What Would Happen if Israel Cedes Territory to Jordan?

[Boston1]

Boston1, et al,

There is no such thing as a "legitimate resistance." It is the consensus of the International Community that international disputes shall be settled by peaceful means; Chapter I, Article 2(3).

I dont' see anything in the conventions which gives any special consideration to something termed "legitimate resistance" a combatant is a combatant is a combatant. Which is very different from a protected person.

And POWs can be held in camps segregated in whatever manor the Sovereign powers judiciary deems fit. However he conventions do specify that female prisoners of war be held separate from male prisoners of war.

From what I can see any threat to the state constitutes a forfeiture of protected persons status

(COMMENT)

A resistance movement is generally thought of as a segment of the civilian community that has banded together to conduct coordinated hostile operations against the Occupation Command in a covert and/or clandestine manner. They are meant to be indistinguishable from the normal, non-Hostile protected persons.

ARTICLE 68 [ Link ]

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.
The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.

In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.
​

Again, there is no such thing as a legitimate resistance movement. That would be the opposing armed force.

Most Respectfully,
R

Thats what I thought.

So protestors with signs out in front of a gov building shouting slogans is about the extent of a legal protest.

The pali's on the other hand are stabbing pregnant woman in the streets. Seems to be that places them squarely in the category of illegal combatants. Unless that is they strap on a uniform prior to every attack.

 

[Boston1]

Boston1, et al,

There is no such thing as a "legitimate resistance." It is the consensus of the International Community that international disputes shall be settled by peaceful means; Chapter I, Article 2(3).

I dont' see anything in the conventions which gives any special consideration to something termed "legitimate resistance" a combatant is a combatant is a combatant. Which is very different from a protected person.

The cite is from
Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949.

Which pertains to civilians. In this case we have civilians, refugees and combatants.

And POWs can be held in camps segregated in whatever manor the Sovereign powers judiciary deems fit. However he conventions do specify that female prisoners of war be held separate from male prisoners of war.

From what I can see any threat to the state constitutes a forfeiture of protected persons status

(COMMENT)

A resistance movement is generally thought of as a segment of the civilian community that has banded together to conduct coordinated hostile operations against the Occupation Command in a covert and/or clandestine manner. They are meant to be indistinguishable from the normal, non-Hostile protected persons.

ARTICLE 68 [ Link ]

Protected persons who commit an offence which is solely intended to harm the Occupying Power, but which does not constitute an attempt on the life or limb of members of the occupying forces or administration, nor a grave collective danger, nor seriously damage the property of the occupying forces or administration or the installations used by them, shall be liable to internment or simple imprisonment, provided the duration of such internment or imprisonment is proportionate to the offence committed. Furthermore, internment or imprisonment shall, for such offences, be the only measure adopted for depriving protected persons of liberty. The courts provided for under Article 66 [ Link ] of the present Convention may at their discretion convert a sentence of imprisonment to one of internment for the same period.

The penal provisions promulgated by the Occupying Power in accordance with Articles 64 [ Link ] and 65 [ Link ] may impose the death penalty on a protected person only in cases where the person is guilty of espionage, of serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons, provided that such offences were punishable by death under the law of the occupied territory in force before the occupation began.
The death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person unless the attention of the court has been particularly called to the fact that since the accused is not a national of the Occupying Power, he is not bound to it by any duty of allegiance.

In any case, the death penalty may not be pronounced against a protected person who was under eighteen years of age at the time of the offence.
​

Again, there is no such thing as a legitimate resistance movement. That would be the opposing armed force.

Most Respectfully,
R

Ok...yet, when the Palestinians have attempted "peaceful" resolution by going directly to the UN, Israel has punished them with economic sanctions.

Irrelevant. The act of war is ongoing, the Arabs declared war back in 1948 and obviously the state of war is ongoing. I dont think an attempt at negotiations regardless of its validity under the Oslo accords constitutes an end to hostilities.

Under Rocco's definition an attack against the armed forces or civilians seems to constitute an act which removes protected persons status.

Although I really should read that thing again as I am kinda tight on time

 

[RoccoR]

"Coyote, et al,

What you see as the Arab Palestinian going before the UN for a peaceful resolution is not what others see.

Ok...yet, when the Palestinians have attempted "peaceful" resolution by going directly to the UN, Israel has punished them with economic sanctions.

(COMMENT)

What I see is a series of attempts to set the conditions such that Israel will be destroyed and the UN will be responsible yet again for the creation of another failed state. The Palestinians don't want the "Right-of-Return." That is nothing more then the opportunity to overrun Israel such that it can no longer defend itself and hold on to the Jewish Nation Home and the ability to secure and protect is sovereignty, is citizens, and its culture from the harm the Arab League will commit given the opportunity.

Again, I ask you: What local nations, surrounding Israel, has the Higher Level of Human Development. And before you say, Israel is holding the West Bank and Gaza Strip down, look at where the other nations are, for which Israel does not have any influence on. Israel is ranked 18th, the US is ranked 8th. You do not find another regional country until you reach #32 Qatar. See the Table A1.1 UN HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2015 Page 47

Israel out ranks some of the wealthiest Middle East, Gulf Coast --- Oil rich countries in the World. And not by some insignificant amount; but by a significant amount. It doesn't out rank just a few, or some select group, but every member nation of the Arab League. And most of what I hear is that Israel is holding the West Bank and Gaza Strip down. Well that is far from the truth. The difference is the focus these other countries have. The reason that the State of Palestine is ranked 113th and falling, is because all its people focus on is creating turmoil and fermenting trouble.

Why anyone that looks at the logic of these wealthy Arab League and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members of the oil-exporting countries and say, they have it right and Israel has it wrong, it beyond me. Anyone who would rather see the Arab Palestinians overrun Israeli is actually not interested in the Human Development of the people, or justice, or fairness. They are interest in conflict and have been since the 1920 Riots. And would rather have another failed state.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Coyote]

"Coyote, et al,

What you see as the Arab Palestinian going before the UN for a peaceful resolution is not what others see.

Ok...yet, when the Palestinians have attempted "peaceful" resolution by going directly to the UN, Israel has punished them with economic sanctions.

(COMMENT)

What I see is a series of attempts to set the conditions such that Israel will be destroyed and the UN will be responsible yet again for the creation of another failed state. The Palestinians don't want the "Right-of-Return." That is nothing more then the opportunity to overrun Israel such that it can no longer defend itself and hold on to the Jewish Nation Home and the ability to secure and protect is sovereignty, is citizens, and its culture from the harm the Arab League will commit given the opportunity.

Netanyahu has made clear that there will be no Palestinian state. I think that that has been apparent to the Palestinians for some time - Israel has insisted on conditions that have to be met while continuing it's settlement activities for example. So I'm just wondering - given that - why should they not go to the UN? Exactly what are their options when dealing with a state that has no intention of delivering?

Again, I ask you: What local nations, surrounding Israel, has the Higher Level of Human Development. And before you say, Israel is holding the West Bank and Gaza Strip down, look at where the other nations are, for which Israel does not have any influence on. Israel is ranked 18th, the US is ranked 8th. You do not find another regional country until you reach #32 Qatar. See the Table A1.1 UN HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT 2015 Page 47

I have no argument there - Israel is far ahead of it's neighbors.

Israel out ranks some of the wealthiest Middle East, Gulf Coast --- Oil rich countries in the World. And not by some insignificant amount; but by a significant amount. It doesn't out rank just a few, or some select group, but every member nation of the Arab League. And most of what I hear is that Israel is holding the West Bank and Gaza Strip down. Well that is far from the truth. The difference is the focus these other countries have. The reason that the State of Palestine is ranked 113th and falling, is because all its people focus on is creating turmoil and fermenting trouble.

Why anyone that looks at the logic of these wealthy Arab League and Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) members of the oil-exporting countries and say, they have it right and Israel has it wrong, it beyond me. Anyone who would rather see the Arab Palestinians overrun Israeli is actually not interested in the Human Development of the people, or justice, or fairness. They are interest in conflict and have been since the 1920 Riots. And would rather have another failed state.

Most Respectfully,
R

I disagree on that part. I do agree that their leadership is to blame in part but not in entirety - Israel, with it's frequent sanctions, control over their economy, utilities, import/export etc makes it impossible to create an enduring economy. Their leadership makes it even worse but Israel is not blameless here.

 

[Boston1]

The palestinians aren't fooling anyone with this "give us another state" argument.

Whats wrong with Jordan and the 80% or so of the mandated area they already have ?

I can't imagine this is anything but another thinly veiled attempt to destabilize Israel.

I think the only solution begins with applying the Geneva conventions and removing all hostile Arab forces from any area of Israeli influence.

At which point I think Israel would be obligated to lighten restrictions and test the waters. It benefits no one to have a large group dependent on welfare holding down the economies of either group.

Oh and I'd kick the UNWRA out right off the bat and take them to the ICC for violations of the principals of neutrality.

 

[Coyote]

The palestinians aren't fooling anyone with this "give us another state" argument.

Whats wrong with Jordan and the 80% or so of the mandated area they already have ?

I can't imagine this is anything but another thinly veiled attempt to destabilize Israel.

I think the only solution begins with applying the Geneva conventions and removing all hostile Arab forces from any area of Israeli influence.

At which point I think Israel would be obligated to lighten restrictions and test the waters. It benefits no one to have a large group dependent on welfare holding down the economies of either group.

Oh and I'd kick the UNWRA out right off the bat and take them to the ICC for violations of the principals of neutrality.

I don't think so. At the bottom of the whole mess is a people who would like self-determination and a state. Mixed in you have the garbage of corruption, extremists, ideologues, and those who simply want power (Hamas). You have Palestinians - Gazans - many, so desperate they are taking horrific and dangerous and expensive sea journeys to get out. These are ordinary people, who want to work, raise their families, educate their children but see no future left in Gaza. They blame it on a combination of Israel's actions and their own leadership.

 

[Coyote]

How about removing hostile Israeli forces from the Occupied Territories?

 

[Boston1]

I think you are missing the whole nature of war with that last.

But I'd agree there are plenty of innocents who just want to live their lives and I'd suggest my plan represents the speediest path to peace.

Step one
Throw the UNWRA out and replace them with the red cross with the agreement that no employees or members of the IRC be nationals, members or a party in any way to the a belligerent in the conflict. Which would immediately aid in ensuring a fare more judicious distribution of aid.

Step two
Arrest and repatriate to a neutral third state all enemy combatants, those who aid combatants and those suspected of aiding or being combatants.

Step three
Ease restrictions gradually in step with a lack of terrorist activities.

Step four
Not another inch of Israeli controlled land should be relinquished. A recognition of Israeli sovereignty and a return of select individuals to areas available for return.

Step five
Annexation of all areas within Israeli influence into the state of Israel.

Step one through four would be unilateral except for parts of step four which would depend on an international acceptance of a token number of returns with the agreement that the world body will accept Israel's annexation of all Israeli controlled territory. And no I'm not even remotely suggesting a large scale return. maybe only those original refugees and only those who can be proven to have never engaged in actions against the state.

My two cents, not that it will ever happen

 

[Coyote]

I think you are missing the whole nature of war with that last.

But I'd agree there are plenty of innocents who just want to live their lives and I'd suggest my plan represents the speediest path to peace.

Step one
Throw the UNWRA out and replace them with the red cross with the agreement that no employees or members of the IRC be nationals, members or a party in any way to the a belligerent in the conflict. Which would immediately aid in ensuring a fare more judicious distribution of aid.

Step two
Arrest and repatriate to a neutral third state all enemy combatants, those who aid combatants and those suspected of aiding or being combatants.

Step three
Ease restrictions gradually in step with a lack of terrorist activities.

Step four
Not another inch of Israeli controlled land should be relinquished. A recognition of Israeli sovereignty and a return of select individuals to areas available for return.

Step five
Annexation of all areas within Israeli influence into the state of Israel.

Step one through four would be unilateral except for parts of step four which would depend on an international acceptance of a token number of returns with the agreement that the world body will accept Israel's annexation of all Israeli controlled territory. And no I'm not even remotely suggesting a large scale return. maybe only those original refugees and only those who can be proven to have never engaged in actions against the state.

My two cents, not that it will ever happen

I think you know I would not agree

 

[Boston1]

I can't imagine why, my plan could be enacted starting right now with the arrest and detainment of POWs. If you want peace, arrest the terrorists and place them under the auspices of the Geneva conventions.

I keep hearing how all these innocent palestinians are being controlled by armed terrorists, well this is your chance.

Arrest them and send them packing.

If you are right and the majority of pali's can act in a civilized manor once their more violent elements have been removed then whats the problem ?

 

[Shusha]

[ Exactly what are their options when dealing with a state that has no intention of delivering?

What Israel wants, what Israel has always wanted, what Israel has consistently agreed to over and over and over again is an end-of-conflict agreement with TWO States each with self-determination, living peacefully side by side. Israel has been, has always been, continues to agree to peace.

The PROBLEM is with the "peace" part. The Arab Muslim Palestinians are having trouble with that part. THAT is the cause of the conflict. Period.

How about removing hostile Israeli forces from the Occupied Territories?

We tried that with Gaza. The "occupation" is not the problem. It it was the problem, it would have been solved in Gaza and Gaza would be a thriving nation serving margheritas to rich tourists on their lovely beaches. The problem is getting the hostile Arab Muslim Palestinians to accept "filthy Jewish (oops, sorry, Israeli) feet" on "their" land.

 

[flacaltenn]

I think it would be a game-changer. What if, rather than trying to gain independence and sovereignty from Israel or in a peace treaty with Israel, the Palestinians were to negotiate with Jordan? What if Jordan became the main player in the interaction with the Palestinians on the world stage?

How would that change or affect the conflict?

Let's say Israel ceded all of Areas A and B to Jordan, as well as those parts of Area C necessary to create a continguous Palestinian area attached to Jordan.

Note that this would not preclude a Palestinian State, it just changes who the Palestinians have to negotiate with in order to obtain sovereignty. Wouldn't it make sense to negotiate with a partner rather than an enemy? Wouldn't everyone agree that common interests can create peace where conflict and opposing points of view could not?

And wouldn't it be better for a country like Jordan to handle security issues with the Palestinians?

What does everyone think will happen?

Interesting thought. Also...reminds me of the (rumor?) of Egypt giving part of the Sinai to Gaza to form a state?

But what would that really gain Israel - could Israel trust Jordan to negotiate what amount to their security needs?

Yes they could rely on Jordan to provide the services and security that is necessary for incubating a Pali state. That's why I've said for ages that a 2 state solution involves Israel working with Jordan and Egypt and other volunteer Arab states. It is the most direct path to eventual autonomy for Palestine.

Israel never got a chance to really negotiate with Jordan over the occupied West Bank, because by that time, the King was looking for ways to rid himself of the Palestinians. And as MOST of the posters have commented, the Palis burned that bridge when they ATTACKED their former host instead of negotiating for real autonomy with King Hussein...

It would be a monumentally BRAVE move for him to step forward now and take part in a reasonable solution..

That's a really interesting thought - I wasn't thinking along those lines but rather that Palestinians would become part of Jordan. That adds a whole new dimension to this and makes it seem like a better alternative than I thought. I wonder how possible it is?

It really is the only way to get a nation state for Palestine. These folks are in the same position they were during the British Mandate. It was noted then that the "palestinians" were not even CLOSE to being capable of self-rule. And some kind of "protectorate" would be required to transition them to statehood. Not a thing has changed. Except that the Palis blew the opportunity while Jordan was hosting them, and have blown away every attempt at electing representation leading to statehood.

The world just doesn't recognize unorganized indigenous populations for statehood.

Israel's error is letting this go on WAY too long. 50 year occupations are immoral and destructive. Israel's expectation always was that the Palis would get their act together and select responsible leadership. And barring that -- Israel doesn't want to be their MENTOR.. So --- some other nation(s) need to step up and volunteer. Preferably a neighbor or two. It's just obvious..

In parent language -- they need a strong talking to about insisting on getting Haifa back.. Or returning to Haifa as non-Israeli citizens. They cannot waste another 50 years. NOBODY has that much patience.

 

[Coyote]

I think it would be a game-changer. What if, rather than trying to gain independence and sovereignty from Israel or in a peace treaty with Israel, the Palestinians were to negotiate with Jordan? What if Jordan became the main player in the interaction with the Palestinians on the world stage?

How would that change or affect the conflict?

Let's say Israel ceded all of Areas A and B to Jordan, as well as those parts of Area C necessary to create a continguous Palestinian area attached to Jordan.

Note that this would not preclude a Palestinian State, it just changes who the Palestinians have to negotiate with in order to obtain sovereignty. Wouldn't it make sense to negotiate with a partner rather than an enemy? Wouldn't everyone agree that common interests can create peace where conflict and opposing points of view could not?

And wouldn't it be better for a country like Jordan to handle security issues with the Palestinians?

What does everyone think will happen?

Interesting thought. Also...reminds me of the (rumor?) of Egypt giving part of the Sinai to Gaza to form a state?

But what would that really gain Israel - could Israel trust Jordan to negotiate what amount to their security needs?

Yes they could rely on Jordan to provide the services and security that is necessary for incubating a Pali state. That's why I've said for ages that a 2 state solution involves Israel working with Jordan and Egypt and other volunteer Arab states. It is the most direct path to eventual autonomy for Palestine.

Israel never got a chance to really negotiate with Jordan over the occupied West Bank, because by that time, the King was looking for ways to rid himself of the Palestinians. And as MOST of the posters have commented, the Palis burned that bridge when they ATTACKED their former host instead of negotiating for real autonomy with King Hussein...

It would be a monumentally BRAVE move for him to step forward now and take part in a reasonable solution..

That's a really interesting thought - I wasn't thinking along those lines but rather that Palestinians would become part of Jordan. That adds a whole new dimension to this and makes it seem like a better alternative than I thought. I wonder how possible it is?

It really is the only way to get a nation state for Palestine. These folks are in the same position they were during the British Mandate. It was noted then that the "palestinians" were not even CLOSE to being capable of self-rule. And some kind of "protectorate" would be required to transition them to statehood. Not a thing has changed. Except that the Palis blew the opportunity while Jordan was hosting them, and have blown away every attempt at electing representation leading to statehood.

The world just doesn't recognize unorganized indigenous populations for statehood.

Israel's error is letting this go on WAY too long. 50 year occupations are immoral and destructive. Israel's expectation always was that the Palis would get their act together and select responsible leadership. And barring that -- Israel doesn't want to be their MENTOR.. So --- some other nation(s) need to step up and volunteer. Preferably a neighbor or two. It's just obvious..

In parent language -- they need a strong talking to about insisting on getting Haifa back.. Or returning to Haifa as non-Israeli citizens. They cannot waste another 50 years. NOBODY has that much patience.

Agree with much of that.
I think though, that Israel also has a desire to keep some of the land and that has probably stalled the process as well.

 

[flacaltenn]

Coyote, et al,

That is the problem with NIAC conflicts.

Boston, et al,

That would be:

REPATRIATION AND RETURN TO THE LAST PLACE OF RESIDENCE
ARTICLE 134 [ Link ]

I think Rocco mentioned something about civilian repatriation being to a last place of residence, ( I'll try and find the exact quote ) which brings us back to the refoulment issue.

(REFERENCE)

• 
  
  • 
    ARTICLE 134 [ Link ]
    
    The High Contracting Parties shall endeavour, upon the close of hostilities or occupation, to ensure the return of all internees to their last place of residence, or to facilitate their repatriation.

Most Respectfully,
R

I don't see how that can be applied to Palestinians who's last place of residence is in the country they are currently in - in fact, there only place of residence

(COMMENT)

It is the dilemma I was trying to explain to P F Tinmore.

In reality, these types of issues are brought-up at the Armistice meeting, Cease-Fire Arrangements, or the Treaty negotiations. The Geneva Convention Code is only used as the default.

Most Respectfully,
R

You can't offer residence and/or citizenship to individuals conquered in battle who refuse to sign an armistice.

Heck --- most Palis wouldn't even sign a recognition of Israel statehood!! Never mind their occupation that came about because their side lost a war and the PREVIOUS landlord no longer wanted the conquered territory back..

 

[Boston1]

The language being used in these last few posts is a frightening example the revisionist narrative infiltrating historic accuracy.

There is no state of palestine to be occupied. The pali's are not an indigenous people.
Self defense is not immoral
Jordan is the Arab state, Gaza will soon enough be another Arab state and no number of Arab states in the original mandated area is going to resolve the real problem

Racism and bigotry. The Arab Muslims simply will not let go of their hatred long enough to realize they are the only ones paying for all the hatred. Israel is a vibrant and robust country with a healthy economy. The only people suffering from the hatred and bigotry of the Arabs, is the Arabs.

Solution, Detain and declare palestinian combatants POWs and remove/repatriate them to a neutral third country or party.

Throw the bums out and let the rest live their lives under gradually reducing restrictions.

 

[RoccoR]

Boston1, et al,

I think this is a very dangerous sequence.

Step one
Throw the UNWRA out and replace them with the red cross with the agreement that no employees or members of the IRC be nationals, members or a party in any way to the a belligerent in the conflict. Which would immediately aid in ensuring a fare more judicious distribution of aid.

(COMMENT)

The UNRWA is a source of income for many Palestinians. And it is one of the most reliable employer payers.

To cut-off this important (non-Israeli) source of revenue would have a grave impact on the economy; and a strain on the population that would have to be elevated immediately.

If the ICRC is brought in, they will want a reimbursement; probably a cost+fixed-fee arrangement. This is counterproductive.

Step two
Arrest and repatriate to a neutral third state all enemy combatants, those who aid combatants and those suspected of aiding or being combatants.

(COMMENT)

This is a very expensive proposition. Third-country receiverships for the placement of refugees, don't do this for free. These third country receivers will want also want some sort of special development aid to supply jobs and employment services for the refugees.

Step three
Ease restrictions gradually in step with a lack of terrorist activities.

(COMMENT)

This can start anytime. Israel wants to reduce the cost of security elements in the West Bank. There are none in Gaza.

The problem has always been the trustworthiness of the Arab-Palestinian. They demonstrated in the Gaza Strip Disengagement that they would not even cooperate in the cessation of hostilities during the withdrawal. There is not reasonable expectation that as long as Jihadist, Islamic Radicals, and Fedayeen were still free, that the Palestinian Government has any influence or ability over their activity.

Step four
Not another inch of Israeli controlled land should be relinquished. A recognition of Israeli sovereignty and a return of select individuals to areas available for return.

(COMMENT)

This is a totally incomprehensible concept to the Arab Palestinian. They would torturously drag out, for years, the negotiations on the slightest of details; and quibble over the fine points. And then, like a cat done playing with a mouse, just up and leave with absolutely no progress.

This is based on their past history.

Step five
Annexation of all areas within Israeli influence into the state of Israel.

(COMMENT)

Absolutely dangerous. You simply cannot move the current Arab Palestinian population anywhere. They will still be there. And upon Annexation, they will automatically become Israeli citizens. It probably would not take more than two decades for the Arabs to assume power, change the laws, and turn the Jewish Homeland into another failed Arab State. And during all that time, the Israelis will hemorrhage revenue on dedicated social and welfare programs for the new citizens that are now free to roam the entire Jewish National Home. This would fiscally exsanguinate Israel.

Step one through four would be unilateral except for parts of step four which would depend on an international acceptance of a token number of returns with the agreement that the world body will accept Israel's annexation of all Israeli controlled territory. And no I'm not even remotely suggesting a large scale return. maybe only those original refugees and only those who can be proven to have never engaged in actions against the state.

My two cents, not that it will ever happen

(COMMENT)

This would play right into their hands.

If you want to see if the Arab Palestinians are self-destructive, then start a Utility Program, that benefits everyone.

When thinking about these types of concepts, you have to imagine a project that will hire both Israeli and Palestinian. You have to have an end product that benefits both populations (Israeli and Arab) on a scale that is dramatic --- maybe even epic; a greater effort than the Hoover Dam.

• Sink a "dedicated gas well set" in the Levant Basin.
• Attach the appropriate refinement process.
• Build a set of gas-powered Electric Generator system. (Keep Building until you reach 500 giga-watt-hours per year.)
• Build a joint Palestinian-Israeli Desalinization Complex on the scale never seen before (6 Million Gallons per day).
• Build a combination pipeline and aqueduct system from the coast to Hebron and then NE to Jericho.
• Connect the gas well set to shore.

This would put everyone to work. It would be the larges project of its kind. And it would benefit the economy and the two populations directly by elevating and shortage of water electric power and water for any type of development.

Just My Thought,
R

 

[Boston1]

Its a ridiculous idea, rhetorically applied to the claims that Israel is somehow in violation of international law. International law is ludicrously inadequate to deal with this issue.

My point is, and I'm not sure if you intended it or just didn't feel like getting into particulars. Is that I can just as easily apply international law and legally force the deportation of what would likely amount to upwards of a million or so pali combatants from Israel. As the same law be applied to forcing Israel to accept enemy combatants as citizens as the pro terrorist faction is demanding.

If the pro terrorist faction wants to pretend international law is on their side its not so hard to show that Israel would be within its rights under international law to simply expel all pali combatants exactly as specified in the Geneva conventions.

The whole Israel is somehow breaking international law argument is just ridiculous. Nearly so as creating another Arab state within the postage stamp size area we call Israel.

I would however fully support the immediate removal of the UNWRA from any activities on Israeli soil and replace them with the ICRC using the $1.3 billion UNWRA budget being presently wasted on indoctrinating new terrorists, storing arms, transporting combatants and weapons in ambulances and providing work, shelter, food and medical aid to terrorists.

I would also engage immediately in segregating combatants from refugees or civilians, and place them in two large camps. One for woman and one for men exactly as specified in the Geneva conventions.

In a nut shell if the pali's really want a war, they should get one.

You are absolutely right that the Israeli's have let this go on WAY to long.

War is not pretty, the objective is not to die in equal numbers. So get it over with ASAP and quit wasting time with it. That old adage about it taking two to fight, is all wrong. It only takes one incessant Arab Muslim pali who refused to play nice.

 

[aris2chat]

Boston1, et al,

I think this is a very dangerous sequence.

Step one
Throw the UNWRA out and replace them with the red cross with the agreement that no employees or members of the IRC be nationals, members or a party in any way to the a belligerent in the conflict. Which would immediately aid in ensuring a fare more judicious distribution of aid.

(COMMENT)

The UNRWA is a source of income for many Palestinians. And it is one of the most reliable employer payers.

To cut-off this important (non-Israeli) source of revenue would have a grave impact on the economy; and a strain on the population that would have to be elevated immediately.

If the ICRC is brought in, they will want a reimbursement; probably a cost+fixed-fee arrangement. This is counterproductive.

Step two
Arrest and repatriate to a neutral third state all enemy combatants, those who aid combatants and those suspected of aiding or being combatants.

(COMMENT)

This is a very expensive proposition. Third-country receiverships for the placement of refugees, don't do this for free. These third country receivers will want also want some sort of special development aid to supply jobs and employment services for the refugees.

Step three
Ease restrictions gradually in step with a lack of terrorist activities.

(COMMENT)

This can start anytime. Israel wants to reduce the cost of security elements in the West Bank. There are none in Gaza.

The problem has always been the trustworthiness of the Arab-Palestinian. They demonstrated in the Gaza Strip Disengagement that they would not even cooperate in the cessation of hostilities during the withdrawal. There is not reasonable expectation that as long as Jihadist, Islamic Radicals, and Fedayeen were still free, that the Palestinian Government has any influence or ability over their activity.

Step four
Not another inch of Israeli controlled land should be relinquished. A recognition of Israeli sovereignty and a return of select individuals to areas available for return.

(COMMENT)

This is a totally incomprehensible concept to the Arab Palestinian. They would torturously drag out, for years, the negotiations on the slightest of details; and quibble over the fine points. And then, like a cat done playing with a mouse, just up and leave with absolutely no progress.

This is based on their past history.

Step five
Annexation of all areas within Israeli influence into the state of Israel.

(COMMENT)

Absolutely dangerous. You simply cannot move the current Arab Palestinian population anywhere. They will still be there. And upon Annexation, they will automatically become Israeli citizens. It probably would not take more than two decades for the Arabs to assume power, change the laws, and turn the Jewish Homeland into another failed Arab State. And during all that time, the Israelis will hemorrhage revenue on dedicated social and welfare programs for the new citizens that are now free to roam the entire Jewish National Home. This would fiscally exsanguinate Israel.

Step one through four would be unilateral except for parts of step four which would depend on an international acceptance of a token number of returns with the agreement that the world body will accept Israel's annexation of all Israeli controlled territory. And no I'm not even remotely suggesting a large scale return. maybe only those original refugees and only those who can be proven to have never engaged in actions against the state.

My two cents, not that it will ever happen

(COMMENT)

This would play right into their hands.

If you want to see if the Arab Palestinians are self-destructive, then start a Utility Program, that benefits everyone.

When thinking about these types of concepts, you have to imagine a project that will hire both Israeli and Palestinian. You have to have an end product that benefits both populations (Israeli and Arab) on a scale that is dramatic --- maybe even epic; a greater effort than the Hoover Dam.

• Sink a "dedicated gas well set" in the Levant Basin.
• Attach the appropriate refinement process.
• Build a set of gas-powered Electric Generator system. (Keep Building until you reach 500 giga-watt-hours per year.)
• Build a joint Palestinian-Israeli Desalinization Complex on the scale never seen before (6 Million Gallons per day).
• Build a combination pipeline and aqueduct system from the coast to Hebron and then NE to Jericho.
• Connect the gas well set to shore.

This would put everyone to work. It would be the larges project of its kind. And it would benefit the economy and the two populations directly by elevating and shortage of water electric power and water for any type of development.

Just My Thought,
R

There are protests because UN has cut payments and funds to camps. They just don't have the money anymore. Can't give what they don't have

68 years, time to get off the dole

 

[Boston1]

Rather than reward the terrorists with more land the logical solution is to first remove their funding. The UN.

Next logical step would be to begin the forced segregation and deportation of terrorists/combatants from legitimate refugees and civilians.

 

[flacaltenn]

The language being used in these last few posts is a frightening example the revisionist narrative infiltrating historic accuracy.

There is no state of palestine to be occupied. The pali's are not an indigenous people.
Self defense is not immoral
Jordan is the Arab state, Gaza will soon enough be another Arab state and no number of Arab states in the original mandated area is going to resolve the real problem

Racism and bigotry. The Arab Muslims simply will not let go of their hatred long enough to realize they are the only ones paying for all the hatred. Israel is a vibrant and robust country with a healthy economy. The only people suffering from the hatred and bigotry of the Arabs, is the Arabs.

Solution, Detain and declare palestinian combatants POWs and remove/repatriate them to a neutral third country or party.

Throw the bums out and let the rest live their lives under gradually reducing restrictions.

There SHOULD be a nation-state of Palestine. We agree that it doesn't exist and hasn't existed in the past. I'm not the one disagreeing on those points. That is the crux of the issue.

The British cut the cheese -- broke for tea -- and FORGOT the partition idea.. No skin off their backs right? Ended up with a KINGDOM of Jordan, a dictator puppet in Syria and the Palestinians on their asses in refugee camps.

They are STILL in refugee camps in Jordan and Syria and Lebanon. And they are growing. Situation is Gaza and West Bank is slightly better than crowded refugee camps where there are ALSO no equal rights..

Point is -- there were so many OPPORTUNITIES for the PLO and PA to form a legitimate leadership that were squandered and STILL no Pali "zionist" ambitions for a homeland. These folks are NOT motivated by NATIONALISM. They don't RESPECT governments. We shouldn't expect them to understand WHY they need one. And if you can't figure it out after sitting in a squalid refugee camp for 50 years being used as hostages and target practice -- there probably isn't really ANY hope for this "indigenous people"..

So -- stop blaming their plight on Israel.. That's my position. Aint gonna urge them to DIE FOR NOTHING -- like some of the other "Pali supporters" do. I SERIOUSLY CARE about this sad story. But there's not much hope that THEY will ever understand how to fix their situation..