HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Foreign Affairs & National Security » Israel/Palestine (Group) » Zakaria: What the Palesti...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 02:16 AM

Zakaria: What the Palestinians should do.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/30/zakaria-what-the-palestinians-should-do/

Zakaria: What the Palestinians should do.

Here’s how I would imagine the scenario unfolding: Mahmoud Abbas would announce that he is dissolving the Palestinian Authority in three months because he has recognized that there is no prospect that it will lead to a state under the current framework. He would also explain that he is returning all obligations and authority to the state of Israel.
.

Palestinians would then start a process of non-violent protests and agitation, asking that they be given what every other person under the authority of the Israeli government has, namely the right to vote in Israeli elections.

The effect of this kind of strategy, would be to force the Israeli public to ask itself whether it was really willing to deny the Palestinians the right to vote. And if they were not willing to deny the Palestinians this right, wouldn’t it be much better to allow them to vote in their own state, rather than the state of Israel, because allowing them to vote in Israel would, of course, fundamentally compromise the Jewish character of Israel.

82 replies, 5402 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 82 replies Author Time Post
Reply Zakaria: What the Palestinians should do. (Original post)
kayecy Dec 2012 OP
oberliner Dec 2012 #1
Recursion Dec 2012 #2
oberliner Dec 2012 #3
Recursion Dec 2012 #4
pelsar Dec 2012 #8
Recursion Dec 2012 #9
pelsar Dec 2012 #11
Recursion Dec 2012 #14
pelsar Dec 2012 #15
Recursion Dec 2012 #16
pelsar Dec 2012 #19
kayecy Dec 2012 #17
pelsar Dec 2012 #18
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #24
pelsar Dec 2012 #25
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #52
oberliner Dec 2012 #12
Recursion Dec 2012 #13
shira Dec 2012 #28
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #21
pelsar Dec 2012 #26
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #29
pelsar Dec 2012 #30
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #31
pelsar Dec 2012 #32
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #34
pelsar Dec 2012 #35
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #41
pelsar Dec 2012 #56
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #62
Shaktimaan Dec 2012 #57
Shaktimaan Dec 2012 #71
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #72
Shaktimaan Dec 2012 #73
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #74
shira Dec 2012 #75
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #76
shira Dec 2012 #77
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #78
pelsar Dec 2012 #79
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #80
pelsar Dec 2012 #81
shira Dec 2012 #82
no_hypocrisy Dec 2012 #5
Recursion Dec 2012 #6
delrem Dec 2012 #7
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #23
delrem Dec 2012 #40
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #55
Recursion Dec 2012 #10
oberliner Dec 2012 #27
Recursion Dec 2012 #36
oberliner Dec 2012 #37
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #39
oberliner Dec 2012 #42
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #46
shira Dec 2012 #49
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #65
shira Dec 2012 #66
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #67
shira Dec 2012 #68
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #69
shira Dec 2012 #70
azurnoir Dec 2012 #63
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #38
oberliner Dec 2012 #43
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #44
oberliner Dec 2012 #47
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #61
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #45
oberliner Dec 2012 #48
Shaktimaan Dec 2012 #58
kayecy Dec 2012 #59
geek tragedy Dec 2012 #64
azurnoir Dec 2012 #20
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #22
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #33
shira Dec 2012 #50
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #51
shira Dec 2012 #53
Ken Burch Dec 2012 #54
Scootaloo Dec 2012 #60

Response to kayecy (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 07:16 AM

1. A commitment to non-violence would go a long way

I would add to this suggestion that Hamas ought to come out publicly and forcefully against violence against civilians and join in the peaceful non-violent approach.

It would also help if the two Palestinian factions can settle on one united government that represents all of the Palestinians, regardless of whether they live in the West Bank or Gaza.

Elections are long overdo - they can help this process and give the new government legitimacy. All parties running in the election should explicitly state their opposition to violent attacks against civilians and their willingness (and indeed desire) to live in peace with Israelis.

In the face of this, even Netanyahu might have no choice but to make a deal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 08:11 AM

2. Except it didn't

Been there, done that. Israel kept building settlements. Come up with a new idea.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #2)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 08:13 AM

3. Never been tried before

In fact, I would imagine it would send (mostly positive) shock-waves around the world.

Imagine the leadership of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and other "militant" groups making a joint statement that they are committed to non-violence and living in peace with Israel.

It has the potential to be revolutionary and trans-formative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 08:24 AM

4. I can't help your selective memory. Between the two intifadas

... the PLO made good on their 1988 pledge, stopped violence, recognized Israel, and all they got for it was expanded settlements. Israel has to do something to demonstrate it's finally negotiating in good faith (if it actually is). Until then, Palestinians have the right (if not very much ability) to defend themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 09:06 AM

8. guess i have to fill in what you chose not to... tsk tsk tsk

Between Intifada I and II, led to the first time in their history for the Palestinians to have partial self-rule, the initiation of self govt, security force and a brighter future...the first positive steps in the right direction- all agree to by israel.

was it perfect? or course not, be it being a Palestenian security member shooting his israeli counter part, the settlements or the myriad of infractions both real and imagined from both sides. BUT it was the first real steps in the right direction, both sides gave and got. Thats what they got from Oslo....

then came arafat....and Intifada II....and the PA decision to throw it all away.

---



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #8)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 09:21 AM

9. When in that time did the settlement expansion stop?

It didn't. The Palestinians at some point had to defend themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #9)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 10:23 AM

11. it hasn't... it wasnt part of the agreement

theres a lot more going on that just the settlements in case you haven't noticed.

your post simply skipped over everything else that involves building a country, which is what intifada I and oslo got started and what Israel in essence gave to the PA to get the whole have their own state get moving...that was negotiating in "good faith" giving them weapons, military equipment, getting them trained via the US, setting up borders for the various areas...and lots more.


and just a fun fact: the oslo accords did not mention that the settlements had to be stopped

Yet, Oslo made no mention of a settlement freeze—formal or otherwise—and, in fact, deferred the settlement issue altogether until so-called “permanent status” negotiations to be held in five years
http://muftah.org/original-sin-how-the-oslo-accords-enabled-continued-settlement-growth-by-khaled-elgindy/


so it seems your "its the settlements" was not exactly the problem, at least not according to the agreement.
unless of course it was the PA that was not negotiating in good faith

well?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #11)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 11:14 AM

14. Islamic Jihad's rockets weren't part of any ceasefire

Just come on and say it: you think Israelis have the right to steal Arab land in safety, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #14)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 11:29 AM

15. thats not the issue...we're learning about....

what the interesting issue is: that so far what you have claimed is simply wrong:

1) you claimed that the PA receive nothing for oslo, when in fact they receive quite a lot in terms of self rule
2) you've claimed that despite oslo the settlements continued, when in fact they were not part of the agreement (hence their expansion as per the PA's agreement was permissible)

in fact if you complaining about settlement growth between the intifadas, you should complain to the PA whom as per their agreement deferred to a later stage

so now what?...you may want to disagree with the PA as per their agreement, thats fine, but dont ignore to what they agreed to either. (unless of course you one of those that believe the "ends justifies them means" you'll have plenty of company)

as to my own personal opinion about the settlements, i'm against them, but I also don't believe in ignoring facts and history.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #15)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 12:41 PM

16. Nobody "receives" self-government. It is an absolute right.

And violence is, unfortunately, justified when it is denied.

I also never claimed settlement freezes were "part of Oslo"; I claimed that the settlements are assaults against which Palestinians have the right of self defense, with force if necessary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #16)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 03:03 PM

19. religious?

Last edited Mon Dec 3, 2012, 03:11 AM - Edit history (1)

self government is an absolute right?...really for everybody? every cultural group? or is this a race (racist) based right? only certain people of certain genes get this "right" and if you have the wrong genes you dont get this right.

how about the christians in gaza, do they get their own government? homosexuals in Iran? can they get their own government?

which brings me to my favorite subject with the progressive: this "right" of self government, i assume its only of secondary importance if its a govt without basic civil rights.

Meaning you just believe that every race should be governed by people of their own race, and how they govern, if its like iran, the taliban, saudi arabia, that is of secondary importance (i.e. your a nationalist)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #15)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 02:17 PM

17. You might at least admit there were two interpretations of Oslo.......

The more important clause, however, is contained in Article XXXI(7) of the Interim Agreement (1995), which states:

Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations.

Whereas Palestinians clearly took the view that this provision applied to Israeli settlement activity—a view shared by the United States, as articulated in its Letter of Assurances to the Palestinians on the terms of the Madrid Peace Conference (Oct. 24, 1991) and reiterated by President George W. Bush as recently as January 2008—Israel has interpreted this provision narrowly, arguing it applies only to the legal status of the Occupied Territories rather than to their physical or demographic status.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kayecy (Reply #17)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 02:42 PM

18. multiple interpretations....of course

anything that was "pushed" off for the future can be interpreted differently. I think its rather obvious that all of the negotiators knew that the settlement would continue to grow, since it wasn't agreed upon that they wont.

which brings us to the "good faith" accusation. Its easy to claim that the PA didnt negotiate in good faith knowing that the settlements would continue to grow..and if they need to stop the oslo process or put pressure on israel for additional stuff, they would just tell their western "useful idiots" the start screaming about the settlements knowing full well, that those idiots would have no idea that there was no clear item about stopping their growth and that infact it was expected.

good faith?....look toward arafat, who tossed out the leaders of intifada I, who knew israelis, and replaced them with his corrupt cronies and with it, any chance of a real settlement

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #18)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:16 AM

24. You're back...we still disagree on most things, but glad that you're here.

Were you involved in the fighting with Gaza?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #24)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:13 AM

25. just a short visit.....

i dont like blogs nor the places like 972 where one cant have a long term conversation with the same people...i like to "get to know" those with whom i'm having a discussion for better or for worse, and that requires longer discussions like here, so this place fits that, but

on the other hand, this place has been education as well as a disappointment to me. Educational in terms of what are the real priorities of the "progressives" are (i had the wrong impression), which clearly are not mine, but disappointing in their lack of ability to stand up to their own standards of "fairness" as i see it or as i believe they should be.

I am actively looking for "pastures" that are more comfortable for me, not in terms of having a good argument, thats why i do the posting, but in terms of posters who will collectively stand up to the more extreme/ignorent elements no matter which side of the line they fall....that is not the case here.

as far as the fighting goes...yes we received their rockets.....while in the city of Beersheva

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #25)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:38 PM

52. Well, do what you need to do.

My impression was that you'd been away due to being called up for the fighting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #4)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 11:03 AM

12. Talk about selective memory

You must not recall the late 80s and early 90s very well.

Tel Aviv-Jerusalem bus 405 suicide attack

The Tel Aviv-Jerusalem bus 405 attack was a suicide attack on July 6, 1989 carried out by Abed al-Hadi Ghaneim of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. On a crowded Egged commuter bus line No. 405 en route from Tel-Aviv to Jerusalem (Israel), Ghanim seized the steering wheel of the bus, running it off a steep cliff into a ravine in the area of Qiryat Ye'arim. 16 civilians died in the attack—including two Canadians and one American, and 27 were wounded.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tel_Aviv-Jerusalem_bus_405_suicide_attack

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #12)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 11:12 AM

13. I was talking about post 1993

7 years from 93 to the start of the second intifada, and all that happened was more of their land got stolen.

It's going to be very difficult to ask them to forego the right of self-defense a second time. And rightly so.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #13)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:28 AM

28. 300 Israelis were killed in terror attacks from 1993-2000.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/victims.html

That's why Netanyahu was elected in 1996.

To do something about the terror attacks, which weren't happening with nearly as much success prior to 1993.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #3)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 04:01 PM

21. Because of course, Hamas and Islamic Jihad define all Palestinians

Just as Kahane Chai defines all Israelis.

There are dozens of nonviolent Palestinian movements. Like, for instance, seeking statehood through the United nations. The mistake you make is that Palestine does lack high-profile peace organizations exclusive to Palestine... Principally because of a lack of resources. However there are a pretty large number of join Israeli / Palestinian peace movements... Some of which like Seeds of Peace have been actively persecuted by the Israeli government. There are also any number of localized groups and efforts with smaller, local aims and agendas.

But of course, these organizations and efforts don't appear on the evening news, and a sad fact of human nature is we emphasize the negative and dismiss the positive. Plus, well... people like you wallow in anti-Palestinian propaganda anyway, so it's no wonder you think all Palestinians are capable of is Hamas-style militancy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #21)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:18 AM

26. your not even kidding....

Tihe mistake you make is that Palestine does lack high-profile peace organizations exclusive to Palestine... Principally because of a lack of resources

are you serious?....what resources are they lacking? TV, radio, internet, twitter, printing press, journalists, volunteers, .....this will be really really really good to hear...

the reason is not resources......

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #26)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:50 AM

29. What do you surmise the reason to be, Pelsar?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:11 AM

30. for the same reason....

Palestinian Democratic Union (progressive, secular and democratic socialist party, ) gets so little votes (2.8% of the popular vote in 2006), just not popular


so..your turn...what resources are they missing, its your claim, now its time to explain and detail it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #30)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:57 AM

31. Funding, primarily

You're aware that it costs money to create an organization and keep it operational on any major level, right? You can't just power them on wishes and good intentions. This is why the majority of peace organizations are joint or multiparty efforts with Palestinians working with Israelis or multiple nationalities to achieve the goal that you - absurdly, and wrongly - dismiss as "unpopular." Just as you dismiss and ignore the many local-level efforts that utilize peaceful forms of redress or protest.

There are also the problems of connections - it's actually rather difficult to organize online and achieve things for any period of time. Not impossible, but difficult. When's the last time DU managed to accomplish anything above an individual scale?

Also, Israel's not real fond of dissent and peaceful protest from Israelis; Take a look at the anti-boycotting law. How do you think it reacts to protest from Palestinians? it hasn't been with welcome arms. it's been met with arrests, "nonlethal" weaponry, deportations, confiscations, bureaucratic shutdowns, pretty much everything short of killing. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/world/middleeast/29palestine.html
Well, short of killing as policy; there had been deaths from canisters, rubber bullets, gas inhalations, and that sort of thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #31)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:14 AM

32. how about priorities...

that would be a better description. most of the present organizations are organized not from with the PA, but from outside, because the PA does not want to finance them...and why is that?

so your claiming that the 2.6% was not because they are not unpopular? so this is very confusing. Your claiming that they are popular, but the Palestinian just didnt vote for them (really?)

go on, explain to me how a popular party gets only 2.6% of the vote and while your at it, explain why the PA is not allocating funds for the popular peace movements starting from oslo, when they were awash with money...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:44 AM

34. I'm not talking about a political party, Pelsar

I just explained to you why most are organized from the outside..

Do also remember that the PA has been seeking peaceful resolution to the situation. Perhaps you think asking the UN to recognize statehood is an act of violence; if so, I think that speaks more about your psychology than the actions of the PA.

But thanks for trying to play, you'll get your consolation prize in three to five weeks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #34)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:40 AM

35. what you didnt explain is why there are no funds.....

you didnt explain why the PA puts the high-profile peace organizations exclusive to Palestine...on such a low priority that they have no funds.

well?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #35)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:56 PM

41. Actually I did. I don't think it's getting through to you, though

The PA has limited funding. It's not wallowing in money. Its financial situation is such that Israel's decision to withhold tax revenues to it is a really big deal for them. That money goes mostly into core functions of the government which, as I'm sure you can imagine, is not a cheap endeavor.

Also, the PA providing big funding to such groups would be redundant as - allow me to reiterate since it is not fucking sinking in - the Palestinian Authority is engaging in peaceful means to solve the conflict.

Isn't the whole point of an NGO being, well... non-Government?

You're still ignoring Palestinian participation in joint endeavors as well as the use of peaceful demonstration, protest, and political efforts on local scales.

Pelsar, you want this fiction, that the Palestinians aren't interested in peace, to be true. It's not true, and it's never going to be true. It's simply you trying to justify your own biases. Might want to get that checked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #41)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:54 AM

56. i'm well aware of the smaller groups....

many from israel, where they meet in israel as well and I'm also aware of the multitude of NGO's which provide lots of money for their various agendas.

but most important i'm aware that not one of those groups have managed to get "mainstream" Palestinians involved, they are for the most part small sections of the society that agree with the western orientation of those groups and have been around for many many years.

an orientation that most of the Palestinian society rejects as per the voting for the secular/progressive party indicates.

Its not a funding issue, its a belief issue.
___

and you make the typical progressive mistake of assuming that everyone believes like you, and must agree to your version of culture, and if not then, well they are wrong. So here you get a lesson in different cultures and how they affect those same people:

Its not a matter of the Palestinians not wanting peace, I never said that, and you make your own conclusion because it fits your 'template." Those various peace groups are all western cultural oriented, they use western symbols, western methods, usually by western oriented/educated Palestinians. The Palestinians have already rejected much of the western culture, in word and deed, and this includes many the "peace organizations, not the concept of peace itself - there is a difference.

if you need further information, you might ask those nice western college students that go to the west bank to protest about the "list" of what they cannot do, cannot say etc within the Palestinian society. Meaning whereas they are being used, they being forbidden to influence the society with their western culture and ways.

i suspect as i have learned here, that "progressives" do not like hearing that their culture is not universal and that everyone must believe as they do, define things as they do, so I'm assuming you really wont accept that reality, perhaps you should visit the west bank and talk about your "peace initiative" to the avg Palestinian, or better go to gaza and try it there....(and feel free to use the word jew or zionist or israeli interchangeably, they do, so it wont be a problem- its their cultural thing you might want to accept)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #56)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:31 AM

62. Ah yes, you're going to tell me about "typical progressives" AND "typical palestinians"

Do go on. Elucidate me with your wisdom, Pelsar.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #31)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 12:57 AM

57. Sorry, have to make a small comment here.

Also, Israel's not real fond of dissent and peaceful protest from Israelis


If you've spent any real time in Israel or known many Israelis well then you'd know just how incredibly untrue this statement is. Public protesting is an ingrained aspect of political life in Israel in a level that's probably hard to imagine in the us. It's closer in regularity to the protest culture of countries like France than what passes for protesting in America.

In short, this statement of yours is simply untrue. You are homing in on a few, isolated examples of incidents that occurred out of a HUGE pool of non-violent protests where nothing adverse occurred.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #31)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 11:05 PM

71. Lame excuse.

History has no shortage of examples of grassroots organizations gaining power and popularity until they were able to effect real change. It's easy to point out obstacles like a lack of funding as potential pitfalls to the success of such movements. But the fact remains that if pushing for a peaceful resolution of the conflict without utilizing terrorism against civilians was truly an important issue then we would see it growing and rising to the forefront. But we haven't. We see groups like Hamas winning popular elections. We see polls saying that most Palestinians favor violence against Israeli towns. We don't see mass movements demanding non-violence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shaktimaan (Reply #71)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 12:38 AM

72. There's "ignorant" and then there's "stupid"

At this point, where you and the other anti-Palestinian posters are spinning in circles trying so hard to pretend the Palestinians detest peace, hate peace, will never use peaceful measures... while ignoring that the Palestinians just went to the UN to try to resolve their issues and are going to be utilizing the apparatus of that organization to resolve more?

That's pretty clearly on the "stupid" line of that difference.

Thanks for playing, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #72)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 01:37 AM

73. Cute.

while ignoring that the Palestinians just went to the UN to try to resolve their issues and are going to be utilizing the apparatus of that organization to resolve more
?

The fact is that the Palestinians have never shied away from utilizing the UN to benefit themselves in any way possible.

Now, there's nothing wrong with that, but it's hardly anything new. Nor is it anything that correlates to a greater commitment to peace. Whatever the PLO is doing with the UN, there's no reason to think that it would indicate any shift in their policies or their citizens' ideologies WRT terrorism.

Your assumption that my inability to see this connection belies my stupidity is pretty funny if you think about it. That the Palestinians went to the UN is not exactly evidence of anything at all, beyond the fact that they went to the UN. REAL examples of a widespread commitment to peace would be more along the lines of what I posted already. Not a PLO decision to try and leverage greater political juice via UN membership. You might as well post what Abbas ate for breakfast as evidence of a Palestinian commitment to peace.

trying so hard to pretend the Palestinians detest peace, hate peace, will never use peaceful measures


Please don't mistake anyone's rejection of your hyperbolic remarks as a belief in the above rhetoric. No one said anything like that. Just because we won't embrace a false picture of a widespread Palestinian commitment to non-violence, doesn't mean we believe in an equally ridiculous opposite narrative.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shaktimaan (Reply #73)

Wed Dec 5, 2012, 02:42 AM

74. Now you're telling fibs, silly

Please don't mistake anyone's rejection of your hyperbolic remarks as a belief in the above rhetoric. No one said anything like that. Just because we won't embrace a false picture of a widespread Palestinian commitment to non-violence, doesn't mean we believe in an equally ridiculous opposite narrative.


Except that's exactly what you and Pelsar are pushing here. You're arguing that the Palestinians are not engaging in peaceful measures. You're saying their citizenry has no interest in peace. You're saying that the peaceful measures they are undertaking "don't count" for whatever inane reason you think applies, while pointedly ignoring other movements and efforts.

And pardon me if I chuckle at people like you getting upset at a lack of big-name peace organizations coming out of Palestine.. .Given that the general tendency of "pro-Israel" people is to demonize every such peace organization as a terrorist front group, hate organization, and corrupt anti-Israel defamation agency anyway. While cheering for the bombing of civilians and the theft of land from another nation.

And of course it's the Palestinians who shun peace, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #74)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 05:30 AM

75. Scoot, you're deflecting from the fact you were wrong.

You were wrong about a lack of resources for peace groups in Palestine.

You were also wrong about their UN bid. Simply going to the UN doesn't mean the PA is for our western version of peace. Hamas was all for the move and they want nothing to do with peace. In fact, every nation that is against Israel's very existence - the very antithesis of peace and 2 states - voted last week for the resolution. They did so "non-violently". So how do you get peace out of that one? A peace that Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Iran agree to? Come on, seriously?

There is no equivalent of PeaceNow that is popular in any way in the WB or Gaza. Hamas and the PA won't allow it. They're totalitarian. Western democratic, liberal cultural values (women's and gay rights, tolerance of the other, etc..) are a threat to these totalitarian regimes. This isn't news. So while Hamas and Islamic Jihad aren't the Palestinian people, they also won't allow for a Palestinian PeaceNow to ever come into existence. The people can't form a significant movement w/o the PLO or Hamas shutting them down.

You brought up 'Seeds of Peace' (SoP). I'm having a hard time finding any statements by this group that denounces terror vs. Israelis. Personally speaking, I think that's kind of important for a peace group. In fact, what I have found is that SoP has the PLO's support. And worse, the ISM's leadership met through SoP, which they also endorse. The ISM is anything but a peaceful organization. They are very clear about supporting the Palestinian (Hamas) right to "resist". They co-founded the antisemitic FreeGaza movement and work with other antisemitic, warmongering groups like the PFLP and western advocacy groups like the PSC.




As to you claiming your opponents here are all warmongers beying for Palestinian blood, did you know J-Street agreed that Israel had a right to defend itself? They didn't openly call for an operation but they certainly didn't oppose it. They opposed a ground assault, but not the operation altogether. They understand Israel had to do something to stop the rockets and protect Israeli civilians. So I'm curious. Are they warmongers to you?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #75)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 06:30 AM

76. The thing is, I'm not wrong

The resources are lacking. The PA is cash-strapped and the West bank isn't exactly a shining beacon of wealth ("better-off than Syria" doesn't actually mean good, you know.)

Even were this not the case, the idea of the government funding such groups brings up some very obvious issues of conflict-of-interest. Shira, how much stock would you, personally, put in the stance of a peace organization that is funded by what you are in this post calling a "totalitarian" government? If I know you - and trust me, I certainly do - you'd be howling that they're just mouthpieces and puppets. And you'd actually have a fair argument on that point, since again, government funding creates conflicts of interest.

Then again you also have denounced every NGO in existence as being nothing but fronts for antisemitism anyway. So in the end you're denouncing the Palestinians for not having something that you would denounce them for having. it seems illogical until one remembers that you're basically just out here to hate Palestinians.

To do as you and Pelsar and Shaktimaan are struggling to do, to cast this lack as some sort of deformity of the Palestinian people as a whole, to showcase the mas some sort of peace-hating mob... simply reeks of racist self-justification. it's like the argument often thrown out against African-Americans, that the problems in many black communities are inescapable due to the blackness of the inhaitens, therefore black people are somehow different, worse people, and so bias against them is justified.

Nice picture. Is it me, or is the guy on the far left in the pink shirt George Lucas?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #76)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:06 AM

77. Come on. So if the PA or PLO had more resources....

...we'd see more peaceful groups similar to PeaceNow?

What evidence do you have for this based on the PLO's history?

And enough conflation. This isn't an attack on the Palestinian people, as you'd like to frame it. I'm focused on the PLO/PA/Hamas not allowing for any genuine and significant peace movement.

I think that was George Lucas in the picture on the left. I'm boycotting all his shit now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #77)

Fri Dec 7, 2012, 07:32 AM

78. I have no idea. What if aliens landed in Rafah?

What if cows were actually chickens, and buffalo wings are actually what they say they are? What if Benjamin Netanyuhu turns out to have been Old Man Finkle all this time, and he would have gotten away with it if it weren't for those meddling kids? If the Israelis were Muslim Arabs, and the Palestinians were white Jews, and everything else were the same, would you still support Israel?

Maybe they'd fix the roads and invest in businesses first. That would be my guess. Try to do something about that 23% unemployment rate, perhaps.

And yes, it is an attack on the Palestinian people, Shira. You, Pelsar, and Shaktimaan are trying to pump the image that they're "not interested in peace." You, unsurprisingly, try to have it both ways with the odd claim that peace is unpopular because Hamas and the PA don't allow it. Because popularity is dependent on allowance, I guess. Which ends up being the same as claiming that it's some deformity of the Palestinians themselves, anyway, so your hedging really makes no difference in what you're saying.

You guys have some straight-up John Birch derangement shit going on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #78)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 04:01 AM

79. A history lesson

What did ghandi, the us civil rights movement and the tunisian spring have in common? Additional examples are available upon request
Answer

All had grass roots beginnings
All forced change on their respective govts
All had limited resources, when they started and became popular dispite those limited funds

Hence your conclusion that there is no widespread western style peace movement within the pa because of lack of funding is not correct

Funding is not and has never been a pre req for the start of any movement and especially not for a popular one- history is full of examples

Find another reason...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pelsar (Reply #79)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 04:31 AM

80. You need to get your shit straight

You started off bitching and moaning about the lack of big-name Peace organizations of the sort of "PeaceNow" or others of that stripe, so obviously the Palestinians are deeply defective.

I point out that such organizations require quite a bit of money to get rolling and keep moving.

You counter that there is absolutely no lack of funds in the PA, so obviously the Palestinians are deeply defective.

I point out that there fucking obviously is, and that unemployment in the West Bank is 23%.

Your position is now complaining about the lack of "grassroots" peace movements, which obviously means the Palestinians are deeply defective.

I could point out grassroots organizations - in fact I've already mentioned them, most are nameless local activities and efforts, as that's the idea of "grassroots" - and I suspect you'll just go back to your original argument; the lack of large international organizations centered in Palestine means the Palestinians are deeply defective. And so on, and so on.

Basically, the argument you present is meaningless to you, so long as it allows you to reach the same conclusion; that the Palestinian people are deeply defective, so your hatred of them is acceptable.

I'll be stepping off the carousel now. You enjoy the ride.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #80)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 06:01 AM

81. i was just answering to the moving conversation.....

I noticed you like adding emotional words to your posts....(bitching and moaning, hatred) i guess it makes it easier for you to push your point if you attempt to make the one who disagrees with you in to some kind of emotional 5 yr old.

that combined with your hyperbole doesnt really lend itself to much of an discussion....

anyway to your points..i was just pointing out the fallacy of your contention:

Organizations require funding, doesnt' always have to be "big money" especially if its a popular movement.- again history is your friend, grass roots organizations that want to change govt policy require public awareness and growth...history has shown that money is not the problem when its popular.

The PA has funds, all gov't have funds, i just claim their priorities are different than yours (you seem to have a problem with the definition of priorities..look it up), or perhaps they are in tune with their own people...i wouldnt know (do you?)

many of the smaller organizations, that may want public policy change haven't "caught on with the mainstream public despite being around for over 20 years or so....it took the muslim brotherhood (with no funding) over 90 years to get the majority they wanted, it could be those organizations may need 90 years as well. It took hamas much less. (both classic grass roots organizations)

......you can want them to, but it doesnt change the simply fact that they haven't, thats why after so long they are all still small (those that want govt policy changes)

back to your 'big name organizations"....which ones are you actually referring to, since as far as i know many use volunteers, collect donations from outside sources and are not necessary dependent upon the local government-care to name names?
____

as far as using the words like "hatred" racist" etc...lets just say i notice that the "anti israeli/progressive crowd are having a rather field day with the use of those words and others these last few days...must be nice getting out of the closet finally....tolerance I noticed is not part of that vocabulary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #78)

Sat Dec 8, 2012, 07:55 AM

82. So if you have no idea and no evidence the PLO would fund Palestinian PeaceNow....

....groups if they just had the money, then why make the claim that it's primarily lack of resources holding the project back?

Hamas and the PLO are totalitarian movements. They label all Liberal and Progressive values as Zionist. If the PLO wanted to fund a Palestinian PeaceNow organization, they would have done so long ago. They chose not to, as they've been pretty busy payrolling Hamas and and giving terrorist families monthly stipends with your tax dollars.

Here's the kicker.

Western groups like the ISM, BDS, PSC, FreeGaza, etc... have many representatives in the territories. If they wanted to, they could have helped kickstart a grassroots PeaceNow movement with likeminded Palestinians. But they're too busy yucking it up with Hamas and justifying the resistance (rockets) flying over into Israel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 08:26 AM

5. With its new status, what would happen if

disenfranchised, non-violent Palestinians made a desperate plea to the U.N. the next time Israeli settlors and/or their government attempts to evict even one family from its home?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to no_hypocrisy (Reply #5)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 08:29 AM

6. Same thing that happened in '88 and '93

World leaders would temporize, and Israel would keep expanding settlements and assassinating and jailing Palestinians.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #1)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 08:42 AM

7. There's no evidence of that.

"In the face of this, even Netanyahu might have no choice but to make a deal."

Of course militant action is utterly worthless and should be stopped, but your statement is absurd.
In fact just two days ago Netanyahu authorized construction of 3,000 new homes and the planning for thousands more in West Bank settlements and in East Jerusalem. His contempt for international law has been continuous and consistent, showing that he's a man of bad faith who cannot be believed when he makes noises about possible negotiation. While demanding recognition of Israel as a Jewish state as precondition for "talks", he himself doesn't recognize Palestine or respect any borders. He has no intention whatsoever of ever doing so. The only hope Palestine has is from without, by the whole world joining in and ramping up the BDS movement.

Oh yes, and it would be nice if the IDF stopped its militant action as well, and returned to behind the 1947 borders. But there's no chance of that, and the double standard is so entrenched that the possibility is neither mentioned or even imagined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to delrem (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:14 AM

23. I think you meant "behind the 1967 borders"

In 1947, the State of Israel hadn't been founded yet, and there WERE no borders to withdraw behind.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #23)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:31 PM

40. OK, I wiki'd it

And I see that the UN plan was never implemented.

Some rhetorical questions - any answers would be above and beyond...:
Isn't it also true that Israel considers the occupied territories to be "contested territory"?
But also, isn't it true that the UN considers the Israeli settlements to be illegal, and that refugees have a right of return? It was suggested to me (on this list) that this only means that there's a pseudo right of return to any leftover land that isn't claimed by Israel, and it appears that Abbas agrees. What borders did the UN general assembly have in mind when it admitted that Palestine had state's privileges? Do you (or does anyone) think that these and other matters (settlements, etc) will eventually have to be decided by the ICC? What other benefit would Palestinians have from the recent UN vote?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:33 PM

55. It would. If BOTH sides made that commitment.

If it's wrong for Israel to put itself at the mercy of the Palestinians and other Arabs, it's equally wrong to demand that Palestinians put themselves at the mercy of the IDF.

What Zakaria is proposing would ONLY be legitimate if he were also to insist, at the same time, that Israel never use violence against non-violent protesters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kayecy (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 09:30 AM

10. The West Bank has been peaceful for years. What has that got them besides less land?

When you keep stealing land from the people who aren't attacking you, and withdraw unilaterally from the people who are, what message are you sending?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:20 AM

27. A level of autonomy that hadn't existed for decades

The vast majority of the population being under Palestinian governance exclusively.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #27)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 09:52 AM

36. Absurd!

being under Palestinian governance exclusively.



Except for, you know, the checkpoints, the settler-only roads, the confiscation of land, the fences going up between their homes and groves, the periodic confiscation of tax revenues...

Calling that "autonomy" is nothing short of Orwellian.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recursion (Reply #36)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 10:30 AM

37. None of those exist in Area A

There are no settlements there and no IDF presence. In fact, no Israeli is even allowed to set foot in Area A.

You asked what they gained - that was definitely a gain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #37)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:58 AM

39. You're asking us to celebrate Bantustans? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #39)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:58 PM

42. No

I'm just pointing out what the Palestinians gained from Oslo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #42)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:05 PM

46. Yes, they gained Bantustans. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #46)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:53 PM

49. They were offered a very fair deal in 2001....

Arafat later regretted not accepting it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/jun/22/israel

Hillary just admitted Arafat called Bill years later and said he was interested in the deal.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4314125,00.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #49)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:39 AM

65. Now Israel has become Arafat. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #65)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 04:12 PM

66. Nope. But the PA is still like Arafat....

Olmert offered more in 2008 than the deal Arafat rejected in 2001.

Maybe stuff like this has something to do with it...

&feature=player_embedded

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #66)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 04:36 PM

67. International pariah, incapable and disinterested in serious negotiations, tilting

towards extremism, refusal to negotiate in good faith.

I'll stand by that comparison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #67)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:34 PM

68. This pariah (deligitimization) effort began after the Taba accord....

It happened at the time Israel was making its best offer to the PA.

The one Arafat rejected.

The one Arafat wanted to agree to afterwards.

=====

So explain to me why this deligitimization process (Pariah status) began at the height of the peace process, when Israel was making its best offer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #68)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:41 PM

69. You think Israel is more respected and supported today than it was

40 years ago?

10 years ago?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #69)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 06:48 PM

70. You didn't answer my question. Attempts to delegitimize Israel by working....

...towards making it a Pariah state generally started over 10 years ago. When Israel was making its best attempt at peace, with the dovish Labour and Meretz giving it their best effort.

Why did this delegitimization, demonization process begin at that time?

Riddle me that one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #37)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:59 AM

63. Area A is a wonder 55% of Palestinians in the West Bank live there on 18% of the land

that is spaced out in to towns and 41% live in Area B 21% of the West Bank land while in Area C 61% of the West Bank 350,00 Israelis are crowded in with 4% of the 2.5 million Palestinians that live in the West Bank yes indeed nit was one heck of a deal but your right no settlements in those towns just around them well except Hebron which is a tale of its own .......

eta



Area Security Civil Admin % of WB land
% of WB Palestinians

A Palestinian Palestinian 18% 55%
B Israeli Palestinian 21% 41%
C Israeli Israeli 61% 4%

This page was last modified on 4 December 2012 at 08:40.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank#Palestinian_administration

Division

Area A (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority): circa 3% of the West Bank, exclusive East-Jerusalem (first phase, 1995). In 2011: 18%. This area includes all Palestinian cities and their surrounding areas, with no Israeli settlements. Entry into this area is forbidden to all Israeli citizens. The Israel Defense Forces maintain no presence, but sometimes conducts raids to arrest suspected militants.

Area B (Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control): circa 25% (first phase, 1995). In 2011: 21%. Includes areas of many Palestinian towns and villages and areas, with no Israeli settlements.

Area C (full Israeli civil and security control, except over Palestinian civilians): circa 72% (first phase, 1995). In 2011: 61%. These areas include all Israeli settlements (cities, towns, and villages), nearby land, most roadways that connected the settlements (and which Israelis are now restricted to) as well as strategic areas described as "security zones." There were 1,000 Israeli settlers living in Area C in 1972. By 1993, their population had increased to 110,000. As of 2012 they number more than 300,000 – as against 150,000 Palestinians, the majority of whom are Bedouin and fellahin.

This page was last modified on 29 October 2012 at 17:01.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_divisions_of_the_Oslo_Accords

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #27)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 11:57 AM

38. Yeah, just like Pine Ridge in South Dakota has been under Indian governance

exclusively.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:00 PM

43. You really want to compare the Palestinian situation to that of Native Americans?

There is none.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #43)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:04 PM

44. Do explain further, Oberliner

I'm curious to see how deep your knowledge of Indian Country goes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #44)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:27 PM

47. Ballpark figure of number of Native Americans killed from, say, 1620 onwards?

In the millions? Tens of millions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #47)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:26 AM

61. Geek is referring to the reservation system, not the history that led there

And the death toll between the two continents is probably an unthinkable number; 22 million is the rough estimate for North America (this includes Mexico and central America). The Spanish themselves guessed that disease and abuse in the Caribbean killed 5 million people; it might be an exaggeration on de la Casa's part... but Hispaniola and Cuba were pretty much wiped clean of Native American... so 5 million doesn't sound like a huge exaggeration.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #43)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:05 PM

45. The only difference is that the Native Americans have become US citizens

and can vote in our elections.

The annexation was formal and legal in their case. Israel gives the Palestinians the worst of both worlds--no right to vote in Israeli elections, no right to self-determination. Just oppression, poverty, and hopelessness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #45)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:27 PM

48. And the mass extermination

But don't let that little fact get in the way of your analogy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geek tragedy (Reply #45)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:11 AM

58. Except...

They do have increasing amounts of self determination such as the right to vote in their own elections. In east Jerusalem the vast majority of Palestinian residents have rejected the opportunity to gain Israeli citizenship in favor of retaining their Palestinian national identity. So you are decrying the denial of rights that the Palestinians are not even requesting. They can not have their own state AND citizenship to Israel. They've made it clear which they desire.

And what about gaza? Were they not granted self determination? What about the closing of dozens of Gazan settlements and several in the West Bank? The economy in the wb is booming, checkpoints are being closed, and the Palestinians have full political autonomy. So in what way is their situation like the American Indians'?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shaktimaan (Reply #58)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 01:57 AM

59. And Netanyahu just goes on building and building....

In east Jerusalem the vast majority of Palestinian residents have rejected the opportunity to gain Israeli citizenship in favor of retaining their Palestinian national identity

Or perhaps they did not want to give Israel an excuse for hanging on to East Jerusalem.

The economy in the wb is booming, checkpoints are being closed, and the Palestinians have full political autonomy.

And Netanyahu just goes on building and building....The Palestinians only now have "full political economy" in 39% of the West Bank, soon that will be reduced to only their towns.........And the "Gaza squalid refugee camps of course.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shaktimaan (Reply #58)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 10:39 AM

64. Gaza has no right to control its own borders, its own air space, its own immigration policy,

it can't enter into treaties with other nations.

What a sad joke your post is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kayecy (Original post)

Sun Dec 2, 2012, 03:49 PM

20. well it's a thought

end the sham that Oslo has become, if it not was designed to be in the first place

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kayecy (Original post)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 04:13 AM

22. Why is it necessary to dissolve the PA?

Zakaria's asking for Palestinians to go from near-powerlessness to TOTAL powerlessness as...what? a gesture of good faith?

How is that going to help?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #22)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 08:34 AM

33. If I understand Fareed...

His idea is essentially total surrender. Give up. Tell Israel, "you win." Everything between Egypt and Jordan is now Israel. Just like Israel has clearly been wanting for a long long time now. Sea to river, all part of Israel now. This is clearly what Israel's goal is, after all, it's why they keep expanding settlements in the west bank and keep driving Arabs out of Jerusalem neighborhoods. Why not give it to them?

Okay, the Israelis want disarmarment? Drop all the weapons, right down to the forks you eat with. The Israelis want territory to be ceded? Cede all of it. The Israelis want to steal that tax revenue? Go for it, guys, it's yours. Surrender every cobble in Jerusalem? It's yours, Israel. Sole ownership of the West Bank aquifer, the Jordan River, and the Gallilee? Take the Gaza gas fields while you're at it, guys!

So now Israel gets everything it wants. Every single demand it's made on the Palestinians is met. Just like Israel wants. Cede it all, it all belongs to Israel now. Every house, every olive tree, every pot of water. Israel wants it that bad, there it is, take it.

But now, Israel has a new problem. The Palestinians have just given over everything it wants. No fuss, no muss. What's Israel going to do about the 3.5 million Arabs that it has just inherited? Not by violent conquest, but by those Arabs giving in, and meeting all of Israel's demands.

Israel can't very well kill them all - and I'd like to think it wouldn't be considered. It'd be an enormous catastrophe for everyone to deport them all; and deport them where? And why, most of 'em are innocent of any wrongdoing. Israel's stuck with these people, basically. What happens then? One of two things.

One, Israel has a Grinch moment; the government's heart grows three sizes and it abandons the idiocy of trying to remain an ethnically-defined state; it grants citizenship and Israeli rights to the Palestinians

Two, Israel retains its apartheid policies, and there's a hurried scramble to figure out how to actually create a viable second state for the Palestinians, in order to ensure the continued "Jewish character" of Israel.

Basically the idea is presenting Israel with a clearly-defined option; "either we become Israelis, or you get serious about a Palestinian state that works."

It's probably a pipe dream, since hte Palestinians have invested so much effort into a Palestinian state... but that's how it would work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Scootaloo (Reply #33)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 05:59 PM

50. It will never happen. Ever. Abbas won't give up his power...

And Gaza is another story. No way do they buy into this, as Israel would be free to re-take Gaza and destroy Hamas.

I recently read about a one-state proposal in which Israel would take over everything (except Gaza) and offer West Bank Palestinian families, including refugees, about $100,000 to relocate elsewhere. If accepted, that would automatically put these families into the upper-class elites of any Arab nation out there. The rest who find this unacceptable would remain and become citizens (demographic problems or not). Refugees outside Israel would remain outside Israel.

But both scenarios, Zakaria's and this one, are both big reaches and so highly unlikely as to have no chance at happening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #50)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:34 PM

51. I noticed that you NEVER admitted it was an unacceptable request.

Do you actually think it was acceptable to ask one side in this to just give up and place itself totally at the mercy of the other side?

Isn't time to give the "Palestiinians have to change their leaders" thing a rest, shira?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ken Burch (Reply #51)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 06:43 PM

53. What request? If the PA wishes to fold and gives Israel the choice...

...why wouldn't you be in favor of this Palestinian initiative?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #53)

Mon Dec 3, 2012, 07:14 PM

54. the choice to do what? Keep the West Bank forever?

What possible reason do Palestinians have for giving up the tiny bit of ability they currently have to influence events?

You can't seriously be suggesting that it could be legitimate to let the Israeli side totally dictate how things play out-that Palestinians should put themselves totally at Netanyahu's mercy. How could you possibly think that's a legitimate thing to ask?

And what would be achieved by dissolving the PA anyway? It's not as though that could possibly make anything better.

The only people who'd actually think dissolving the PA and leaving Palestinians with nothing at all are those who WANT Palestinians to be stuck with the pre-Oslo status quo for the rest of eternity...people who care more about repudiating Oslo than ending the war. In short, people who have no positive ideas at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to shira (Reply #50)

Tue Dec 4, 2012, 03:16 AM

60. Okay.

And? I basically see it as speculative fiction, as I imagine pretty much everyone does.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread