that ANYONE who votes Likud or for Likud's crazier partners is voting AGAINST peace. Forever.

Hopefully the electorates on both sides will be wiser (assuming the Palestinians ever do manage to hold an election, and the Israelis go moderate-left).

Feiglin: Pay Palestinians to leave West Bank

Several Likud officials called for the annexation of the West Bank on Tuesday, in contradiction with the party's official policy.

Despite being instructed by the Likud campaign not to give interviews, Moshe Feiglin made controversial statements during a conference in Jerusalem on Tuesday.
.........................................

"The State of Israel is paying 10% of its GNP every year for the two-state solution and the Oslo Accords. It's paying for separation fences, Iron Domes and a guard at every café. Soon we'll have to place Iron Domes in every school in Tel Aviv.

"With this budget we can give every Arab family in Judea and Samaria $500,000 to encourage it to immigrate to a place with a better future.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4327557,00.html

I wonder if he is making some kind of "point" or is serious.

Along the lines of we could have bought the place for what it cost to lose it militarily.

"The one-state solution" is a specific group of ideas that have unification as a single state as the center point. There's a lot of other stuff that goes into the "single state solution" that is not included in the Israeli Right's ideas, nor in the more extreme outlooks from Palestinians (who frankly lack enough political structure and tradition to clearly define "right and left&quot

The actual one-state solution is nothing like the militarist purge that fuels the Stalag-Comic fantasies of the Israeli right, nor is it the mirror image espoused by Hamas, of deporting all Jews of non-native ancestry back to Europe. Your attempt to characterize it as such is either ignorant or disingenuous.

As for the Israelis ever going moderate-left? Why would that ever happen? Likud and Yisrael Beitinu are in charge because they give Israelis what Israelis want. Left parties in Israel are miserable non-entities because Israelis are not actually interested in anything they have to offer.

Nothing that you've written here is true (except perhaps in your own mind).

What you think is the "actual" one-state solution is no more "actual" than what Feiglin or Haniyeh thinks is the one-state solution.

In fact, assuming you are neither Israeli nor Palestinian, it is wholly irrelevant.

Right-wingers among Israelis and Palestinians both support the notion of a single state and reject the idea of a two-state solution.

This has been explicitly stated numerous times by representatives from both sides.

The "One-state solution" proposes a single binational secular democratic state that is equal between Jews, Arabs, and whoever else. This is a very well-documented proposal, even if it hasn't been given serious consideration in western / Israeli circles.

What Feiglin endorses is a wholesale purge of Arabs - and goyim in general, actually - from "Eretz Yisrael," and the institution of a totalitarian state-theocracy over the Jews of Israel, where disagreeing with the state is also blasphemy and disloyalty to the race. In other words, the land of milk and honey for at least three I/P posters I can think of off the top of my head. While this... vision does indeed consist of a singular state, it is fundamentally different from the "One State Solution."

Haniyeh actually endorsed a two-state solution based on the armistice lines in 2006;

What agreements will you honor?

The ones that will guarantee the establishment of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital with 1967 borders -- as well as agreements that would release prisoners.

Would Hamas recognize Israel if it were to withdraw to the '67 borders?

If Israel withdraws to the '67 borders, then we will establish a peace in stages.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/24/AR2006022402317.html

He has of course also said that Hamas will not recognize Israel, as recently as last year. The Hamas party line calls for an Islamic state across the breadth of Palestine, and the expulsion of non-native Jews back to Europe (or wherever) - with nativity being defined as ancestral ties in Palestine prior to the waves of immigration in the 20th century. The wild thing is that this is actually more moderate than what Feiglin is calling for.

Again this establishes a single state, but is a far cry from the "One state" solution.

Words and terms have meaning, Oberliner. Meaning is explored in details. By ignoring details you obfuscate meaning, and thus attempt to turn those words and terms into just whatever the fuck you want them to mean.

You cannot equate either the Caliphate state envisoned by Hamas, nor the fascist Eretz Yisrael being pushed by Moshe Feiglin, with the one State solution. It's as nonsensical as saying the "two state solution" is expelling Palestinians into Jordan; see, Israel and Jordan, two states, ha ha ha.

No Zionist would ever agree to your one-state solution. Virtually no Israeli would. Your characterization of Feiglin's proposed state as fascist is blatant propaganda...or worse. Feiglin recognizes race, religion, culture, shared history as important elements which bind people together to make an enduring state, nation. You don't...which renders the one-state solution you describe as unstable, dishonest nonsense.

Is that a criticism or an endorsement?

Ah, always good to have another mainstream representation of Team Israel in the ranks. Welcome aboard.

Not only are the vast majority of Zionists or Israelis against it (over 90%) but so are Palestinians (close to 90%).

They don't want it.

You wish to impose something on them that won't fly.

So what will that result in? More war, more strife, more bloodshed. The vast majority of Palestinians are against liberal/progressive values, as they prefer a state based on sharia law. Your theory of a binational state is based on fantasy and if you don't already know that, you do now.

Your making Haniyeh sound moderate is absolute horseshit. He is a Jew hater extraordinaire. Par excellence. Think Meir Kahane, but on steroids. This is a man not only for the murder of Jews, but he's literally ordering his underlings to carry it out against the "Jew apes and pigs". Finally, in no way whatsoever is this totalitarian theocrat for secular democracy. That's a f*cking joke!

The equivalent of your view would be Zionists here whitewashing Meir Kahane and the most violent, extreme settlers who call for the killing of all Arabs. It is just as extreme and just as disturbing.

And I never claimed that Haniyeh was advocating a secular democracy. Just making a point that his ideas are more moderate than those of a Likudnik extremist that Oberliner chose to reference.

Do try reading a post before shitting your pants next time.

...and arguably even more extreme than Feiglin.

Also, in no way is Feiglin - as bad as he is - worse than Haniyeh (who you tried to present as more moderate than him).

Something that sounds good in your head at the moment, may not stand up to scrutiny once expressed. For instance, this one;

"Advocates of 1 binational secular state are just as extreme and arguably even more extreme than Feiglin."

Is just so utterly absurd, so jaw-droppingly inane, that the only response to it is the much-maligned internet expression, "lolwut"

So Shira, for this post, allow me to award you exactly one Ursula Vernon Award for Excellence in Ludicrousness.

...one binational secular state. And yet, the anti-zionist movement insists on it. They've heard all the arguments against, they know it's impossible, and they know it would lead to more war and bloodshed.

There is not one antizionist out there who can make a reasoned argument for 1 binational state.

They are fanatics who are even more extreme than Feiglin.

=============

At least you dropped the pretense that Haniyeh is less radical than Feiglin, so that's a start.

Feiglin, is more of an extremist than Haniyeh. Here's how this works

Position A) "Deport most of the people I don't like. Privilege the people I do like over those I don't" (Haniyeh, if he had his way)
Position B) "Deport all of the people I don't like. Institute terrifyingly fascist authoritarian rule over the people I do like" (Feiglin, if he had his way)

Neither position is moderate, of course, but there's a grade there, y'see?

As for your other stuff? The vast majority of Palestinians weren't real keen on that whole "partition" idea in the first place. so you think their opinion matters now? Also the majority of Israelis, twenty-two years ago, would have spit in your face for suggesting a crazy idea like a two-state solution. Some still would, including the man to whose defense you are riding.

I believe we've gone over this before, at any rate. I'm simply here explaining to Oberliner that the "One State Solution" is a defined, specific idea that is not what is being proposed by Haniyeh nor Feiglin - nor for that matter anyone else you want to cast as "on the right." They may have their own ideas of a single state, but htye are not "The One State Solution" any more than "Jews in ISrael, Arabs to Jordan" is the "Two-State Solution."

And your statement that "advocates of 1 binational secular state are just as extreme and arguably even more extreme than Feiglin" is still probably one of the stupidest things I've ever seen you say. And I don't have a high opinion of anything you've ever said, so that's maybe something you want to consider...

Haniyeh already (to use your words) has instituted a terrifyingly fascist authoritarian state in Gaza.

Do you have any idea what Haniyeh (really, Hamas) does to women, children, gays, and christians there? I'm not sure you do. But that's nothing compared to what Haniyeh does and will do with Jews given the chance. Care to explain what you know about the Hamas agenda WRT Jews? I know discussing that is very uncomfortable for you, but try.

As to stupidity WRT certain progressives supporting 1 binational state:

Enough to make Nazis blush. But not certain progressives for 1-state who insist on the binational solution. Are they stupid, ignorant, or evil warmongers?

It's sort of like judging that one fart smells worse than another, frankly. Haniyeh's position on Jews in his dream-state is that those of non-Palestinian ancestry should be deported to their places of ancestry. Feiglin's position on Arabs is that they all need to be deported, period.

As for your poll there. Weren't you just telling me that the vast majority of Palestinians (whose opinion you rather suddenly seem to care about) oppose a one-state solution? Because that poll says exactly the opposite of that claim.

...what they currently do in Gaza to Palestinians there. I suppose we could also ignore the Hamas charter and daily government rants there about killing all the Jews.

That way Feiglin and Haniyeh become more similar to one another.

Next, we'll argue whether Roosevelt was worse than Stalin. Of course he was, and by a few margins.



==================

To answer your question, about 9 in 10 Palestinians are against a secular 1-state solution as the vast majority is against secularism/liberalism. A one state Hamastan is preferable.

Including what they currently do in Gaza to Palestinians there. I suppose we could also ignore the Likud (Israel) charter and daily government attacks on other human beings.

That way Feiglin and Haniyeh come a little closer on the scoreboard.

Next we'll argue whether Meir Kahane was better than Sari Nussiebeh. of course he was, and by a few margins



==================

...You really buy that horseshit, don't you? Amazing. I guess someone out there has to buy Daniel Pipes' books.

The original Zionists thought sharing the land with the Arabs was undesirable and impossible.
The Labor Zionists tried for years to get the Arabs to sell their birthright in exchange for western technology.
Jabotinksy got it right; the Arabs were not a rabble, they would never sell...Jews would have to take the land by force and keep it by force. Same as all other nations before them.
Nothing has changed; human nature is an unchangeable given. Peace is a utopian dream. Muslim culture is unwilling to accept Jews as equals while Jews regard Muslims as unwanted enemies in their midst, with good reason.

I get you're speaking very generally, but the last two assumptions you made we're just weird.