veterans. The most recent poster boy for the Palestinian, Samer Issawi, was born years after the '73 War. Most of today's Palestinian insurgents and terrorists are much too young to have any personal knowledge of the original conflict or the subsequent major wars. The Palestinians pass-on the legacy of hardship, betrayal, and martyrdom like campfire horror stories, poisoning the minds of the children of each generation in a desperate attempt to continue a struggle started by old men of their great-great grandfathers time. In another decade, or less, with a life expectancy of about 70 years, it will be the rare Palestinian that remembers the five Arab nation attack on 15 May 1948. Only the hatred will remain, but the survivors will be gone. They wil have left the legacy of a nation that could have been, but never was because of their arrogance. They will be dead and leaving behind children, and their children, and their children's children, that have no memory of what they fight for, only convinced by bitter old men that it is more important to continue a lethal struggle than build a nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

I agree with most of your assesment, but the blame for failure and hatred needs to be spread out to both sides. You can feel the hatred on these boards.

Yes generation after generation of both peoples have created a Mass Psychosis on both sides. We need someone with vision to untangle this festering hate.

Thing is, I visit the region, mostly Israel, at least once a year. There is certainly animosity for Arabs in those whose families have been "touched" by Arab terrorism and some in those who have been taught to hate but it does not equal the across-the-board hate for Jews which is passed from gen to gen in the Arab World. There is a not insignificant minority in Israel, perhaps even a majority, who for various reasons want a just solution to the conflict that you just don't find anywhere in the Arab World. That said, Israelis certainly have a share of the blame for the situation but hardly and equal share.

According to the article, "for the past four years, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has refused to come to the negotiating table with Israel and has continuously tried to impose preconditions on talks.

He has insisted that Israel accept the pre-1967 lines as final borders and has demanded that Israel release all Arab terrorists from its jails, and halt construction in Judea, Samaria and east Jerusalem for a second time before talks begin. At the same time, he has refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist. His Fatah party's newly adopted logo shows all of Israel as Palestine.

He has embraced Hamas rather than condemning its rocket attacks on Israel and has refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist, choosing instead to incite his people against Israel on official PA television networks and newspapers"

Not very promising...

 

[SAYIT]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You say this all the time.

The problem with the two state solution is that it requires the Palestinians to give most of their country to foreigners.

No other people in the world would accept that but they have a double standard when it comes to Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Oh, I'm probably confused again. I thought about 70%(+) of the British Mandate of Palestine went to Trans-Jordan (Arab Palestinians); nearly everything East of the Jordan River. Not to mention about 50% (or the remaining 30%) went to Israel.

The Mandate did not belong to the Palestinians as your assertion suggests: "most of their country to foreigners." It was territory under the control of the Allied Powers.

This idea that the Palestinians had a country prior or during the mandate is just incorrect, historically and factually. The Allied Powers knew better, and the Ottoman's knew better. In fact, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan are creations (out of the French and British Mandates) of the Allied Powers.

The idea of "foreigners" is an isolationist concept (involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against jewish immigrates). Tje immigrants embarked on a project to purchase a large number of land parcels. In addition to acquisitions by the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, the Palestine Land Development Company, and the Jewish National Fund, as well as individual purchasers, in the acquisition of land. But land ownership has nothing to do with the national sovereignty. It has everything to do with Palestinian intolerance, as they are trying to make ownership an issue for the 30% of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

I believe 78% of the Mandate's land mass was ceded to the Hashemites, "foreigners" from Arabia. They rule, through the power of their monarchy, over their nearly powerless Palestinian majority.

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You say this all the time.

The problem with the two state solution is that it requires the Palestinians to give most of their country to foreigners.

No other people in the world would accept that but they have a double standard when it comes to Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Oh, I'm probably confused again. I thought about 70%(+) of the British Mandate of Palestine went to Trans-Jordan (Arab Palestinians); nearly everything East of the Jordan River. Not to mention about 50% (or the remaining 30%) went to Israel.

The Mandate did not belong to the Palestinians as your assertion suggests: "most of their country to foreigners." It was territory under the control of the Allied Powers.

This idea that the Palestinians had a country prior or during the mandate is just incorrect, historically and factually. The Allied Powers knew better, and the Ottoman's knew better. In fact, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan are creations (out of the French and British Mandates) of the Allied Powers.

The idea of "foreigners" is an isolationist concept (involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against jewish immigrates). Tje immigrants embarked on a project to purchase a large number of land parcels. In addition to acquisitions by the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, the Palestine Land Development Company, and the Jewish National Fund, as well as individual purchasers, in the acquisition of land. But land ownership has nothing to do with the national sovereignty. It has everything to do with Palestinian intolerance, as they are trying to make ownership an issue for the 30% of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

I believe 78% of the Mandate's land mass was ceded to the Hashemites, "foreigners" from Arabia. They rule, through the power of their monarchy, over their nearly powerless Palestinian majority.

Indeed, and the Jordanians are working on that problem as we speak.

It has nothing to do with the Palestinian issue though.

 

[sealadaigh]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You say this all the time.

The problem with the two state solution is that it requires the Palestinians to give most of their country to foreigners.

No other people in the world would accept that but they have a double standard when it comes to Palestine.

(COMMENT)

Oh, I'm probably confused again. I thought about 70%(+) of the British Mandate of Palestine went to Trans-Jordan (Arab Palestinians); nearly everything East of the Jordan River. Not to mention about 50% (or the remaining 30%) went to Israel.

The Mandate did not belong to the Palestinians as your assertion suggests: "most of their country to foreigners." It was territory under the control of the Allied Powers.

This idea that the Palestinians had a country prior or during the mandate is just incorrect, historically and factually. The Allied Powers knew better, and the Ottoman's knew better. In fact, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan are creations (out of the French and British Mandates) of the Allied Powers.

The idea of "foreigners" is an isolationist concept (involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against jewish immigrates). Tje immigrants embarked on a project to purchase a large number of land parcels. In addition to acquisitions by the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, the Palestine Land Development Company, and the Jewish National Fund, as well as individual purchasers, in the acquisition of land. But land ownership has nothing to do with the national sovereignty. It has everything to do with Palestinian intolerance, as they are trying to make ownership an issue for the 30% of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

I believe 78% of the Mandate's land mass was ceded to the Hashemites, "foreigners" from Arabia. They rule, through the power of their monarchy, over their nearly powerless Palestinian majority.

i do not think western colonial powers, or any colonial power, have any god given right to dictate to an indigenous people what that indigenous people's relationship to their land should be.

 

[RoccoR]

SAYIT, et al,

Revenge is always a result of some previous event.

Thing is, I visit the region, mostly Israel, at least once a year. There is certainly animosity for Arabs in those whose families have been "touched" by Arab terrorism and some in those who have been taught to hate but it does not equal the across-the-board hate for Jews which is passed from gen to gen in the Arab World. There is a not insignificant minority in Israel, perhaps even a majority, who for various reasons want a just solution to the conflict that you just don't find anywhere in the Arab World. That said, Israelis certainly have a share of the blame for the situation but hardly and equal share.

(COMMENT)

I can understand the feeling and the emotion; but the healing can only begin with the resumption of peace.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

You say this all the time.


(COMMENT)

Oh, I'm probably confused again. I thought about 70%(+) of the British Mandate of Palestine went to Trans-Jordan (Arab Palestinians); nearly everything East of the Jordan River. Not to mention about 50% (or the remaining 30%) went to Israel.

The Mandate did not belong to the Palestinians as your assertion suggests: "most of their country to foreigners." It was territory under the control of the Allied Powers.

This idea that the Palestinians had a country prior or during the mandate is just incorrect, historically and factually. The Allied Powers knew better, and the Ottoman's knew better. In fact, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, and Jordan are creations (out of the French and British Mandates) of the Allied Powers.

The idea of "foreigners" is an isolationist concept (involving political, legal, and economic discrimination against jewish immigrates). Tje immigrants embarked on a project to purchase a large number of land parcels. In addition to acquisitions by the Palestine Jewish Colonization Association, the Palestine Land Development Company, and the Jewish National Fund, as well as individual purchasers, in the acquisition of land. But land ownership has nothing to do with the national sovereignty. It has everything to do with Palestinian intolerance, as they are trying to make ownership an issue for the 30% of the Mandate.

Most Respectfully,
R

I believe 78% of the Mandate's land mass was ceded to the Hashemites, "foreigners" from Arabia. They rule, through the power of their monarchy, over their nearly powerless Palestinian majority.

i do not think western colonial powers, or any colonial power, have any god given right to dictate to an indigenous people what that indigenous people's relationship to their land should be.

Indeed, it is the right to self determination that is enshrined in international law.