Unilateral declaration of Palestinian statehood?

[Czardas]

Smileys do not an argument make.

You suffer from both the originally stated delusion and the twin delusion that Israel is wholly a rational and reasonable society that wants the Palestinians to have their own nation or even be there at all.

That depends.

Most Israelis that I've met and talked to are in support of a Palestinian state. They think a two-state solution is acceptable.

Reasonable people rarely make up a society. The racist zionists in the settlements hold plenty of sway in the government.

The Israeli society is highly fractured. More so than most, in fact. The government tends to fall on the right-wing extremist side of things, but it's hardly supported by even a slim majority of the population.

Then there is something inherently wrong with Israel.

There is. It's an authoritarian, theocratic oligarchy that has essentially been run by the same incompetent people for a few dozen years. The military is highly mismanaged, its PR is terrible, it can't maintain control of the media, it encourages terrorism and violence, and the economy sucks. Not to mention the conscription. Basically, it's just like every other Middle Eastern nation, except backed by US money to fight states backed by Soviet money that has since evaporated but apparently nobody noticed.

However, I'm not sure Israel as a society -- as a whole -- doesn't want to see the formation of a Palestinian state and the whole kerfuffle brought to a peaceful solution. The government doesn't want to, but I wouldn't be surprised to find that if you polled the actual citizens, you'd come out with something like 60% in favour, 40% against at minimum. (There may be actual numbers that contradict this. I haven't done research.)

[Phenia]

As long as Israel can wag the US and scream "Holocaust!" whenever challenged, there will never be either peace nor a Palestinian state.

Ah, this lovely strawman. It's sort of like when it is said that 'black people can just scream 'Slavery!' whenever its pointed out high rates of crime among black populations.' It's blaming victims for exploiting their victimhood, and largely without basis. There may be some who do this, but for the most part it's the anti-Israel crowd who goes on about the Holocaust. Iran, for example, and its official position that the Holocaust didn't even happen. But I suppose that's Israel wagging the dog in Iran, too?

[Mirkana]

Smileys do not an argument make.

You suffer from both the originally stated delusion and the twin delusion that Israel is wholly a rational and reasonable society that wants the Palestinians to have their own nation or even be there at all.

That depends.

Most Israelis that I've met and talked to are in support of a Palestinian state. They think a two-state solution is acceptable.

Reasonable people rarely make up a society. The racist zionists in the settlements hold plenty of sway in the government.

The Israeli society is highly fractured. More so than most, in fact. The government tends to fall on the right-wing extremist side of things, but it's hardly supported by even a slim majority of the population.

Then there is something inherently wrong with Israel.

Israel is notorious for its unstable government. Every Israeli government without exception has been a coalition. I don't give the peace process much hope with the current government in power, but a more liberal one would have a shot.

[Dododecapod]

You are arguing that if Hamas/PA completely hammers down the terrorist attacks, Israel will respect them enough to allow them either their own state or serious autonomy with stopping the settler invasion. You are wrong. That is the reason there is Hamas in charge of Gaza. The previous group decided to capitulate and hope for peace. Israel shot them down. Since there is no political or real military discourse, the only way to resist oppression is armed terrorist resistance. Am I denying that Hamas is a terrorist organization or the Palestinian governments are happy, Democratic societies having their sunshine and happiness stolen by Israel? No. But Palestine doesn't control the strings. The terrorist groups will lose their popular support if Israel stops being a giant asshole towards the Palestinians. Palestine can't make the concessions. THERE ARE NO CONCESSIONS TO MAKE. Israel has to make concessions and hope those concessions stop the popular support of the major terrorist organizations.

Why should they?

Seriously, give me just ONE good reason why Israel should make ANY concessions to ANYONE.

In case it's missed your notice, Israel is winning. They get more territory every year. Their populace is safe and affluent. The situation is entirely in their favour. Why change?

There's no pressure from outside to do so. The UN passes another worthless treatise on the subject; who cares? The Euros whine and whine and do nothing. The ONLY group that can change things is the Palestinians themselves.

[Nodinia]

Well they won't get very far following the Abbas method of bowing down, greasing their asses and letting all and sundry have their way with them....He's shown the exact worth of the "peace dividend".

[Angleter]

Smileys do not an argument make.

You suffer from both the originally stated delusion and the twin delusion that Israel is wholly a rational and reasonable society that wants the Palestinians to have their own nation or even be there at all.

That depends.

Most Israelis that I've met and talked to are in support of a Palestinian state. They think a two-state solution is acceptable.

Reasonable people rarely make up a society. The racist zionists in the settlements hold plenty of sway in the government.

The Israeli society is highly fractured. More so than most, in fact. The government tends to fall on the right-wing extremist side of things, but it's hardly supported by even a slim majority of the population.

Then there is something inherently wrong with Israel.

Israel is notorious for its unstable government. Every Israeli government without exception has been a coalition. I don't give the peace process much hope with the current government in power, but a more liberal one would have a shot.

That's PR for you.

[America of the North]

It will quite clearly never happen with the American veto about. Unfortunately whilst the most powerful nation in the world refuses to criticise Israel (and in the limited cases where it does, fails to force Israel to make any changes) it is hard to see how there will be peace. From a Palestinian perspective, the whole homeland is theirs, not just the scraps left to them by '67. Meanwhile Israel seemsy unable to seriously make any move to give them any ground, so I can't see peace happening anytime soon.

The biggest hope for peace is that the current trend of Western powers becoming more sympathetic to the Palestinians continues. Then perhaps Israel will be forced to back down and there will come a realisation within their aministration that it is time to settle with what they have already stolen from the Palestinians before the tides change.

Salam xx

[Dododecapod]

Well they won't get very far following the Abbas method of bowing down, greasing their asses and letting all and sundry have their way with them....He's shown the exact worth of the "peace dividend".

Yes. HIS area didn't get bombed to pieces in the last blow up.

[Free Hawaii]

It would be nice to have the Zionists put down a peg.

On the other hand, should Hamas continue lobbing rockets into Israel on a daily basis as they like to do, then that would be tantamount to a declaration of War by a sovereign state, and Israel would be quite justified in blowing the hell out of them and would be legitimately defending themselves against foreign aggression.

[Andaluciae]

My one comment about using the 1967 borders is kind of snarky, and doesn't really support my position that there should be a Palestinian state within those borders, but, here goes...

Full restoration of the 1967 Borders would put all of the lands claimed by the PA under the authority of either Egypt, Jordan or Syria.

[Nodinia]

Well they won't get very far following the Abbas method of bowing down, greasing their asses and letting all and sundry have their way with them....He's shown the exact worth of the "peace dividend".

Yes. HIS area didn't get bombed to pieces in the last blow up.

Yes, it just gets built on and effectively annexed. Thats rather more lasting and irreversible than what was done by the bombs.

[The_pantless_hero]

As long as Israel can wag the US and scream "Holocaust!" whenever challenged, there will never be either peace nor a Palestinian state.

Ah, this lovely strawman. It's sort of like when it is said that 'black people can just scream 'Slavery!' whenever its pointed out high rates of crime among black populations.' It's blaming victims for exploiting their victimhood, and largely without basis. There may be some who do this, but for the most part it's the anti-Israel crowd who goes on about the Holocaust. Iran, for example, and its official position that the Holocaust didn't even happen. But I suppose that's Israel wagging the dog in Iran, too?

1) You obviously have no fucking idea what the expression "tail wags the dog" means."
2) No black people scream "Slavery!", it's always "racism!" Your argument defeats itself in saying "largely without basis." That statement affords agreement that it does occur, which is the point. Perhaps you can reformulate a sensible argument when you can figure out what certain idioms mean.

Why should they?

Seriously, give me just ONE good reason why Israel should make ANY concessions to ANYONE.

In case it's missed your notice, Israel is winning. They get more territory every year. Their populace is safe and affluent. The situation is entirely in their favour. Why change?

There's no pressure from outside to do so. The UN passes another worthless treatise on the subject; who cares? The Euros whine and whine and do nothing. The ONLY group that can change things is the Palestinians themselves.

Would you like a chair to reach the point?

[Ralkovia]

It will quite clearly never happen with the American veto about. Unfortunately whilst the most powerful nation in the world refuses to criticise Israel (and in the limited cases where it does, fails to force Israel to make any changes) it is hard to see how there will be peace. From a Palestinian perspective, the whole homeland is theirs, not just the scraps left to them by '67. Meanwhile Israel seemsy unable to seriously make any move to give them any ground, so I can't see peace happening anytime soon.

The biggest hope for peace is that the current trend of Western powers becoming more sympathetic to the Palestinians continues. Then perhaps Israel will be forced to back down and there will come a realisation within their aministration that it is time to settle with what they have already stolen from the Palestinians before the tides change.

Salam xx

Yes, because when we gave them the Gaza Strip as a test of the waters, they use it as a new staging area to launch rockets. Perhaps we should give them there own nation because they have proven to be so responsible with their own. Israel is waiting on the Palestinian people to get their own population under control before they do shit.

You talk about Israel being xenophobic, wouldn't the xenophobic solution be to give the Palestinians some land so they could all leave Israel? No, because obviously expansionism and xenophobia go hand in hand. Israel expands in territory they have won, should the Czechs and everyone else give back land to Austria? Maybe we should give all of Europe back to Italy? Sorry Brits your back under Italian control, good news Irish.

Certainly Israel has committed its fair share of crimes but when an attacker invades and you turn it around on them and win, to the victor goes the spoils. I don't get to whine about it when I'm the one who invaded in the first place. I don't really remember war being so apologetic. "Did I invade you? I'm sorry." Last I heard in 1947 the Jewish community accepted the original partition plan which made Israel quite small and heavily split.

To put the following events in layman terms,"And then the Muslims zerg rush kekekeke the Jews and they lose. Next thing you know the Jews are winning and you see the Muslims going 'Christians, Christian's, Western people! We just want to give our pals some land and the Jews aren't playing nice.' The Western people, mind you this is during the cold war, say we see though your deception. So the muslims go to the soviets and the soviets say,'oh yes you obviously have been taken advantage of. Can I give you some weapons to help you?' Suddenly the Westerners take interest and since the soviets, those atheist bastards, have decided to aid the muslim the West must aid the Jews. In the proxy war of the second half century, upon its ending neithers the Jews nor the Muslims have gotten the message to Shut dee fuck up wars over, the Muslims invade on the Jewish holy day hoping to rape them while they're praying on the ground. Fortunately, Jews larger noses prevent them from bowing with their head buried in the ground, and the Jews catch the Muslims and on a reverse grapple they get the Muslims in a headlock and force them to eat dirt until the Muslims say they will play nice. When the Israeli's let go, the Muslims go back to their house and call all their friends and say,'Tomorrow we'll get them Jew bastards.' The Jews never lose and the Muslims never win but sometime in the past 8 years the West decided to play a game of musical chairs and now we're buddy buddy with the Palestinian's who always whine. I'm sure we'll help them once they do the metaphorical truffle shuffle and shut the fuck up about them being their before the Jews. We all know the Jews gipped the canaanites out fair and square."
-An excerpt by Toneeromee on the case of the history of Israeli's.

If one would like to get into specifics. Screw Jews and Arabs Israel belongs to the Canaanites. I honestly don't see why Israel has to do jack shit for people whose childrens extra-curricular activities include: Watching the new episode of "1001 ways to kill the Jews" narrated by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Rocket club(done with real rockets), and bomb-making seminars.

Now I'm not saying that every Palestinian knows how to operate a mortar, I'm just saying that if they want a homeland I don't want them having a military.

Now then going to a bit more extremist position, why the hell should Israel be the one giving up land? If they want a damn homeland so bad Jordan or Syria should be a kind Muslim neighbor and give them something; what was all that Muslim Brotherhood stuff I hear about. I'm sure the Israeli's would give them some sort of territory that would allow them to border Jerusalem but your asking for a nation the twice the size of Montenegro to give up a huge portion of its territory.

I mean after all when the Muslims have all of this All of this
Why should the Israeli's be able to have a nation to themself. To put this in an analogy, the Muslim's is the rich spoiled kids,"mommy can I have this." The west answers,"But why you have all of this!" The brat answers,"But this one is special, this one is special. I want this! I Want this NOW! GIVE IT TO ME I WANT IT I WANT IT I WANT. I NEED TO HAVE IT!! I MUST HAVE IT! IT WAS MINE FIRST." The mother sighs and says,"I am sure we can work something out..."

Last time I checked, there was only one country that Jews are a majority in, but why let them have shit.

[Maurepas]

Meh, just give both sides nukes and let them bomb each other into oblivion. No more Palestine, no more Israel, no more problem.

Sounds good to me, though, nukes may be a bit extreme, MOABs should do fine...

Im rather sick of the lot of them until they grow up and join the Civilized World...

[Maurepas]

meh. Can I declare my bedroom a sovereign nation?

Youre doing it on the internet now,

[The Macabees]

I admittedly have no revised my position since I originally posted it (and I guess I could make some things clearer), but this is the gist of what I believe in regards to Israel and Palestine: Zionism's Losing Battle. My father's side of the family (well, half of his family) has practically disowned me (since they are Jewish), but it's what I believe.

[Dododecapod]

As long as Israel can wag the US and scream "Holocaust!" whenever challenged, there will never be either peace nor a Palestinian state.

Ah, this lovely strawman. It's sort of like when it is said that 'black people can just scream 'Slavery!' whenever its pointed out high rates of crime among black populations.' It's blaming victims for exploiting their victimhood, and largely without basis. There may be some who do this, but for the most part it's the anti-Israel crowd who goes on about the Holocaust. Iran, for example, and its official position that the Holocaust didn't even happen. But I suppose that's Israel wagging the dog in Iran, too?

1) You obviously have no fucking idea what the expression "tail wags the dog" means."
2) No black people scream "Slavery!", it's always "racism!" Your argument defeats itself in saying "largely without basis." That statement affords agreement that it does occur, which is the point. Perhaps you can reformulate a sensible argument when you can figure out what certain idioms mean.

Why should they?

Seriously, give me just ONE good reason why Israel should make ANY concessions to ANYONE.

In case it's missed your notice, Israel is winning. They get more territory every year. Their populace is safe and affluent. The situation is entirely in their favour. Why change?

There's no pressure from outside to do so. The UN passes another worthless treatise on the subject; who cares? The Euros whine and whine and do nothing. The ONLY group that can change things is the Palestinians themselves.

Would you like a chair to reach the point?

You lost me.

Near as I can tell, you're whining about the Israelis not doing stuff. You haven't addressed the point: why should they? What benefit do they get from it? If you can't answer that, you have no concept that can ever work.

[The_pantless_hero]

Near as I can tell, you're whining about the Israelis not doing stuff. You haven't addressed the point: why should they? What benefit do they get from it? If you can't answer that, you have no concept that can ever work.

Then you can't tell much. I was countering, again, the assertion that Palestinians have to make concessions for peace, AGAIN. I know Israel won't do anything, I was making the point that THEY had to take action for peace. Perhaps you have heard of my friend "hypothetical situation."

[The_pantless_hero]

You talk about Israel being xenophobic, wouldn't the xenophobic solution be to give the Palestinians some land so they could all leave Israel? No, because obviously expansionism and xenophobia go hand in hand. Israel expands in territory they have won,

I wasn't aware that Israel had "won" territory that even Israel recognizes as being part of the Palestinian Authority's Gaza.

[Uawc]

May the Palestinian people have their victory, their land, and their lives back from Zionism, and may they finally rise up to successfully fight against the state-sponsored terrorism they had to deal with for so long.

[The Archregimancy]

Now then going to a bit more extremist position, why the hell should Israel be the one giving up land? If they want a damn homeland so bad Jordan or Syria should be a kind Muslim neighbor and give them something; what was all that Muslim Brotherhood stuff I hear about. I'm sure the Israeli's would give them some sort of territory that would allow them to border Jerusalem but your asking for a nation the twice the size of Montenegro to give up a huge portion of its territory.

Last time I checked, there was only one country that Jews are a majority in, but why let them have shit.

I appreciate the passion that you clearly bring to the topic, and I don't mean to demean your depth of feeling when I point out the primary problems with the specific above statements that you yourself admit are 'more extreme' are....

1) Not even the current more right-wing government recognises the West Bank and Gaza as 'its territory'. While there are disputes over where the border should lie, and while some unilateral annexations have taken place, no Israeli government has ever disputed that it occupies territory that is not part of Israel. No Israeli government has therefore seriously disputed that a final peace plan will involve giving the occupied territory. Disputes largely revolve around that old chestnut of whether they have to give up the Occupied Territories or just occupied territories (ie, whether all of the pre-1967 territory, or merely some of that territory). There are, of course, voters in Israel who would go further and simply claim all of the West Bank and Gaza, but this has never been the official position of the Israeli government. Therefore no one is in fact asking Israel to give up 'its territory', but rather territory that even the Israeli government recognises isn't part of Israel.

2) The counter-argument to your point regarding there only being one nation where Jews are in the majority is that some would strongly argue that they only became the majority in that country 60 years ago via violent conflict and what is today termed 'ethnic cleansing'. Given that there are thousands of people who remember when Jews were in the minority in the territory in question, those people - and their children - are bound to feel strongly about not being given access to their recent ancestral land. Some would also whether ethnic and/or religious self-identification is enough to automatically grant the right to self-government within a specific territory - but those making that counter-argument would soon find themselves on fairly tricky ground with the Palestinians, too.

I've tried to keep the above as neutral as possible, merely attempting to note counter-arguments to some of the points you raise rather than strongly arguing my own position. But as I'm sure you recognise, part of the problem with the Palestine/Israel issue is the extent to which both sides feel wronged, and both sides feel that right is on their side.

[Nodinia]

It will quite clearly never happen with the American veto about. Unfortunately whilst the most powerful nation in the world refuses to criticise Israel (and in the limited cases where it does, fails to force Israel to make any changes) it is hard to see how there will be peace. From a Palestinian perspective, the whole homeland is theirs, not just the scraps left to them by '67. Meanwhile Israel seemsy unable to seriously make any move to give them any ground, so I can't see peace happening anytime soon.

The biggest hope for peace is that the current trend of Western powers becoming more sympathetic to the Palestinians continues. Then perhaps Israel will be forced to back down and there will come a realisation within their aministration that it is time to settle with what they have already stolen from the Palestinians before the tides change.

Salam xx

Yes, because when we gave them the Gaza Strip as a test of the waters, .....

Actually it was because using 30,000 troops to guard under 8,000 settlers was considered a waste of resources and to wrong foot Arafat.
Settlements in the West Bank could be dealt with "when the Palestinians turn into Finns", if I remember the phrasing correctly. And lo and behold, the settlements are still there and expanding......

[Phenia]

meh. Can I declare my bedroom a sovereign nation?

I don't know. Does your bedroom hate Jews?

[Phenia]

As long as Israel can wag the US and scream "Holocaust!" whenever challenged, there will never be either peace nor a Palestinian state.

Ah, this lovely strawman. It's sort of like when it is said that 'black people can just scream 'Slavery!' whenever its pointed out high rates of crime among black populations.' It's blaming victims for exploiting their victimhood, and largely without basis. There may be some who do this, but for the most part it's the anti-Israel crowd who goes on about the Holocaust. Iran, for example, and its official position that the Holocaust didn't even happen. But I suppose that's Israel wagging the dog in Iran, too?

1) You obviously have no fucking idea what the expression "tail wags the dog" means."

Even if I didn't, that's quite irrelevant. And I do, Mr Angry Fucking Ad Hominem.

2) No black people scream "Slavery!", it's always "racism!"

Ahh, right. Well you know, since there is no racism against black people, and the Holocaust didn't happen, I can see where you might say that neither thing should be mentioned.

Your argument defeats itself in saying "largely without basis." That statement affords agreement that it does occur, which is the point. Perhaps you can reformulate a sensible argument when you can figure out what certain idioms mean.

My argument is just fine since you're addressing an argument that's not been made by anyone relevant. Or anyone, so far as I can tell. But by all means, do show me where someone - in this thread, for example, has "screamed HOLOCAUST" as an argument for Israeli policies. Perhaps you can reformulate a sensible argument that isn't based on a strawman you just love to burn again and again.

[The_pantless_hero]

Ahh, right. Well you know, since there is no racism against black people, and the Holocaust didn't happen, I can see where you might say that neither thing should be mentioned.

So were you trying to prove my point?

do show me where someone - in this thread, for example, has "screamed HOLOCAUST" as an argument for Israeli policies.

So are we limiting the places to look for evidence to a 4 page thread, really?
My point, however, is that the ghost of the Holocaust hovers behind the Zionist protectionism. Disagree with the zionist radical opinion? Antisemite. The US government supports Israeli groups that are admittedly racist jingoists. Is there any valid reason for these positions? Similar with the minorities in the US. Everyone is afraid of the ghost of racism. Are there racist people? Yes. Is everyone who disagrees with certain mainstream black positions, or phrases something improperly, a racist? No. That won't stop anyone. Even Cosby caught a shit storm for telling it to people straight.