What did Israel gain by abandoning Gaza?

[SD_Film Artists]

The disengagement from Gaza in 2005 was supposed to increase security and diplomatic standing. But after all these years it seems as if it has done nothing for Israel other than being a Hamas beachhead.

I mean, it feels like they might as well never have left Gaza considering that Hamas and like parties will never be satisfied untill there is no Israel.

Incorrect. It was supposed to free up resources to concentrate on building in the West Bank, give the appearance of concessions while granting none, and wrong foot the palestinians. All three worked.

Also "abandoning" gives the impression they left something that was theirs. It was not then or now Israeli territory.

As to the op, as already covered, Israel gained the opportunity to consolidate and expand their holdings in the West Bank without having to provide security out of proportion to the actual settler amount in Gaza while pretending to agreeableness with their neighbors.

That would make sense. I presume the few Hamas rockets were a smaller price than what it was like before.

And there were other words one may use, but things like 'pull out of' may insinuate a purely militery affair instead of a partially civilian exodus. I.e- "pull out of Iraq".

[Buffett and Colbert]

Satisfaction, see. Israel was hurt by Iran's wishes to wipe it off the map, so it was Israel's turn to try to oppress someone else.

[North Suran]

Satisfaction, see. Israel was hurt by Iran's wishes to wipe it off the map, so it was Israel's turn to try to oppress someone else.

It's like how Reagan invaded Grenada after Maggie Thatcher won the Falkland's War.

[SaintB]

The disengagement from Gaza in 2005 was supposed to increase security and diplomatic standing. But after all these years it seems as if it has done nothing for Israel other than being a Hamas beachhead.

I mean, it feels like they might as well never have left Gaza considering that Hamas and like parties will never be satisfied untill there is no Israel.

They made themselves look like the good guys on the world stage. Its all politics; make them look wrong while you look right.

[Angleter]

Isreal has no place in the middle east, it was illegally established by my own country. Sure you want your historic lands, but with that thinking Germany,Italy and Denmark could legally reclaim the British Isles.

I don't hate the people, just the government, it is too aggressive and expansionist.

Edit: clean up.

1. In the 1940s, the Mandate for Palestine had a Jewish population of around 30%, which is entirely a reasonable figure for at least part of Palestine to be set aside for a Jewish state. Then in 1948 the Arab Palestinian state declared war and lost. Guess what? They lost territory, as many nations who lose a war do. Leading on to my second point...

2. Israel has been on the end of a mass declaration of war no fewer than three times (1948, 1967, 1973) and managed not only to survive each war, but win them. The current 'Occupied Palestine' was part of Jordan and Egypt before the 1967 war, and was gained by Israel. Territorial changes have been part of post-war peaces for thousands of years, especially now in cases where the aggressor is defeated. Israel may seem aggressive, but we have to remember that it is FIGHTING TO SURVIVE. If a pro-Nazi government took over parts of Ireland in 1940, what would you expect the British to do?

[Post-Unity Terra]

I wasn't aware 'but we took it from them in a war!' was a reasonable legal argument for owning land any more.

[Angleter]

I wasn't aware 'but we took it from them in a war!' was a reasonable legal argument for owning land any more.

France has Alsace-Lorraine, Poland has the bits of it that used to be in Germany, Belarus and Ukraine have Eastern Poland, Slovenia and Croatia share Istria, Romania has Transylvania, etc.

Without 'but we took it from them in a war' being used in the last 95 years the borders of Europe would still look like this:

http://www.philatelicdatabase.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/map-europe-1871-1914.jpg

Although Ireland might have been independent and Servia and Montenegro might have united.

[Non Aligned States]

Israel may seem aggressive, but we have to remember that it is FIGHTING TO SURVIVE.

Israel is not currently fighting to survive. Israel is not at conflict with any of the national powers in the region. Israel is snipping away bits and pieces of land outside their borders and dispossessing the original tenants regardless of international law. The claim that Israel is "fighting to survive" now is about as valid as claiming Russia was "fighting to survive" against Georgia (the nation in the Caucasus, not the state in America).

[Gauthier]

Israel may seem aggressive, but we have to remember that it is FIGHTING TO SURVIVE.

Israel is not currently fighting to survive. Israel is not at conflict with any of the national powers in the region. Israel is snipping away bits and pieces of land outside their borders and dispossessing the original tenants regardless of international law. The claim that Israel is "fighting to survive" now is about as valid as claiming Russia was "fighting to survive" against Georgia (the nation in the Caucasus, not the state in America).

Or how the Serbs were "fighting to survive" against the Croats.

[Abdju]

Israel may seem aggressive, but we have to remember that it is FIGHTING TO SURVIVE

Isreal is not currently facing a realistic threat to it's survival from any of it's neighbours, yet Isreal itsel continues to act agressivly, and has openly talked of agressive intentions against her neighbours, including Liberman's famous threat to bomb the Aswan dam, decades after Egypt signed a peace treaty with Isreal.

Meanwhile, a large proportion of the population supports expansionist policies, including attempting to re-take the Sinai.

Israel also occupies the Golan Heights and Sheba' Farms, which, like Sinai, were ever a part of British Mandate Palestine. Is occupying foreign land a part of "survival", or just blatant and unrelenting aggression against neighbours, even those who have signed a peace treaty with you?

France has Alsace-Lorraine, Poland has the bits of it that used to be in Germany, Belarus and Ukraine have Eastern Poland, Slovenia and Croatia share Istria, Romania has Transylvania, etc.

This doesn't apply to Israel though. These provinces are granted broadly the same rights and representation as the rest of those nations, and the people treated as full citizens of the nation. This is NOT the case for the West Bank and Gaza. Israel has never granted citizenship to all Palestinians. They are not entitled to vote in Israeli elections, they live under different laws and are not permitted to travel to other regions.

These are not the actions of a brave democracy fighting for it's survival. They are the actions of an aggressive, racist government that has more in common with apartheid South Africa (with whom it had extensive relations) than Britain or Poland in WW2.

[Risottia]

The disengagement from Gaza in 2005 was supposed to increase security and diplomatic standing. But after all these years it seems as if it has done nothing for Israel other than being a Hamas beachhead.

I mean, it feels like they might as well never have left Gaza considering that Hamas and like parties will never be satisfied untill there is no Israel.

Actually, iirc, at least in Israel there are no more attacks carried out by suicide bombers.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

'Expansionary' is rather stupid. They're trying to take over the bits they see as rightfully belonging to them. If they were 'expansionary' they would've kept the Sinai. I don't think Israel has any interest in, say, Syria. Israel isn't trying to 'expand', they're trying to consolidate.

Thereby, you defend China's annexation of Tibet as not expansionary yes? And would do the same if they attempted to take Taiwan. They do after all, believe that Tibet and Taiwan rightfully belongs to them.

As to the op, as already covered, Israel gained the opportunity to consolidate and expand their holdings in the West Bank without having to provide security out of proportion to the actual settler amount in Gaza while pretending to agreeableness with their neighbors.

There's a difference, as I see it. Israel already occupied the areas it's trying to retake. It has no interest beyond that.

If they were 'expansionist' they would have kept the Sinai and would probably have occupied Jordan and so forth. China and Tibet come under the same heading. China's not going to move into India any time soon.

I'm not arguing that it's RIGHT, but that there's a difference between occupying a territory you previously owned and expansionism.

[Abdju]

'Expansionary' is rather stupid. They're trying to take over the bits they see as rightfully belonging to them. If they were 'expansionary' they would've kept the Sinai. I don't think Israel has any interest in, say, Syria. Israel isn't trying to 'expand', they're trying to consolidate.

Thereby, you defend China's annexation of Tibet as not expansionary yes? And would do the same if they attempted to take Taiwan. They do after all, believe that Tibet and Taiwan rightfully belongs to them.

As to the op, as already covered, Israel gained the opportunity to consolidate and expand their holdings in the West Bank without having to provide security out of proportion to the actual settler amount in Gaza while pretending to agreeableness with their neighbors.

There's a difference, as I see it. Israel already occupied the areas it's trying to retake. It has no interest beyond that.

If they were 'expansionist' they would have kept the Sinai and would probably have occupied Jordan and so forth. China and Tibet come under the same heading. China's not going to move into India any time soon.

I'm not arguing that it's RIGHT, but that there's a difference between occupying a territory you previously owned and expansionism.

Only none of this land did previously belong to them. Gaza, West Bank, Golan and Sheba' were nver previously part of Isreal prior to it's invading them in 1967. China had been involved in Tibet, to a greater or lesser degree, for centuries.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

I'd like to point out also that while the Palestinians aren't allowed to have their own sovereign nation, they are also not allowed to vote in Israeli elections. Isn't that nice?

[Gauthier]

I'd like to point out also that while the Palestinians aren't allowed to have their own sovereign nation, they are also not allowed to vote in Israeli elections. Isn't that nice?

Only three kinds of Palestinians in the Middle East: Cheap Labor, Terrorists, and Target Practice.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

I'd like to point out also that while the Palestinians aren't allowed to have their own sovereign nation, they are also not allowed to vote in Israeli elections. Isn't that nice?

Only three kinds of Palestinians in the Middle East: Cheap Labor, Terrorists, and Target Practice.

Don't forget 'collateral damage'.

[Angleter]

Israel may seem aggressive, but we have to remember that it is FIGHTING TO SURVIVE

Isreal is not currently facing a realistic threat to it's survival from any of it's neighbours, yet Isreal itsel continues to act agressivly, and has openly talked of agressive intentions against her neighbours, including Liberman's famous threat to bomb the Aswan dam, decades after Egypt signed a peace treaty with Isreal.

Meanwhile, a large proportion of the population supports expansionist policies, including attempting to re-take the Sinai.

Israel also occupies the Golan Heights and Sheba' Farms, which, like Sinai, were ever a part of British Mandate Palestine. Is occupying foreign land a part of "survival", or just blatant and unrelenting aggression against neighbours, even those who have signed a peace treaty with you?

France has Alsace-Lorraine, Poland has the bits of it that used to be in Germany, Belarus and Ukraine have Eastern Poland, Slovenia and Croatia share Istria, Romania has Transylvania, etc.

This doesn't apply to Israel though. These provinces are granted broadly the same rights and representation as the rest of those nations, and the people treated as full citizens of the nation. This is NOT the case for the West Bank and Gaza. Israel has never granted citizenship to all Palestinians. They are not entitled to vote in Israeli elections, they live under different laws and are not permitted to travel to other regions.

These are not the actions of a brave democracy fighting for it's survival. They are the actions of an aggressive, racist government that has more in common with apartheid South Africa (with whom it had extensive relations) than Britain or Poland in WW2.

Golan Heights, Shebaa Farms and East Jerusalem are actually integral parts of Israel. Indeed, Shebaa Farms and Golan Heights are merely territorial disputes between Israel and Lebanon/Syria- to call that 'occupation' would be like saying that Guyana is 'occupying' Essequibo. Palestinians are under the control of the PNA and vote in PNA elections (unless they're in the Gaza Strip under the compassionate and democratic Hamas).

Also, the moment that 'Palestine' becomes fully independent, then Hamas would most likely coup the government there, get Arab support and lead a fourth attempt to destroy Israel. Netanyahu offered the PNA the chance to have their own state earlier this year, but (as ever), the PNA refused and continued to play the underdog.

[Abdju]

I'd like to point out also that while the Palestinians aren't allowed to have their own sovereign nation, they are also not allowed to vote in Israeli elections. Isn't that nice?

Only three kinds of Palestinians in the Middle East: Cheap Labor, Terrorists, and Target Practice.

Those damn darkies can't multi-task! If only they did, we could reduce their numbers considerably, and have much more space for those nice, clean, modern settlements with nice families jetted in from Europe and the States to solve this demographic crisis....

It's nice to have a dream, isn't it?

[SD_Film Artists]

Since you're mentioning the Golan Heights and Shebaa Farms, Peter Snow & Son made a very good documentary on that era.

[Abdju]

Golan Heights, Shebaa Farms and East Jerusalem are actually integral parts of Israel. Indeed, Shebaa Farms and Golan Heights are merely territorial disputes between Israel and Lebanon/Syria- to call that 'occupation' would be like saying that Guyana is 'occupying' Essequibo.

The entire world (including the US) except Israel disagrees with that view. Golan and Sheba' were both annexed by Israel in 1967, and were never a part of the British Mandate, which is the only land which was assigned for division between Israel and Palestine.

Palestinians are under the control of the PNA and vote in PNA elections (unless they're in the Gaza Strip under the compassionate and democratic Hamas).

Just like a good little Bantustan should.

Also, the moment that 'Palestine' becomes fully independent, then Hamas would most likely coup the government there, get Arab support and lead a fourth attempt to destroy Israel. Netanyahu offered the PNA the chance to have their own state earlier this year, but (as ever), the PNA refused and continued to play the underdog.

Purely hypothetical, and a tad hysterical as Hamas has repeatedly made references to it's willingness to support a 1967 boundary two state solution. Hamas would most likely not "coup" the government, since they actually won an election and were later forced into a coalition by the West. I don't like Hamas one little bit, but I fully acknowledge a few facts about them.

1. They are politicians, and supremely good ones. They know how to win support,and know Palestinians would grab a real and viable two state solution. Not to go along with that would be political suicide. They also know that accepting a Bantustan would likewise be political suicide. This has been the de-facto Hamas line for some years.

2. They were given a lot of help by Mossad in the early days, in the hope that they would undermine the then PLO.

3. They are a threat to Egyptian security in the Sinai, due to smuggling and contacts with local rebel groups in north and central Sinai.

All this is, however, a diversion, since you have completely ignored my main point:

Israel itself continues to act aggressively, and has openly talked of aggressive intentions against her neighbours, including Liberman's famous threat to bomb the Aswan dam, decades after Egypt signed a peace treaty with Isreal.

Meanwhile, a large proportion of the population supports expansionist policies, including attempting to re-take the Sinai.

[Abdju]

Since you're mentioning the Golan Heights and Shebaa Farms, Peter Snow & Son made a very good documentary on that era.

Ah, 6th of October. Creating ridiculously named towns, streets and national holidays for over 30 years...

[Non Aligned States]

There's a difference, as I see it. Israel already occupied the areas it's trying to retake. It has no interest beyond that.

So you're going to pretend that Israeli settlers don't go around kicking out Palestinians from their homes with IDF support, homes which are outside of any territory that Israel supposedly occupies, taking their homes and using it for themselves?

[Blouman Empire]

Isreal has no place in the middle east, it was illegally established by my own country. Sure you want your historic lands, but with that thinking Germany,Italy and Denmark could legally reclaim the British Isles.

I don't hate the people, just the government, it is too aggressive and expansionist.

Edit: clean up.

But there is no book that says the British Isles have been given to the Germans/Italians/Danish by God.

[Blouman Empire]

Isreal has no place in the middle east

Yes it does. It is there. Unless you've got a, well, solution for the existence of Israel, there it is and there it will remain. Saying it shouldn't exist is like saying that women shouldn't be capable of childbirth. -useless.

Umm no it isn't.

[Blouman Empire]

I'd like to point out also that while the Palestinians aren't allowed to have their own sovereign nation, they are also not allowed to vote in Israeli elections. Isn't that nice?

Only three kinds of Palestinians in the Middle East: Cheap Labor, Terrorists, and Target Practice.

Don't forget 'collateral damage'.

That term is what the children are called, you know when schools are targeted by the Israeli military.