Trump Deal - details, reactions and development on the ground

[Hollie]

Originally posted by Hollie
Islamic terrorists expected up to give up Islamic terrorism?

That’s just, you know, racist or something.

Well, to be fair, the history of "negotiations" between every settler colonialist state that has ever existed in human history and the natives they subjugated (America and Indians, Afrikaners and black south africans, France and Algeria's natives etc, etc...) can be summed up by the 4th item FY forgot to mention:

The natives were expected to spread their asscheeks and hope it wouldn't be too fat.

So no one can say I'm unfairly singling out Israel.

You seem not to have noticed that some societies (oddly, non-islamist societies), have managed to overcome religious, tribal alliances and joined the modern world. I would cite Hong Kong, Vietnam, South Korea and Israel to name a few. It is possible to overcome adversity and some societies can take control of their future, Some, not all.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Forget two states, Trump’s plan prescribes apartheid

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Forget two states, Trump’s plan prescribes apartheid

In some ways she's right, but the Palestinians have done this to themselves by rejecting 98% of the West Bank and a shared Old City of Jerusalem in the past. So the deals will keep getting worse and worse for them. Whoever doesn't learn from the past is condemned to repeat those mistakes. Or make even worse mistakes.

 

[Hollie]

Forget two states, Trump’s plan prescribes apartheid

Another silly, false analogy to "apartheid".

 

[flacaltenn]

They probably conferred with a couple Arab League countries... It's a good plan for changing up how peace is negotiated here.. They did a swell job of "real estate" and business development (probably OVER did that part)... But what they're lacking is a distribution list to MAKE peace with other than Abbas and Hamas..

I've always thought Hannah Ashrawi was the best PA spokesperson.. Still very informative and not as political..

I was going to agree with this. And then the last sentence. Ugh.

I can't bear that woman.


The Izraeleez! The Izraeleez!

Lots of people in leadership HERE that I can't stand.. (RUSSIA RUSSIA RUSSIA.. emoluments ).. But there ARE issues about living in limbo for over 50 years now... It's not ALL the Izzies fault of course.. But, it needs to be fixed. And nothing gets fixed without bonifide representation.. I personally think she's a better spokesperson and not so repetitive and shrill...

 

[Shusha]

Forget two states, Trump’s plan prescribes apartheid

This article is heavy on rhetoric and light on substance. ("Wild-eyed Zionist fanatics" pah-leeze, can we order up some credible journalism, here?)

About the only sentence which even TRIES to discuss the plan is this one:

The envisaged Palestinian entity ... lacks any trappings of statehood: Sovereignty, contiguous territories, a capital, control of borders, armed forces, etc.

What counter-offers could Palestine make to solve these vague complaints? What else is needed to meet the criteria of sovereignty? How can the territories be made contiguous? What is needed in order for a city to be a capital? What is meant by "control of borders"? What sort of armed forces? Also items she forgot to mention, but should have: control over airspace, control over territorial waters.

Before you go all, "But Palestine MUST have a military or else!" on me, a couple things. There are 21 countries in the world with no armed forces, either by choice or by restriction from another State. So no, she doesn't have to have a military. Also, remember this is a PEACE Accord. The base assumption is that the two States agree not to attack each other and that peace is in the BEST INTERESTS of BOTH Parties. Going all Gaza after signing a peace agreement is going to be BAD for the Palestinians. And it will be the responsibility of Palestine to DEMONSTRATE its peaceful nature by agreeing to be monitored by Israel and actively working to prevent the importation of weapons, terrorism, "freedom fighting" and playing the happy little martyrs game.

 

[Shusha]

For example, discuss contiguity and enclaves. I see three options.

1. A plan in which the borders between the two States follow the people resulting in a Swiss cheesy border on both sides with some creative transportation work-arounds so that people don't have to cross international borders to get to work.

2. A plan with contiguous borders in which Jews and Arabs are forcibly displaced from their residences so that everyone ends up in the "right" State.

3. A plan with contiguous borders in which Jews and Arabs are left in place and become incorporated into their State of residence.

Team Palestine seems to be in favour of door #2, as icky as it is.

 

[Shusha]

For example, discuss control of borders, territorial waters, airspace.

I agree these things are NECESSARY for sovereignty and thus, Palestine should have them. (Note its perfectly fine for one State to be completely enclosed by another State. There are several of them in the world.)

How can we give Palestine this control while STILL ensuring Israel's security? (And also protecting the lives of Palestinians by ensuring Israel never has to defend itself.)

I would propose a reversal of the fundamental premise of the clauses in the Trump Framework. The current Framework prioritizes Israel's security, creates a normalization of Israeli security control and conditions removal of security on "good behaviour" by the Palestinians. I suggest we reverse this and make Palestine's sovereignty the default and expect its normalization at some point in the future. Its a subtle shift in attitude, and won't make much difference in practical terms for the near future, but its a necessary step for full Palestinian sovereignty.

That said, any peace deal will HAVE to confront Israeli need for security.

 

[José]

FOREVERYOUNG436
It's equally as horrible to assimilate refugees. Don't you think my father would still like to live in the DP camp he was in after WW2? Don't you think my mom would still want to be in that tent that she lived in when she first came to Israel? What could they be thinking?

FOREVERYOUNG436
In some ways she's right, but the Palestinians have done this to themselves by rejecting 98% of the West Bank and a shared Old City of Jerusalem in the past. So the deals will keep getting worse and worse for them. Whoever doesn't learn from the past is condemned to repeat those mistakes. Or make even worse mistakes.

"The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense."

The "Arabs of Palestine cannot recognize the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine or any situation arising or derived therefrom."

Rocco used different words to say exactly what I said in the red, bolded part:

What do you call a political entity designed by foreign powers, with no historical and popular legitimacy, without a military, crammed with refugees dreaming of going home, crisscrossed by ethnically segregated roads, with adjacent settlements, checkpoints and military bases between the "cantons", bridges and tunnels "uniting" its disconnected pieces?

The palestinian leaders Rocco cited were rejecting the UN partition plan in 1948 because it was a farce, a fake palestinian homeland devised by the international community with no historical and popular legitimacy.

The very same reason palestinians leaders and society rejected the "deal of the century" in 2020... because it is a pseudo palestinian homeland imposed on them, not the ancient historic land they call home.

Peel Commision Partition Plan = 70% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

UN Partition Plan = 45% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Rabin - Arafat = 22% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Barak - Arafat = 22% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Rocco's quotation is exactly the reason the "deal of the century" and all the other partition plans were rejected in the past and will continue to be rejected in the future (if proposed)...

It's a fake Palestine envisioned by Trump and Netanyahu... Peel, UN, Rabin and Barak's plans were ethnic corrals... Trump's plan goes one step further... it concieves a series of fully fledged ethnic enclaves surrounded by the jewish ethnocracy from all sides, not the real homeland that extends from the river to sea... the only one that has "historical and popular legitimacy" in the eyes of the palestinian population.

 

[José]

The problem with message boards is that the group mentality people display is so strong they don't agree or disagree with what people say they agree or disagree according to whom is talking to them.

When a zionist like Rocco and an anti-zionist like myself say exactly the same thing people agree with the former and disagree with the latter... go figure...

In any case, let's hope people will agree with what I said now that it was confirmed by Rocco, the zionist.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

FOREVERYOUNG436
It's equally as horrible to assimilate refugees. Don't you think my father would still like to live in the DP camp he was in after WW2? Don't you think my mom would still want to be in that tent that she lived in when she first came to Israel? What could they be thinking?

FOREVERYOUNG436
In some ways she's right, but the Palestinians have done this to themselves by rejecting 98% of the West Bank and a shared Old City of Jerusalem in the past. So the deals will keep getting worse and worse for them. Whoever doesn't learn from the past is condemned to repeat those mistakes. Or make even worse mistakes.

"The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense."

The "Arabs of Palestine cannot recognize the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine or any situation arising or derived therefrom."

Rocco used different words to say exactly what I said in the red, bolded part:

What do you call a political entity designed by foreign powers, with no historical and popular legitimacy, without a military, crammed with refugees dreaming of going home, crisscrossed by ethnically segregated roads, with adjacent settlements, checkpoints and military bases between the "cantons", bridges and tunnels "uniting" its disconnected pieces?

The palestinian leaders Rocco cited were rejecting the UN partition plan in 1948 because it was a farce, a fake palestinian homeland devised by the international community with no historical and popular legitimacy.

The very same reason palestinians leaders and society rejected the "deal of the century" in 2020... because it is a pseudo palestinian homeland imposed on them, not the ancient historic land they call home.

Peel Commision Partition Plan = 75% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

UN Partition Plan = 45% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Rabin - Arafat = 22% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Barak - Arafat = 22% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Rocco's quotation is exactly the reason the "deal of the century" and all the other partition plans were rejected in the past and will continue to be rejected in the future (if proposed)...

It's a fake Palestine envisioned by Trump and Netanyahu... Peel, UN, Rabin and Barak's plans were ethnic corrals... Trump's plan goes one step further... it's a series of fully fledged ethnic enclaves surrounded by the jewish ethnocracy from all sides, not the real homeland that extends from the river to sea... the only one that has "historical and popular legitimacy" in the eyes of the palestinian population.

because it is a pseudo palestinian homeland imposed on them, not the ancient historic land they call home.

Where/when was this historic homeland?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

FOREVERYOUNG436
It's equally as horrible to assimilate refugees. Don't you think my father would still like to live in the DP camp he was in after WW2? Don't you think my mom would still want to be in that tent that she lived in when she first came to Israel? What could they be thinking?

FOREVERYOUNG436
In some ways she's right, but the Palestinians have done this to themselves by rejecting 98% of the West Bank and a shared Old City of Jerusalem in the past. So the deals will keep getting worse and worse for them. Whoever doesn't learn from the past is condemned to repeat those mistakes. Or make even worse mistakes.

"The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense."

The "Arabs of Palestine cannot recognize the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine or any situation arising or derived therefrom."

Rocco used different words to say exactly what I said in the red, bolded part:

What do you call a political entity designed by foreign powers, with no historical and popular legitimacy, without a military, crammed with refugees dreaming of going home, crisscrossed by ethnically segregated roads, with adjacent settlements, checkpoints and military bases between the "cantons", bridges and tunnels "uniting" its disconnected pieces?

The palestinian leaders Rocco cited were rejecting the UN partition plan in 1948 because it was a farce, a fake palestinian homeland devised by the international community with no historical and popular legitimacy.

The very same reason palestinians leaders and society rejected the "deal of the century" in 2020... because it is a pseudo palestinian homeland imposed on them, not the ancient historic land they call home.

Peel Commision Partition Plan = 75% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

UN Partition Plan = 45% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Rabin - Arafat = 22% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Barak - Arafat = 22% of Palestine = fake Palestine = rejected

Rocco's quotation is exactly the reason the "deal of the century" and all the other partition plans were rejected in the past and will continue to be rejected in the future (if proposed)...

It's a fake Palestine envisioned by Trump and Netanyahu... Peel, UN, Rabin and Barak's plans were ethnic corrals... Trump's plan goes one step further... it's a series of fully fledged ethnic enclaves surrounded by the jewish ethnocracy from all sides, not the real homeland that extends from the river to sea... the only one that has "historical and popular legitimacy" in the eyes of the palestinian population.

because it is a pseudo palestinian homeland imposed on them, not the ancient historic land they call home.

Where/when was this historic homeland?

It never existed. On the other hand, Eretz Yisrael is the ancient and historic homeland of the Jews.

 

[Coyote]

Oh here we go again denying homelands. How predictable. We just can't seem to move beyond accepting the fact that this area is the homeland to two different sets of people and therein lies the problem.

 

[Coyote]

For example, discuss contiguity and enclaves. I see three options.

1. A plan in which the borders between the two States follow the people resulting in a Swiss cheesy border on both sides with some creative transportation work-arounds so that people don't have to cross international borders to get to work.

2. A plan with contiguous borders in which Jews and Arabs are forcibly displaced from their residences so that everyone ends up in the "right" State.

3. A plan with contiguous borders in which Jews and Arabs are left in place and become incorporated into their State of residence.

Team Palestine seems to be in favour of door #2, as icky as it is.

#3 would be ideal but unlikely I'm guessing.

#2 would be criminal and as a member of Team Palestine I'm totally opposed to any involuntary displacements.

#1 probably the best work around and any solution will most likely incorporate some version of this.

 

[Shusha]

The problem with message boards is that the group mentality people display is so strong they don't agree or disagree with what people say they agree or disagree according to whom is talking to them.

When a zionist like Rocco and an anti-zionist like myself say exactly the same thing people agree with the former and disagree with the latter... go figure...

In any case, let's hope people will agree with what I said now that it was confirmed by Rocco, the zionist.

Um. We ALL agree that Arabs will apparently never agree to a Jewish State.

But RoccoR doesn’t use antisemitic tropes to justify Arab refusal to do so.

Shrug. If you force Israel into a zero sum game, Arabs are going to get the zero.

 

[Coyote]

For example, discuss control of borders, territorial waters, airspace.

I agree these things are NECESSARY for sovereignty and thus, Palestine should have them. (Note its perfectly fine for one State to be completely enclosed by another State. There are several of them in the world.)

How can we give Palestine this control while STILL ensuring Israel's security? (And also protecting the lives of Palestinians by ensuring Israel never has to defend itself.)


Palestinians

I would propose a reversal of the fundamental premise of the clauses in the Trump Framework. The current Framework prioritizes Israel's security, creates a normalization of Israeli security control and conditions removal of security on "good behaviour" by the Palestinians. I suggest we reverse this and make Palestine's sovereignty the default and expect its normalization at some point in the future. Its a subtle shift in attitude, and won't make much difference in practical terms for the near future, but its a necessary step for full Palestinian sovereignty.

That is interesting and intrigues me, but I'm having a hard time visualizing it. Can you expand on this one thing?

That said, any peace deal will HAVE to confront Israeli need for security.

I agree on that point.

 

[Coyote]

Forget two states, Trump’s plan prescribes apartheid

This article is heavy on rhetoric and light on substance. ("Wild-eyed Zionist fanatics" pah-leeze, can we order up some credible journalism, here?)

About the only sentence which even TRIES to discuss the plan is this one:

The envisaged Palestinian entity ... lacks any trappings of statehood: Sovereignty, contiguous territories, a capital, control of borders, armed forces, etc.

What counter-offers could Palestine make to solve these vague complaints? What else is needed to meet the criteria of sovereignty? How can the territories be made contiguous? What is needed in order for a city to be a capital? What is meant by "control of borders"? What sort of armed forces? Also items she forgot to mention, but should have: control over airspace, control over territorial waters.

Before you go all, "But Palestine MUST have a military or else!" on me, a couple things. There are 21 countries in the world with no armed forces, either by choice or by restriction from another State. So no, she doesn't have to have a military. Also, remember this is a PEACE Accord. The base assumption is that the two States agree not to attack each other and that peace is in the BEST INTERESTS of BOTH Parties. Going all Gaza after signing a peace agreement is going to be BAD for the Palestinians. And it will be the responsibility of Palestine to DEMONSTRATE its peaceful nature by agreeing to be monitored by Israel and actively working to prevent the importation of weapons, terrorism, "freedom fighting" and playing the happy little martyrs game.

I agree with you on this - Palestine does not have to have a military and it's important to keep in mind that this agreement is coming off of a defensive war which Israel won. It seems reminds me of the agreements we made with Japan after WW2. No military. I think that is good point to keep.

 

[Coyote]

Originally posted by Hollie
Islamic terrorists expected up to give up Islamic terrorism?

That’s just, you know, racist or something.

Well, to be fair, the history of "negotiations" between every settler colonialist state that has ever existed in human history and the natives they subjugated (America and Indians, Afrikaners and black south africans, France and Algeria's natives etc, etc...) can be summed up by the 4th item FY forgot to mention:

The natives were expected to spread their asscheeks and hope it wouldn't be too fat.

So no one can say I'm unfairly singling out Israel.

You seem not to have noticed that some societies (oddly, non-islamist societies), have managed to overcome religious, tribal alliances and joined the modern world. I would cite Hong Kong, Vietnam, South Korea and Israel to name a few. It is possible to overcome adversity and some societies can take control of their future, Some, not all.

And oddly, there Muslim majority societies such as Senegal that can join that list.

 

[Coyote]

RE: Trump Deal - details, reactions and development on the ground
⁜→ et al,

As I said in Posting #15686 (Jan 24, 2020), future criminal life-style is often predictable by reviewing the history of past criminal behaviors. That applies equally to the future response of any Peace Plan that might be presented to the criminal; positions held by the Arab Palestinians.

Since the invitation to assist the UN Palestine Commission in the implementation of a peaceful solution to the "Question of Palestine," the Arab Palestinians adopted a political posture of belligerence, hostility and violence.

"The Arabs of Palestine consider that any attempt by the Jews or any power group of powers to establish a Jewish state in Arab territory is an act of aggression which will be resisted in self-defense."

"It is very unwise and fruitless to ask any commission to proceed to Palestine because not a single Arab will cooperate with the said Commission."

The "Arabs of Palestine cannot recognize the Balfour Declaration, the Mandate of Palestine or any situation arising or derived therefrom."
​

(COMMENT)

There is NO reason in the world to suggest that the majority of the Arab League or the Arab Palestinians would adopt a peaceful posture or any non-violence solution to the conflict. They are people who have repeatedly provided support for acts of terrorism and anti-Semitism.

I cannot (for the life of me) understand why any peaceful nation would provide any further support to the Arab Palestinian Regime.


Most Respectfully,
R

Yet, I've heard that some of these Arab states are working with Israel to resolve the conflict without violence. So why wouldn't there be a reason they might want to end this conflict given the more urgent and destabilizing issues emerging in the area?

 

[Shusha]

#3 would be ideal but unlikely I'm guessing.

#2 would be criminal and as a member of Team Palestine I'm totally opposed to any involuntary displacements.

#1 probably the best work around and any solution will most likely incorporate some version of this.

Exactly. We agree. #3 is optimal, but "off the table" as far as Palestine is concerned. We might morally disagree with that position, and for good reasons, but ... shrug, what can you do?

We agree. #2 is criminal and a violation of human rights (not to mention TOTALLY hypocritical of the Arab Palestinians as in "you must not remove us, but we have the right to remove you" sort of way.) Also off the table.

Therefore, Swiss Cheesy is the only viable, realistic solution to the problem. I'll suggest, then, that complaints against the Plan because "contiguity" fall into the "not real problems" category. Though there is still room to argue "we need a little more territory" from the Palestinians.