Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forum
This message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (Little Tich) on Mon Mar 20, 2017, 10:46 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Not exactly two of of the world's greatest success stories.
Response to oberliner (Reply #1)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
sabbat hunter
(6,835 posts)a single state solution, which is the death of Israel. They want all Palestinians to be allowed to return to Israel proper. Both of these would lead to a Jewish minority very quickly, which would cause MAJOR issues. They hold up Lebanon as a shining example of what to follow. They fail to mention how long it took Lebanon to get a new president, or how the Lebanese Christians have far more seats in their Parliament than their actual numbers reflect, which is bad. It also holds up Yugoslovia under a dictator (Tito) as how a state can be forced together and live in harmony with a 'tri-cameral legislature'. They fail to mention that the legislature was a rubber stamp for Tito, who was a dictator.
A one state solution is not going to work in Israel/Palestine. What will work is both sides being reasonable. Israel pulling out of most of the West bank, except for Jerusalem, Israel giving reparations for those that were actually forced out of Israel proper, in exchange for Arab countries giving money to those jews forced out of Arab countries post 1948. The Jews living in areas of the WB that will become Palestine, will be given two options, leave (with compensation) or stay, but realize they will be governed by Palestine, not Israel.
Response to sabbat hunter (Reply #2)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Pretty disingenuous as you're against 2 states, period. This isn't about settlements as there were none in 1947 & yet you still reject that 2 state solution. You're a 1-stater with goals similar to that of Hamas. Just be honest and admit it.
Response to shira (Reply #8)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
sabbat hunter
(6,835 posts)should either leave with compensation, or if they stay, they are ruled by Palestine, thus no break up of a continuous state of Palestine in the WB.
Jerusalem was never intended to be a part of Palestine, so it should not go to them.
Response to sabbat hunter (Reply #17)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
sabbat hunter
(6,835 posts)where Jerusalem (east or West) belongs to Palestine. Cease fire maps after the War of independence don't count, as that is all they were, cease fire lines, not meant necessarily as permanent borders.
I do not know if the settlers are a drain on Israel or not. If they are, then they would need to be removed (With compensation) and not be allowed to stay as part of a Palestine.
If the settlers are NOT a drain on Israel, then they should have the option of staying (becoming Palestinian citizens) if they wish, but realize that means they get integrated into Palestine fully.
Response to sabbat hunter (Reply #31)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)You've been wrong on nearly everything here, from settlements being illegal to the occupation's legality, to Jordan being Palestine...
It's difficult debating much of anything with you when all you have is false propaganda to base your arguments on.
Response to shira (Reply #34)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 30, 2016, 07:23 AM - Edit history (1)
Morocco in Western Sahara
Turkey in North Cyprus
Russia in Georgia’s Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Ukraine's Crimea
China in Tibet
Indonesia in E.Timor
Vietnam in Cambodia
In no other examples are the Geneva conventions brought up (against settlers). Only Israel.
We've been over this before despite your weak denial...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=132861
Here's an actual study on it...
http://israelseen.com/2016/09/09/prof-eugene-kontorovich-settlement-activity-not-a-violation-of-geneva-conventions/
Israel cannot be the only occupying country in which settlements are illegal according to Geneva. That's called discrimination. One standard or no standard at all. In none of the situations above is there a demand for settlers to leave any territories. That's also unique to Israel.
And of course the "occupation" is legal. If it weren't, Israel would've been pressured to withdraw immediately in 1967 and without negotiating a peace deal. From Egypt, from Jordan. But that was never the intent of UN resolutions 242 and 338 which call for recognized & secure borders.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)West and UN must hold Turkey to account for Geneva Convention violations in Cyprus
“The impunity granted to Turkey must come to an end, the law must be enforced and justice must be served”, said Theo Theodorou, spokesman for Lobby for Cyprus.
https://lobbyforcyprus.wordpress.com/2016/08/01/turkeygenevaconventionviolations/
Of course, they don't have anything like the PR machine that the Palestinians have, so their cause gets largely ignored.
shira
(30,109 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 30, 2016, 07:53 AM - Edit history (1)
They're using Geneva Conventions to demand action against Turkey ethnically cleansing 200,000 Greeks. Of course, that's what forced transfer really means, not Turkish settlers voluntarily choosing to move to Cyprus.
Kontorovich's research is a game-changer.
How does one argue for Israeli settlements being illegal according to Geneva when no other situation worldwide is ever deemed illegal by the same standards?
Response to shira (Reply #36)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)The facts are there for anyone to look up & verify.
1. Show a precedent for anyone other than Jewish settlers being forced to leave an occupied territory.
2. Show evidence from anything in the UN about any other settlements in the world being deemed illegal due to the Geneva convention. If you doubt there are any other settlements in any other occupations, simply use google. Or not, since you appear allergic to the facts.
You can't prove Kontorovich wrong. I know it and you know it.
QED.
Response to shira (Reply #40)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)It's there in his research paper. Link already provided above.
Find something wrong.
You can't.
still_one
(92,422 posts)That they say a two state solution has been shown to be non-workable is a huge false argument.
It has to be done through negotiations. Those negotiations were close to being realized under Rabin, Carter, and Clinton, but when bush was elected, all of that was thrown away.
A two state solution is very much possible, but it is going to take a lot of work, and parties willing to sit down and negotiate.
FBaggins
(26,762 posts)It's a blogger hosted on their server.
A blogger with nothing particularly new to say. Just another version of "a supposedly-secular democracy quickly flooded with a new Palestinian majority"
Response to FBaggins (Reply #3)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)sabbat hunter
(6,835 posts)it is fucking mondoweiss. Piece of shit website.
shira
(30,109 posts)Response to shira (Reply #9)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
oberliner
(58,724 posts)Such as:
zaid November 27, 2016, 11:12 pm
I prefer Ayatollah Khamenei solution.
https://twitter.com/khamenei_ir/status/531366667377717248?lang=en
Just and humane.
Response to oberliner (Reply #24)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Jews are Khazars racist nonsense...
Oops?
Response to shira (Reply #43)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)Did you conveniently forget already?
Response to shira (Reply #45)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
shira
(30,109 posts)How many more ways does it need to be proven Mondoweiss is a hate site?
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)shira
(30,109 posts)ON CONTIGUITY
The least practical aspect of the two-state scenario results from the geographical positioning of the Gaza Strip in relation to Judea and Samaria (West Bank). Unlike in other proposals, The New State Solution would front-load this most intractable geographical challenge rather than defer it to a nebulous ‘future date.’
The New State Solution would thus be anchored first and foremost in the Gaza Strip, with territorial expansion into a section of the Sinai Peninsula. This state could be larger than anything that could be accommodated by the minute area of Judea and Samaria, thus granting geographical viability. It also redefines the Gaza Strip as a central part of the solution, rather than an insurmountable problem.
...ON DEMOGRAPHICS
Financial and commercial assistance would be granted to any residents of Judea and Samaria wishing to relocate to The New State.
Consider that today, as in the past, Jews immigrate to Israel with the belief that a better life awaits them here. Their reasons for doing so are varied. Significantly, however, Jews come to Israel voluntarily. They are neither forcibly transferred into Israel as individuals, nor as whole communities.
So too should it be for the Palestinian Arabs of Judea and Samaria.
Like many in the Jewish Diaspora, some will wish to remain where they currently reside. Others will sense and seize upon the gleaming opportunity offered by The New State.
The Palestinian Arabs are no more monolithic than are the Jewish People. Some may wish to constitute their futures in Judea and Samaria, others will prefer the option of opening a hotel along the shores of their own state or the prospect of building a home overlooking the Mediterranean, or they will move seeking employment and the opportunity to build up a state in which they have agency. They ought to be allowed to choose.
Successful repatriation to The New State would significantly further reduce Israel’s demographic considerations regarding Judea and Samaria while those residents already in the Gaza Strip would be part of The New State, resolving that demographic concern.
For those not wishing to relocate from Judea and Samaria, the more favorable demographic realities enjoyed by Israel would engender the confidence needed to annex Judea and Samaria with full and equal rights being extended to all, regardless of race, religion or creed. This would take place only once a 50% immigration threshold to The New State is achieved.
Israel would continue the policy of the right of return and would control immigration policy within Israel. It would thus maintain its democratic and Jewish character by far more than the two-thirds majority advocated by some proponents of the one state solution.
Those Palestinian Arabs claiming citizenship overseas would have an open channel to immigration into The New State, with The New State affixing immigration policy for itself....
...For too long, calls have come for a two state solution incorporating Judea and Samaria as the basis of a Palestinian state. At its core, such a plan requires the mass, likely enforced displacement of at least many tens of thousands of Jewish people in order to build a home for another people. Past experience within Israel does not bode well for any such notion, nor should it. I do not want to see the people of Israel go through such a process. I do not wish to see the Palestinian Arabs go through such a process. There should be no forced transfers of populations.
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/announcing-the-new-state-solution/
appal_jack
(3,813 posts)aranthus
(3,385 posts)Why would Egypt give up any part of the Sinai? What about water? What about arable land?
shira
(30,109 posts)TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)There was certainly a lot of fog surrounding the episode.
In a speech to mark national teachers' day and which mostly dealt with education, Sisi stressed that no one can make such promises and that there is no room for talk about the matter.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/184903
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Egypt-PA-deny-report-that-Sisi-offered-Abbas-land-in-Sinai-for-Palestinian-state-374785
shira
(30,109 posts)....for strict 1967 borders. It would still allow the PA to have their own state inside the W.Bank, but compensate for settled regions by expanding Gaza.
Not the 'New' state solution but related.
It benefits Sisi as well, getting the PA to administer Gaza & this part of the Sinai is better than having to contend with Hamas & other Salafist sources, ISIS, Al-Qaeda, etc.
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)would the New State type of model be acceptable to you if the movement was reversed i.e. the Palestinians were encouraged to move from Gaza to a West Bank state ? Given that that would make the problem of acquiring territory from Egypt moot.
shira
(30,109 posts)....in exchange for Gaza & the built-up settler areas?
I don't think Israel wants Gaza.
Last edited Mon Nov 28, 2016, 07:01 PM - Edit history (2)
The prize for Israel is the West Bank, moreover the West Bank with as few Palestinians as possible.
I really struggle to identify any vestige of fairness in these New State/Greater Gaza 'solutions' which look to deliver that jackpot above all else.
But it's a useful discussion.
Response to shira (Reply #10)
TubbersUK This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to shira (Reply #10)
Little Tich This message was self-deleted by its author.
ericson00
(2,707 posts)accept that there will be a non-Muslim state in the Middle East, that Muslim sovereignty will only extend to Mecca, Medina, Qom, Najaf rather than to those and Jerusalem as well, that Israel won't commit demographic suicide, and then we can have a 2 state solution. It's that simple.
