Palestinian Bid For Statehood

[Fred Sherman]

look at the list of their assassination. the people who died has families and friend who dislike this action therefore hate Isreal ----> violence<---- . They are one main source of the problem and their behavior need to be changed

All legitimate black ops targets. The PLO, Hezbola, Hamas and Iran put themselves in a defacto state of war with Israel. Its no different than CIA operations against Al Qaeda or the Talaban

 

[Fred Sherman]

Wales though is a different matter...

Okay, with the exception of Doctor Who by BBC Wales, what?

Just think. Cardiff as the capitol of Palestine. Finally a reason for it to exist.

 

[kkm323]

All legitimate black ops targets. The PLO, Hezbola, Hamas and Iran put themselves in a defacto state of war with Israel. Its no different than CIA operations against Al Qaeda or the Talaban

but I am not defending the CIA (thats a different subject) you can not use the CIA as an excuse for the Mossad they both wrong. We have seen it by our eyes that both are not the best solution, and we can't just laid everything on them to take care of. Otherwise the entire world would be a miss. The world is a better place now because of people who negotiate and seek solution not them.

Again: killing is not a solution at all

 

[Phil Conway]

I think you missed my point entirely. The history is irrelevant. Its not the Israel of the Bible/Torah/Koran. It is modern-day Israel, recognized by the international community with borders, a capitol and embassies throughout the world. it is a member nation of the UN.

I didn't. The history is key to this conflict, as so many people look back at it on both sides and feel that they are wronged as a result of the meddling of other parties over the last 60 years+.

There is a modern-day Israel, and it does have defined borders, but it has not stuck to them and has annexed land belonging to other countries (this is part of the dispute).

We can argue whether or not Palestinians are oppressed. Ignored? That isn't even debatable. They are the most recognized and talked about people without a nation on the planet.

But they are not recognised by the people that matter. For Palestine and Israel to negotiate a peace, there must be recognition between the two. How can you discuss a peace deal with representatives of a country when you deny that country's existence? Israel's Arab neighbours refused to recognise Israel and attempted to oppress it, culminating in the 6-day war. There's a perfect example of why the current setup doesn't work.

You say both nations can exist side-by-side. Thats theoretical. For that to happen, the PA must reject Hamas, a terrorist organization, first and foremost. Secondly, they PA must not be a safe harbor of terrorism. These are requirements for the world governments before they can do anything more to help. Meet them, and more things can happen.

It is theoretical, and it's definitely chicken and egg at the moment. Hamas will not lay down it's arms whilst Palestinian civilians are gunned down/blown up in the streets, and the Israelis will not lay down their arms whilst militants launch rockets over the border and blow themselves up on buses. If you are pointing a gun at another man, and he is pointing a gun at you, and you distrust each other, would you be capable of taking the first step and lowering your weapon?

There needs to be some form of compromise here. If Israel makes concessions that takes away Hamas' popular support, then it will cease to exist. The problem is that Hamas is a direct reaction to what the Palestinians see as Israel's direct oppression of them and encroachment on their territory. The Palestinians see this very struggle as a battle for survival and recognition against a superior oppressive opponent. The very name "Hamas" means "Islamist Resistance".

Mossad is a reaction to Hamas and others. If Mossad didn't exist, more than likely you'd see Israelis picking up their own weapons and forming their own militant groups. Mossad exists in the strength that it does as a direct reaction to Hamas and the other militant groups who target Israeli civilians. It is a symptom of the problem rather than a cause of it.

Next, we have to address the unique situation of Israel's existence. It is surrounded by enemies that want nothing less than its total destruction. No one can expect Israel to give up land that will out it at a strategic disadvantage. Its not different than the US not allowing Soviet missiles on Cuba during the 60s. Some things are just too much of a strategic weakness to be acceptable.

The only way that a peace can be reached is if there is compromise. Israel is not weak, it has a military and weapons far exceeding anything of it's neighbours, and has done since it's formation. I would argue that the giving up of land does not put it at a strategic disadvantage when you take it's military might into account.

Israel's encroachment onto land it does not own is also part of the problem as mentioned above. It's neighbours see settlement building as occupation of the land and displacement of the current landowners, just like the native Catholics in Northern Ireland perceived the settlement of English Protestants as occupation and displacement (another fine mess created by my country), and we all know how that ended.

So who brokers the solution? The EU? Not likely. The problem with the EU is it is an economic alliance, not a political one. When the EU nations speak about Israel & Palestinians, it is with a discordant voice. Russia? With their relationship with Iran, that might not be a bad idea, at least as one member to the party. China also has influence. Maybe a middle east summit jointly brokered by the US, China and Russia?

I like that idea, but I don't see any US president buying into it. They all want to be the rock star.

At the end of the day, Israel still holds all of the cards. Should their patience ever wear thin, they could eliminate the PA quickly and decisively. They have the military capability to eliminate all of their enemies and the public will to do it. But that would be a nuclear option (at least figuratively) because world opinion would turn quickly against them unless they were provoked.

And why should Palestine come exclusively from Israel? How about some land from Israel, some from Jordan, some from Lebanon and Syria? Or is Palestine simply the excuse for Arab anti-semitism?

It doesn't matter how you look at this, there is no good solution. The not thing that is certain - granting Palestinian statehood before finding that resolution will be disastrous. It will destabilize the region and I'm nearly certain set in motion the events that lead to the next world war.

The best possible solution for me is to get both sides talking, and then for those two sides and their neighbours to compromise. What is more important, peace with your neighbours or more land to secure yourself against the theoretical threat of war, and their distrust of you as a result?

All sides have to give something up to get this to go anywhere, and that won't happen whilst the Israelis feel threatened or the Palestinians feel oppressed/wronged. I fear (as per the rest of your post) that there isn't anyone capable of sorting out this mess. Numerous politicians, empires, and countries haven't helped, and neither has both sides blowing each other up. Everyone in this messy dispute is far too entrenched in their own positions and refuse to give anything up.

The problem is that the whole region was never split cleanly into countries. In the past, Arabs and Jews lived side by side, most of the time peacefully. No matter how you carve it, you cannot seperate these people into different nations down boundary lines (Jerusalem is a perfect example of this). A different approach is needed, but I'm not sure what or how. If it was that easy to figure out, it would have been solved already

 

[Fred Sherman]

I truly believe if the UN votes for Palestinian statehood, the US should withdraw from the US, cease all funding to the UN and eject the body from US soil. Following that up with withdrawing the $500 million in annual support given to the Palestinian Authority.

Mossad is a reaction to Hamas and others. If Mossad didn't exist, more than likely you'd see Israelis picking up their own weapons and forming their own militant groups. Mossad exists in the strength that it does as a direct reaction to Hamas and the other militant groups who target Israeli civilians. It is a symptom of the problem rather than a cause of it.

Uhh, no. The Mossad was created in 1949, shortly after Israel came into being. Hamas was founded in 1987, Hezbollah in 1985 and the PLO in 1964. So no, the Mossad wasn't a reaction to anything other than legitimate statecraft, like the CIA, MI5, KGB or other governmental intelligence agencies.

The best possible solution for me is to get both sides talking, and then for those two sides and their neighbours to compromise. What is more important, peace with your neighbours or more land to secure yourself against the theoretical threat of war, and their distrust of you as a result?

Theoretical threat of war?

A significant rise in the number of terror attacks was recorded in August, the Shin Bet reported Monday.

According to the report, 178 attacks were recorded in August, compared to 53 in July. The figures include rocket strikes from the Gaza Strip.

Overall, 134 rocket attacks against Israel were recorded during the month.

Shin Bet officials noted that the number of terror attacks originating in the Gaza Strip rose to 135, compared to 30 that originated in Judea and Samaria. Meanwhile, six terror attacks originated in Jerusalem, compared to eight in July.

The terror attacks in August claimed the lives of nine Israelis and wounded 55 others. Eight Israelis were killed in the terror offensive in southern Israel and another person was killed in a Grad attack.

In total, 145 rockets and 46 mortar shells were fired at Israel last month, compared to 20 rockets and two mortar shells in July. Most attacks in Judea and Samaria and in Jerusalem (34 out of 36 attacks) were in the form of firebombs.

I'm not seeing much in the way of theoretical. BTW, note the locations: Judea and Samaria and in Jerusalem AKA Palestinian Authority.

Furthermore...

Netanyahu said he has turned to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas several times, and offered him to meet, but Abbas declined. "I told him the road to peace goes through direct negotiations and not unilateral decisions at the UN," he said.

Also on Tuesday, Israel’s Ambassador to the UN, Ron Prosor, said in an interview that Israel “is ready to negotiate tomorrow,” with the Palestinians.

In an interview with Army Radio, Prosor discussed attempts to arrange a meeting between Abbas and Netanyahu during their mutual visit to New York before the UN vote on Palestinian statehood, which is due to take place on September 23.

Negotiations aren't possible because both sides won't negotiate. And who made this all possible? None other than Obama when he, as usual, opened his mouth to change feet: http://www.nationalreview.com/corne...obama-promise-palestinian-state-david-french#

His brothers are calling on our Muslim president to make good on his promise. The problem for them is regardless of where he may or may not have been born and whether he is Muslim at heart or not, Obama is a true American. Having had power, he is adverse to giving it up and that requires Jewish voters. So Palestine is out int he cold.

 

[Paul B]

Seems to me there is little point in debating the issue when you've already made your mind up.
As you stated in your opening post: "Case closed."

Thankfully not everyone is as closed minded and there may yet come a time when a peaceful solution is found.

 

[Fred Sherman]

I made up my mind about the UN long ago. Its a worthless international debate society, a paper tiger with no claws or teeth.

I have no idea what to do about two people with equally legitimate, but diametrically opposed views and I've said so. But I do no when you're faced with a gasoline spill, you don't vote to use matches.

Don't confuse my contempt for the UN as anything more than that.

 

[Fred Sherman]

After more research, it turns out the nation best positioned to broker mideast peace is...

India.

India and Israel share extensive economic, military and strategic ties. India has also recognized the Palestinian state. India and Russia are important strategic allies, which could allow India to exert some measure of influence over the Syrian and Iranian antagonists through Russia. Finally, India's relationship with Pakistan mirrors that of Israel and Palestine, giving them a somewhat sympathetic view towards the disagreement. It was roughly the same timeframe (1947) when India, Pakistan and Burma were created out of the British Raj (Damn, Britain imperialism really screwed up the world), which led to territorial disputes that exist today. The two countries nearly resorted to nuclear war in 2001, for goodness sake. I think India can relate better to both sides than nearly any other country on earth.

So thats my idea. US, step away and step off. India, its your turn.

 

[kkm323]

His brothers are calling on our Muslim president to make good on his promise. The problem for them is regardless of where he may or may not have been born and whether he is Muslim at heart or not, Obama is a true American. Having had power, he is adverse to giving it up and that requires Jewish voters. So Palestine is out int he cold.

maybe you should consider reading this again..
Muslim president = since when?
promise = what?!! its call a solution
true American = pro-Israel !!

 

[grant sarver]

when you're faced with a gasoline spill, you don't vote to use matches.

Oh Fred! Your analogies crack me up. You create an analogy unrelated to the subject in any way, that has only one obvious answer, then state that it proves your case!

Reminds me of a cartoon I saw back around 1970. Henry Kissinger set out to prove the validity of "the domino theory". He set up a row of dominos and knocked down the first one. "See!" he declared!

OBTW: how many of the "dominos" actually fell after Nam? Oh, and I lost a lot of buddies in Nam.

And as kkm323 observes, you like to use blatant falsehoods to inflame.

 

[Fred Sherman]

maybe you should consider reading this again..
Muslim president = since when?
promise = what?!! its call a solution
true American = pro-Israel !!

You missed some of the tongue in cheek references.

Some (including some mideast leaders) believe Obama is really Muslim. I personally doubt it.
Some believe he wasn't born in the US. I doubt that too.
Thats sarcasm.

He did make what could be interpreted as a promise a year ago.

true American = love of power over breaking promises. That was the implication.

I'll use a <sarcasm> tag in the future. Sometimes I'll shift gears too quickly for others to pick it up.

 

[TheLaw]

I didn't. The history is key to this conflict, as so many people look back at it on both sides and feel that they are wronged as a result of the meddling of other parties over the last 60 years+....The problem is that the whole region was never split cleanly into countries... In the past, Arabs and Jews lived side by side, most of the time peacefully. No matter how you carve it, you cannot seperate these people into different nations down boundary lines (Jerusalem is a perfect example of this). A different approach is needed, but I'm not sure what or how. If it was that easy to figure out, it would have been solved already

Phil, you really need to extend your history reading beyond 1948. You might have a better appreciation for the problem. I really didn't want to talk about this situation but after reading everything you wrote, I feel compelled to share the following:

A few things might shock you. (1) There are plenty of Jews, Palestinians and Christians who get along very well in Israel and many really do want peace. (2) Arabs consist of many different sects. Would it shock you to know that Arabs serve in the Israeli army? (3) The region of "Palestine" also extended well into Jordan - but past issues and that border question seems not to be an issue. But let's get to your statements: "In the past, Arabs and Jews lived side by side, most of the time peacefully." Israel became a country in 1948. What happened before then in the entire middle east like Iran, Iraq, Syria, etc. -- places that are much larger than a tiny country? Phil, as you're very concerned about the oppression of people, what happened to the Jews and Christians living in the rest of the middle east? What are their rights, for example, in Syria? Do you know what Sharia law is?

Long before 1948... in the 19th century, there began a movement called "Arab Nationalism." The 20th century brought more problems with the extreme Islam leader, El-Mufti, who later was a Nazi collaborator, along with Hitler and Mussolini. Take a guess what his purpose was? Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust (occurred before 1948.) This issue isn't about a strip of land - it's about control over the entire region and the people pushing the buttons aren't necessarily even Palestinians themselves.

So who is the "leader" and "voice" of the Palestinians? Phil - can you answer this? Do you remember a guy named Yasser Arafat - one of the world's most notorious terrorists? Do you remember Oslo - for which Arafat was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for allegedly making peace with Israel? Shortly thereafter, terror attacks continued. Arafat died a billionaire while his own people languished in poverty - and Arafat was funded by interests that were obviously not peaceful in nature - billions of dollars. From whom? Take a guess. Arafat kept many innocent people angry at a common enemy while keeping himself wealthy and accomplishing the mission that many powerful leaders in the middle east set forth: "Peace for us means the destruction of Israel." Who do you think die for the cause? Did you know that Sadam Hussein would send money to the families of suicide bombers to fund these children strapping explosives onto their bodies? How many of these children are actually oppressed by Israelis or raised to hate Israelis to carry out an end that other powerful leaders prefer to actual peace? Osama Bin Laden explained his mission was aligned with the plight of the Palestinians, etc. Was that billionaire was oppressed too? No - both him and Arafat could have used their billions to feed, clothe and improve the quality of life for all the Palestinians. But it's also about keeping the poor, unknown young dogs starving so they can be ferocious and give up their lives as martyrs... it's an ugly situation.

BOTTOM LINE: You want to solve the problem? You need to solve the entire middle east problem and provide that same equality and fairness for a much larger piece of real estate. Make no mistake - there are many people on both sides who want peace. But who is going to stop the powerful forces at work from carrying out their intended mission? Abbas is powerless to stop these great powerful forces and their money from carrying out their ends. So what security does this bring to Jews and Christians in the middle east if the answer is "sorry, I can only control the people I can control?" Both Palestinians and Israelis unfortunately worry about this. It's a sad reality and "Palestine" is unfortunately more of a means to an end.

It pains me greatly to see numerous innocent people die - ANY people of any race or religion. I truly grieve for the victims on both sides. But before you reach any firm conclusion and share these "obvious" solutions, you really need to fully understand and appreciate the entire nature of the problem. Drawing a few lines, even if possible, isn't going to solve the biggest problem of all.

 

[Sadik B]

Well...

1. I have seen "history" being presented with "proofs" by both sides on how the land belongs to them and not to the other side.

2. Palestinians have engaged in terrorism activities and Israel is a terrorist state.

3. US, India or anyone else should just leave them alone and mind their own business.

Just my 2 cents...

 

[TheLaw]

1. I have seen "history" being presented with "proofs" by both sides on how the land belongs to them and not to the other side.
2. Palestinians have engaged in terrorism activities and Israel is a terrorist state.
3. US, India or anyone else should just leave them alone and mind their own business.

1. Nobody is claiming that land belongs exclusively to them.
2. A group of militant extremists are the terrorists. All the Palestinian people are not one group nor are they all terrorists. If you can't figure out the difference between Israel and Hamas, perhaps you should look up what the word "Hamas" means as a starter. Then you can read their charter. Israel doesn't exist to kill people. Now if Israel is a "terrorist state" then what is Syria? What is Iran? But also see #3.
3. Have you heard of the Gulf War? The Iraq War? If you're throwing around words like you have, some might say that the largest...

This really isn't a great issue to discuss here. It's very complicated, divisive and depressing. Sure people should be free to discuss but I'm hoping that this topic can naturally end and move onto other interesting and productive conversation. There are plenty of other places that are probably more appropriate forums for discussion.

 

[Sadik B]

1. I wasn't talking about "exclusively". Fred posted earlier about the history of the place and how there was never a Palestine. I was merely saying I have seen "history" being presented by both sides claiming opposite things.

2. I did not mention Syria or Iran. The only thing I mentioned was that yes, there are terrorist organizations in Palestine and the government of Israel is also a terrorist state. I stand by what I said, I understand you may disagree.

3. Yes, I have. The reason I was curt in what I said was that in spite of a strong resolve not to get involved in any discussions on this subject, I could not help myself. I know where you are coming from and I stand by what I said.

I agree this isn't a place to discuss this.

 

[jmurrayhead]

Isn't Hamas that stuff I put on my pita bread?

 

[Kim]

Isn't Hamas that stuff I put on my pita bread?

tee hee hee

 

[Ranger375]

2. I did not mention Syria or Iran. The only thing I mentioned was that yes, there are terrorist organizations in Palestine and the government of Israel is also a terrorist state.

I'd like to hear your definition of a terrorist state.

There seems to be a lot of ignorance in this thread.

 

[Phil Conway]

Phil, you really need to extend your history reading beyond 1948. You might have a better appreciation for the problem.

You seem to have missed the following...

The simple truth is that this land has been repeatedly conquered by so many different factions over the last 1300 years (The Greeks, The Persians, The Babylonians, The Arabs, the British) that it ceased to be either Israel or Palestine, and the original drawing up of the borders should never have happened in the form that it did.

I am well aware of the history of the region pre-WW2, I tried to keep the context of my posts limited to current events to avoid making my posts so long as to dissuade anyone from reading them. That isn't the same as ignorance

A few things might shock you. (1) There are plenty of Jews, Palestinians and Christians who get along very well in Israel and many really do want peace. (2) Arabs consist of many different sects. Would it shock you to know that Arabs serve in the Israeli army? (3) The region of "Palestine" also extended well into Jordan - but past issues and that border question seems not to be an issue. But let's get to your statements: "In the past, Arabs and Jews lived side by side, most of the time peacefully." Israel became a country in 1948. What happened before then in the entire middle east like Iran, Iraq, Syria, etc. -- places that are much larger than a tiny country?

None of these shock me - as I have pointed out previously the whole region can't just be carved up by lines in an attempt to make everything work, and as we all know life isn't black and white to the point where all Palestinians and Israelis would be completely seperate. The whole region (Arabia/Persia - not just the current countries we know as Israel/Palestine) has been repeatedly conquered and occupied by different empires/countries (Ottomans, Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, Byzantines, Babylonians, British) for over 1400 years and more. Fred has given a more accurate and in-depth list above on one of his posts. You have displacement/dispersement of all of the different religious/ethnic groups involved, some by choice and some by the previous history of the area - they don't all live in contiguous blocks on a map and most haven't done so for generations. You have Christians/Jews in Iran, Iraq, Syria, and others, plus Arabs in Israel. As you have rightly pointed out, some of these groups are viciously oppressed by other groups within their countries or by their own governments.

Long before 1948... in the 19th century, there began a movement called "Arab Nationalism." The 20th century brought more problems with the extreme Islam leader, El-Mufti, who later was a Nazi collaborator, along with Hitler and Mussolini. Take a guess what his purpose was? Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust (occurred before 1948.) This issue isn't about a strip of land - it's about control over the entire region and the people pushing the buttons aren't necessarily even Palestinians themselves.

The issue of control is evident for all to see. You have Iran and Syria among others attempting to destabilise the region for it's own ends, by arming militant groups in an attempt to escalate the current problems.

The Nazis are probably most responsible for creating the need for a modern Israel. Imagine for a moment that the Holocaust hadn't happened - there probably would have been no mass exodus of Jews into the region, and the argument for a (predominantly Arab) state with a smaller Jewish state to replace the British Mandate would have probably been more compelling. The British had proposed a two-state solution to the Sharif of Mecca and Baron Rothschild (leader of the British Jewish community) under the Balfour Declaration in 1917 to gain their support during WW1, when the Ottomans joined the war, however support for a Jewish state started to wane after this point. The roles could have possibly been reversed, with a larger prosperous Palestine and a smaller, more aggressive Israel. We'd probably be in the same mess we are now however...

So who is the "leader" and "voice" of the Palestinians? Phil - can you answer this? Do you remember a guy named Yasser Arafat - one of the world's most notorious terrorists? Do you remember Oslo - for which Arafat was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize for allegedly making peace with Israel? Shortly thereafter, terror attacks continued. Arafat died a billionaire while his own people languished in poverty - and Arafat was funded by interests that were obviously not peaceful in nature - billions of dollars. From whom? Take a guess. Arafat kept many innocent people angry at a common enemy while keeping himself wealthy and accomplishing the mission that many powerful leaders in the middle east set forth: "Peace for us means the destruction of Israel." Who do you think die for the cause? Did you know that Sadam Hussein would send money to the families of suicide bombers to fund these children strapping explosives onto their bodies? How many of these children are actually oppressed by Israelis or raised to hate Israelis to carry out an end that other powerful leaders prefer to actual peace? Osama Bin Laden explained his mission was aligned with the plight of the Palestinians, etc. Was that billionaire was oppressed too? No - both him and Arafat could have used their billions to feed, clothe and improve the quality of life for all the Palestinians. But it's also about keeping the poor, unknown young dogs starving so they can be ferocious and give up their lives as martyrs... it's an ugly situation.

I'm aware of most of the above. I'm not old enough to know all of Arafat's history personally (i.e. via the news), but I have done enough reading up on it to be aware of the facts that you reference, including his terrorist activities. His political party (of which the current Palestinian president is a member) still calls for the destruction/removal of Israel among it's goals.

Arafat's personal history fits with the history of the region - you have dictators and despots hiding behind the titles of "president", "clerics", "royal families", and others in an attempt to lend themselves legitimacy. Most of them have or still are meddling in the region by providing militant groups with weapons or money. Some of these dictators have (and still do) brutally suppress their own people in an attempt to maintain their tight grip on power. Few of them have the interests of their people at heart. Some of this has changed with the dawn of the Arab Spring and multiple revolutions, and others (eg Syria) are still killing their own civilians to try and stem the tide. Not all of these revolutions are for the better - the previous Egyptian president upheld a peace deal with Israel that was deeply unpopular within his own country and will probably fail given the popular uprising there, and the hardening of opinion towards Israel given recent killings on the border between the two countries.

I wasn't aware of your claim about Hussein but it doesn't surprise me, especially seeing as both sides in the Iran/Iraq war used children as suicide bombers.

BOTTOM LINE: You want to solve the problem? You need to solve the entire middle east problem and provide that same equality and fairness for a much larger piece of real estate. Make no mistake - there are many people on both sides who want peace. But who is going to stop the powerful forces at work from carrying out their intended mission? Abbas is powerless to stop these great powerful forces and their money from carrying out their ends. So what security does this bring to Jews and Christians in the middle east if the answer is "sorry, I can only control the people I can control?" Both Palestinians and Israelis unfortunately worry about this. It's a sad reality and "Palestine" is unfortunately more of a means to an end.

It pains me greatly to see numerous innocent people die - ANY people of any race or religion. I truly grieve for the victims on both sides. But before you reach any firm conclusion and share these "obvious" solutions, you really need to fully understand and appreciate the entire nature of the problem. Drawing a few lines, even if possible, isn't going to solve the biggest problem of all.

I agree with all of the above

 

[=MGN=RedEagle]

I can't see this thread ending well...

That was the first thing I thought when I read it. I could just hear the bombs dropping in my mind. Lol!