But what would you do with the existing settlements (Ma'ale Adumim is gigantic!) and the hundreds of thousands of settlers? Swap them with the same number of Israeli Arabs?
Israeli - Palestinian Conflict
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
But what would you do with the existing settlements (Ma'ale Adumim is gigantic!) and the hundreds of thousands of settlers? Swap them with the same number of Israeli Arabs?
The Israeli arabs are Israeli, the Israeli settlers are Israeli, why would their be swaps?
If that's the case why the hell has war and demands for recognition on both sides been going on since then?
Land swaps would prevent large-scale ethnic cleansing, in the true sense of the term.
Israel's response to the unilateral bid by the Palestinians? And the quote by Bibi, is why I felt, the Palestinians are on a hiding to nothing, Israel can do what it wants, as Bibi stated, and everyone that matters understands that, and won't do anything to stop it.
So if the Palestinians want a state, they have to submit to the Israeli will, and take what they are given...simple as that.
Well, they Palestinians have already missed quite a few opportunities in the past, so maybe they shouldn't miss this one. There's no alternative.
Yup, while they keep dreaming of utopia, the reality on the ground changes as we speak.
They're gonna end up with F-all.
It's like the leadership doesn't realize, in the real world...'fair', 'equitable' and whatnot simply don't matter. It's all about who has more pull/sway, and who can afford to sit things out...and Israel ticks all of the above.
Yup, while they keep dreaming of utopia, the reality on the ground changes as we speak.
They're gonna end up with F-all.
Hilarious
Yup, while they keep dreaming of utopia, the reality on the ground changes as we speak.
They're gonna end up with F-all.
It's like the leadership doesn't realize, in the real world...'fair', 'equitable' and whatnot simply don't matter. It's all about who has more pull/sway, and who can afford to sit things out...and Israel ticks all of the above.
Exactly. This is why they should probably just accept the hard facts and take whatever they can so that everyone can finally move on. If they think ahead 10 years from now, what could possibly change? What ground breaking stuff do they have on their political agenda for the near future?!
I'm laughing at the absurdity of it all...not the notion of the Palestinians not having a nation.
I'm a non-entity from the internet, and even I realize how with each passing year, this potential Palestinian state shrinks or changes(Israel puts up more settlements, more housing, more barriers).
Whether the deal when Clinton was in power was fair or not...I think it's safe to say, it was a lot fairer than anything they'll be getting a decade on. Did Israel have a security wall back then, a wall it built pushing into Palestinian land, and claiming it as a security buffer.
Think of how much damage 9/11 did to the Palestinian cause around the world(unrelated but not really)...Notice how Bibi went to the UN, and kept going on about Militant Islam, a Palestinian State is not about Islam or Militant Islam, but in the post 9/11 world, everything can be muddled together, no grey areas.
All about timing, and the Palestinians see to have nothing but BAD TIMING.
Its not a land swap you're wanting, it's getting rid of a bunch of people you don't want in your nation
I think you're confusing something here- it's the Israelis who want to keep the settlements and it's the Palestinians who would want to get rid of all settlers in their new state. Right?
It's been Israeli government policy to put thier citizens in the west bank, it's their fault that they'll all have to be moved back
They're not part of my nation either way. They see themselves as Palestinians, and a land swap should include as many Palestinians as possible in the future Palestinian state. This sure beats being second class citizens in the apartheid state west of the (future) border.
They are citizens of Israel, they are part of your nation
So are the Arabs of East Jerusalem.
Which is occupied territory, whats your point?
Arabs with Israeli IDs can, and should find themselves residents of a future Palestinian state if one is established.
What if they're happy in Israel?
They are, just as some knobhead settlers are all too happy raising kids behaind barbed wire in the heart of Hebron.
I reckon a lasting peace agreement should see the necessary minimum number of people evicted from their homes, and at the same time separate the two populations to the greater possible extent.
Draw the lines for the 2 countries and leave the settlers to decide whether they want to be part of palestine or Israel the same goes for the Arabs living in Israel.
They live on occupied territory, the Arabs living within Israel do not, different situation.
Are you saying that every single inch of territory that is currently inhabited by the settlers, legally belongs to Palestinians?
So hold on, you're suggesting the forced eviction of thousands of people based solely on racial/ethnic lines? Even those Arabs who are happy to be part of a future Israel? Really?
If its within the internationally-recognized occupied borders, then yes.
Except for the Golaan Heights and Shebaa farms which belong to Syria and Lebanon respectively.
Bollox of the highest order..
On the contrary, the only existing enforceable document actually encourages Jewish settlement. This document was created on April 24, 1920 at the San Remo Conference when the Principal Allied Powers agreed to assign the Mandate for the territory of Palestine to Great Britain. By doing so the League of Nations "recognized the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine" and established "grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country." Article 6 of the Mandate "encouraged … close settlement by Jews on the land," including the lands of Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha)."
I think you'll find it's King Hussein's fault for bombing Israel when they - the Jordanians - illegally occupied the 'west bank'.
League of nations....what a blast from the past
All that document stated was that Jews have a historical connection to PALESTINE, which has always been true. No where does it say that they need to force out natives and start to build settlements over land which isn't internationally assigned to them.
Also you're forgetting a more important 'document' or legislation rather, and thats the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 which assigned the Mandate of Palestine to two states : Jewish and Arab on a roughtly 50:50 basis. This whole idea that Jews need to forcefully claim their promised lands by building illegal settlements is pure Zionist zealotry, there's nothing legal or moral about it.
League of nations....what a blast from the past
All that document stated was that Jews have a historical connection to PALESTINE, which has always been true. No where does it say that they need to force out natives and start to build settlements over land which isn't internationally assigned to them.
Also you're forgetting a more important 'document' or legislation rather, and thats the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 181 which assigned the Mandate of Palestine to two states : Jewish and Arab on a roughtly 50:50 basis. This whole idea that Jews need to forcefully claim their promised lands by building illegal settlements is pure Zionist zealotry, there's nothing legal or moral about it.
How is that even valid when the Arabs themselves rejected it and therefore declared it invalid?! At what point in history did we have a situation where the Arabs in Palestine declared their state and their borders, officially recognized by the UN?
Yes
Where did I say that?
Jerusalem isn't occupied. It had been between 1948-1967.
“Mr. JAMALI (Iraq): ... We believe that the decision which we have now taken ... undermines peace, justice and democracy. In the name of my Government, I wish to state that it feels that this decision is antidemocratic, illegal, impractical and contrary to the Charter ... Therefore, in the name of my Government, I wish to put on record that Iraq does not recognize the validity of this decision (181), will reserve freedom of action towards its implementation, and holds those who were influential in passing it against the free conscience of mankind responsible for the consequences.”
“Amir. ARSLAN (Syria): ... Gentlemen, the Charter is dead. But it did not die a natural death; it was murdered, and you all know who is guilty. My country will never recognize such a decision [Partition]. It will never agree to be responsible for it. Let the consequences be on the heads of others, not on ours.”
“H. R. H. Prince Seif El ISLAM ABDULLAH (Yemen): The Yemen delegation has stated previously that the partition plan is contrary to justice and to the Charter of the United Nations. Therefore, the Government of Yemen does not consider itself bound by such a decision ... and will reserve its freedom of action towards the implementation of this decision.”
You said that there should be a minimum number of Arabs evicted from their homes as part of a peace agreement. Isn't that implying that people should be forced from their homes, if the minimum number is not met?
Jews are people too...
What I said was that I felt an agreement on borders should take into account current demography so a minimum number of people are evicted (obviously the only ones actually evicted will be some of the Jewish settlers). As some of the main settlements are going to be annexed to Israel the Palestinians should get in return areas adjacent to the 1967 line which are densely populated with Palestinian Arabs who ended up in Israeli territory after the 1948 war.
It is, you're just being silly
Actually, not only that it was occupied back then, it was also ethnically cleansed when all the Jewish survivors were evicted out from the Old City after the shelling of the Jewish Quarter in 1948.
From Wiki:
In 1948 during the Arab-Israeli War, its population of about 2,000 Jews was besieged, and forced to leave en masse. Colonel Abdullah el Tell, local commander of the Jordanian Arab Legion, with whom Mordechai Weingarten negotiated the surrender terms, described the destruction of the Jewish Quarter, in his Memoirs (Cairo, 1959):
"... The operations of calculated destruction were set in motion.... I knew that the Jewish Quarter was densely populated with Jews who caused their fighters a good deal of interference and difficulty.... I embarked, therefore, on the shelling of the Quarter with mortars, creating harassment and destruction.... Only four days after our entry into Jerusalem the Jewish Quarter had become their graveyard. Death and destruction reigned over it.... As the dawn of Friday, May 28, 1948, was about to break, the Jewish Quarter emerged convulsed in a black cloud - a cloud of death and agony."
—Yosef Tekoah (Permanent Representative of Israel to the United Nations) quoting Abdullah el-Tal, [6]
The Jordanian commander who led the operation is reported to have told his superiors: "For the first time in 1,000 years not a single Jew remains in the Jewish Quarter. Not a single building remains intact. This makes the Jews' return here impossible."[7] The Hurva Synagogue, originally built in 1701, was blown up by the Jordanian Arab Legion.
In the 1960s, American town planners, together with the Jordanian authorities, had planned that the quarter be transformed into a park.[8] During the nineteen year Arab administration, a third of the Jewish Quarter's buildings had been demolished by the Jordanians.[9] All but one of the fifty-three Jewish houses of worship that graced the Old City were destroyed. The synagogues were razed or pillaged and stripped and their interiors used as hen-houses or stables.[6]
I'm quite sure we'd be witnessing another wave of destruction of archaeology and material culture if the PA would ever get the control over Jerusalem.
Unfortunately, Israel does not exert its authority to prevent irrepairable damage to the Temple Mount as things are.