- Jun 10, 2015
- Reaction score
Will it be President Trump to police the towns, or build a house there?Bennett has talked about several plans, but hasn't been able to make anything happen. Trump is making annexation happen.First, the Trump admin. formulated the socio-economic projects,First, while sovereignty has been a passionate topic of discussion for a long time, especially around election time, nothing has been annexed since 1980 and annexation of any part of Judea or Samaria would not be imminent if not for Trump.
and included it as leverage in a wider geopolitical approach.
But essentially it's Naftali Bennet's plan,
and the geopolitical aspect of the plan regarding the Israeli-Arab alliance,
is the hard work establishing new relations allover all continents of PM Netanyahu .
Second, there's no such significant minority aside from the Arab Joint List,Second, when you talk about Israelis, you say "we" but there is even now a significant minority of Israelis who opposed annexation of any part of Judea and Samaria, and without the expectation of US recognition of the annexation, that minority would probably swell to a majority. While sovereignty over all of Judea and Samaria may be a done deal in the minds of the people you talk to, clearly it is not for most Israelis. I understand that you believe sovereignty over all of Judea and Samaria is only being held up because of objections from Washington, but that is not true, most Israelis do not support it.
I'm quiet sure You won't surprise me with any of the new polls
that I haven't seen getting published now.
In matter of fact, it is a wide consensus on all political spectrum of the Israeli left and right,
that cities like Ma'ale Edumim, 'Ariel, Upper Modi'in, Beitar etc. which have become significant economic centers to be included in any plan, which is what we see being the focus of the currently discussed outline.
As well as Jordan valley, it is a no-discussion position, national position, that regardless of any formal status of bilateral or international agreement, it remains under Israeli control exclusively, as the minimal defensive geographical boundary in the country, this is ours.
Listen, it's like with the British Empire, they chose to side with the Zionist movement,
but only after we have already started building outside Jerusalem walls, built several new significant towns, infrastructure and networks of local coordination for investments, as well
as allocating great efforts, energy and time in the political promotion.
And here too, the base of the plan is in the Israeli political discourse, those who shifted it during and after the Oslo disaster were the Judeans themselves, they, Sovereignty Movement's Women in Green, Yesha Council, the young Party of Yeminah, Betzalel Smotrich, Tzipi Hotovely etc. these are the people representing the young generation which established the facts on the ground, the facts in the Israeli political discourse, and went to Washington never being afraid to both oppose our PM's and Your Presidents.
But beyond mere political level, there's also natural development in the environment. The Gush Dan area of Tel-Aviv, the central economic metropolitan area in Israel, joining several large cities together is located right to the west of Judea, a 10-20 minute ride to to the east, and already being overpopulated in comparison to the rest of the country. In Judea, which large portion of residents comprise of immigrants from America, the cost of living is times more affordable, for the price of an old 3 room apartment in Tel-Aviv, Herzliyah or Rishon L'Zion, one can get a modern small private house with a garden, with open nature, in one of the most fast growing and developing areas in the country, with a mostly young community and a family focused environment to grow Your kids.
The Israeli CBS shows that in a single generation every 3rd Israeli is an orthodox Jews. And B"H that the Israeli birth-rates have already evened and a bit surpassed the birth-rates of several major Arab nations, a trend that has been constant in the larger Arab world, especially with the countries focused on modernization.
It's really not what they show in the news, to say the least.
And the middle east is not anymore what people are used to think.
But I get it,
when taking leadership, great leaders tend to take credit for the work of other's,
and totally ok, if translates better to the base of support - as long as work is actually done.
Yes, definitely - the mention of Pali state translates directly into justification for further violence.The objections you raise to the "deal" are frivolous.
The mere mention of a Palestinian state in the plan will endanger Israel.
Nonsense, a Palestinian state, the two state solution, is mentioned favorable thousands of times a day all over the world, including by some Jews in Israel, and when it is mentioned in the plan, it is mentioned only in terms of the PA meeting a set of conditions it cannot possibly meet in the foreseeable future. So it redefines a Palestinian state in terms that are beneficial to Israel.
Ahi, excuse me,
but frivolous is the manner in which You tend to disregard any my objections.
But it's going to be me to live with the consequence, and also having past experience.
And excuse me for making such a frivolous comparison, but You know, that African Americans are using the N-word doesn't justify regulating it into an agreement or law, neither justice.
Now, the N-word is merely a word, if empowered in public discourse will indirectly lead to fatal consequences, while the Pali states o.t.o.h. are actual power bases of suicide dealers.
Kinda like if You folks wait another year and a half until CHAZ arms up,
and the US admin signs with them a formal agreement.
Would that lead to less violence, or encourage it?
The US is not side to the agreement, but according to the plan will take part in signing the agreement into international law, which will as far as I understand bound it constitutionally as it did with the Mandate terms.Everything can change, but if the US were to some day stop supporting this deal as written, then Israel would be under no obligation to stand by it, either. When things change, you adapt to the changes, but cowering in fear of change is nearly always counter productive.
It will have the status of international law in force of the Israeli sovereign decision to follow on the recognition of PLO, but regardless of US formal position.
And in case followed in such trajectory - a needless mistake.
You know how exactly?There are no gestures. These are just unsubstantiated rumors spread by people who oppose annexation for their own reasons.
You say you have read the plan, but take a step back from it and see the broader strokes. It erases the Green Line and it changes the discussion of a Palestinian state from whether the Palestinians have a right to one to what would be their responsibilities before be able to claim that right. There simply is no downside for Israel in the Plan.
Why does construction have to freeze?
To wait for them to enter negotiations?
There's nothing their representatives have to offer or negotiate.
Our focus is with the local population and gradual replacement of the PA autonomy rule with complete Israeli sovereignty, with the path to citizenship once the demographics naturally enforce the development and change the country outline with its economic centers.
Westerners and Arabs are used to think Israelis are in constant hurry,
but facts show the opposite, the time is on our side.
'Shwayah shwayah' as our Arab cousins say.
More Israelis oppose West Bank annexation than support it — survey
Poll by dovish Geneva Initiative contradicts findings from another recent study, which saw a plurality of Israelis back the movewww.timesofisrael.com
A Palestinian state is mentioned favorably thousands fo times a day all over the world including in Israel, and it is mentioned without obligating the Palestinians to do anything in order to get it. The Trump plan only mentions a possible Palestinian state in terms of the extensive reforms the Palestinians would have to make to deserve a state. I know you are able to understand the difference but you are committed to applying Israeli sovereignty over all of Judea and Samaria, but there is very little support for that among the greater public. Even Bennett only proposed annexing area C.
The Plan will not become international law, just as Oslo never became international law. The US will seek to have the UN Security Council pass a resolution supporting it, but it will almost certainly fail since both the Europeans and Arabs will oppose it.
"Settlement Minister says government won't back Palestinian statehood. 'We won't freeze construction or create isolated enclaves.' "
Minister to Arutz Sheva: 'Israel working to reach a deal with US on sovereignty plan' - Inside Israelwww.israelnationalnews.com
Rylah, there are no monsters under the bed.
Did Pres. Trump initiate it and create the base of support, or PM Netanyahu?
It's not "my dad your dad" kindergarten talk, neither a chicken and egg dilemma,
more a question of simple common sense - recognizing the constant and the interval.
PM Netanyahu governed during how many US presidents?
Wanna remind us what he inherited from Clinton?
We as a nation have our own job to do, if it aligns with the current American politics, how blessed, and sell it however You find fit as long as obstructions are not introduced.
If not...well You know us Israelis.
We rely on ourselves, and the Judeans on the ground,
who now sit both in the coalition and the opposition said the same,
and in the typical Israeli manner - 'to the face' when in WH with PM Netanyahu.
Accept it or not, but they didn't lie - lines are irrelevant.
Kids gonna keep building the Judean hills, and turn them into vibrant towns.