Achieving Peace in the Middle East

Palestinian childern seriously

I think the world would be better off without both the Israelis and Palestinians. People who have been fighting over basically worthless land for centuries are simply to stupid to live. Maybe we can "accidently" drop a few bombs on that sandlot on the way to Iraq.


(Joking).

 

Great ideas, Jedi-Xen.

Two practical problems though:

1) Jerusalem. Israel will never accept UN control of the city; the UN has passed more resolutions condemning Israel than any other nation on earth. They are not trusted nor liked by the Israelis, and for good reason; there is a strong anti-Israel/anti-semitic lobby on this planet, and the post-Holocaust old guard have pretty much decided that they have to fend for themselves. That is not to say that I don't support UN action here, because I do very much, but I just don't think it would work at the present.

A solution that both sides may accept is "Israel gets the Jewish parts, Palestine gets the Muslim parts". Since they're both segregated into East and West Jerusalem, they can both stay (hopefully) out of each other's way.

2) A palestinian military-your proposal here was excellent. Two major problems. Israel will never accept any form of palestinian airspace that cuts across Israel proper, claiming that this makes them (Israel) vulnerable to attack. The second problem is military alliances. A palestinian military, indeed, a palestinian state will not work unless each arab muslim nation recognizes Israel's right to exist within secure borders and gives up their sworn claims to destroy Israel. Remember, most of the countries in the middle east are still technically at war with Israel; if a palestinian state with a military is formed without the above, then what is to stop such a state from forming a military alliance with Iran, Iraq, and Syria, perhaps "inviting" them in to perform joint military exercises or build bases right next to Israel? This would never be tolerated by the Israelis.

So, while your ideas are excellent overall, unfortunately, I think the above reasons are part of why they may not work. Of course, it would help if both sides decided that they actually want peace.

Peace ,
V-03

 

Up.

 

Thanks

 

A solution that both sides may accept is "Israel gets the Jewish parts, Palestine gets the Muslim parts". Since they're both segregated into East and West Jerusalem, they can both stay (hopefully) out of each other's way.

Yes unfortunatley your right Vaderize. I believe President Clinton accepted something like this in a peace plan that eventually crashed and burned, both sides seemed content with it, but that was before Israel elected Sharon.


A palestinian military-your proposal here was excellent. Two major problems. Israel will never accept any form of palestinian airspace that cuts across Israel proper, claiming that this makes them (Israel) vulnerable to attack. The second problem is military alliances. A palestinian military, indeed, a palestinian state will not work unless each arab muslim nation recognizes Israel's right to exist within secure borders and gives up their sworn claims to destroy Israel. Remember, most of the countries in the middle east are still technically at war with Israel; if a palestinian state with a military is formed without the above, then what is to stop such a state from forming a military alliance with Iran, Iraq, and Syria, perhaps "inviting" them in to perform joint military exercises or build bases right next to Israel? This would never be tolerated by the Israelis.

This almost happened, not the Palestinian military, but the Arabian nations recognizing Israel, in exchange for an independent Palestine using pre-1967 borders. The peace plan was drafted by Saudi Arabia of all people, was a nice looking peace plan too. Unfortunatley this is when terrorism really picked up in Israel/Palastine, it is also when Sharon decided it would be a good time to expel Arafat, those two things together really gave the peace process a black eye.

I agree my idea's probably won't work, not because they cant, but because the leaders of Israel and the PA don't want them too. Its the leadership of these two "states" that is causing this, not the citizens who likely want nothing more than peace.

Sad isn't it?

 

Here is a question I would love to ask all of you: why didn't Jordan establish an independent "Palestinian" state when it controlled a significant portion of present-day Israel? Could it be that the Arab nations were not looking for an independent state for the "Palestinians" but were wanting to kill the Jews?

 

Jordans conduct between 1948 and 1967 was hardly good. I suspect that they were happy to control extra territory.

 

Here is a question I would love to ask all of you: why didn't Jordan establish an independent "Palestinian" state when it controlled a significant portion of present-day Israel? Could it be that the Arab nations were not looking for an independent state for the "Palestinians" but were wanting to kill the Jews?

Why didn't Epypt do the same thing with the Gaza Strip? Or the Sinai? Intrestingly enough Jordan and Egypt, the nations that controlled the territory that is now PA prior to 1967 are more than less the only Arabian nations who recognize Israel.

 

Why didn't Epypt do the same thing with the Gaza Strip? Or the Sinai? Intrestingly enough Jordan and Egypt, the nations that controlled the territory that is now PA prior to 1967 are more than less the only Arabian nations who recognize Israel.

The Sinai penninsula was part of Egypt proper but I would suggest that they had similar motives to Jordan. They were happy to control the territory. Both of those countries are now what we term moderate arab states. They have both signed peace treaties with Israel all though their motivations were different. Egypt did so in 1978 and lost most of their influence in the arab world who viewed it as a sell out to the west (US mainly) as Egypt have recieved massive subsidies from the US ever since. Jordan signed a peace treaty in 1994 after the Oslo accords had been signed. Under King Hussein, one of the few Arab leaders who really believed in peace, they had been peaceful towars Israel for many years before but would not sign a treaty until the Israelis recognised the Palestinians right to statehood as per the Oslo accords.

 

Oh my God. Oh my GOD.

I actually agree with POLUNIS.

And behold, he opened the seventh seal.....

Peace,

V-03

 

Here is a weblink that will take considerable time to peruse, but it is well worth it: Myths and Facts.

 

I agree with POLUNIS as well.

The Arabs aren't interested truly in a two state solution. They want the destruction of Israel.

 

Actually I disagree with you,

Try living in a squalid refugee camp all your life, because your home's been colonized, and see how you feel.

There are many Palestians interested in the two state solution, they have been for a very long time.

While the ruling party in Israel, Likud, have voted not to ever have a Palestinian state.

My $.02

 

Check out this map of the not so generous camp david peace plan, from gush shalom, part of the Israeli peace camp.

http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf

Tell me how we'd like to live, here in the U.S, if we wern't allowed to travel from say Manhattan to New Jersey and divided into tiny little camps? Much like btw, how it was in the Bantu cantons in South Africa.

 

btw, poulinis, we don't actually know if "the arabs" want to kill "the jews" (you throw the word around candidly), most of them are ruled by autocratic secular dictatorships so we won't ever know for sure what they think.

But most of this is a problem in all truth, which has been left by Europe, the arabs have never had a holocaust on their land. Which has had btw as many if not more jews than Europe, throughout history.

Anyway, let's not generalize and start putting people into boxes. I know many jews who are just as big nutcases as any fanatic arab. Believe me, I went to Brandeis. But this doesn't mean that, many Israelis and many jews don't want peace.

 

ksid-

Check out POLUNIS's link; it actually provides one of the most accurate depictions of the historical roots of the conflict that I have come across.

Tell me how we'd like to live, here in the U.S, if we wern't allowed to travel from say Manhattan to New Jersey and divided into tiny little camps? Much like btw, how it was in the Bantu cantons in South Africa

To be fair, I think you need to acknowledge that the travel restrictions are a result of terrorism in Israel proper; thousands of palestinians used to travel to Israel every day for work and play before the intifadeh. Israel imposed the restrictions because of the attacks. I'm not going to take a side on whether or not this is right or wrong in this post, but that fact deserves mentioning. BTW, ever see The Siege?. If a city were beset by terrorism in the US, travel restrictions might happen.




Peace,

V-03

 

They can't travel within the west bank.

Say for instance village A is seperated from village B. There are roads that only settlers can use, which cut the lines of communication between villages. (i.e. their country isn't contiguous)

So yes, if I couldn't go from my home to the local super-market I'd be pissed. Check out the link I sent you guys.

Side note, there are settler camp's which are over-flowing with swimming pools, while the palestinians don't have enough water to drink (sound like injustice to you?)

The only polunis argument I wanted to answer is that all Israelis don't want to kill all arabs nor all arabs want to kill all Israelis. Let's not start putting people into boxes.

Going down that road will lead to a darkness, which is often self-fulfilling rather than fact.

And, I don't need another link mixing up Judaism with politics. What they're doing is contaminating Judaism.

May the Force flow through us all (since this is a star wars forum) .

 

btw, checked out the link. I'd still prefer a secular Israeli link.

but regardless, it's not relevant to my above post anyway.

 

btw, checked out the link. I'd still prefer a secular Israeli link.

I understand where you are coming from, but in the previous thread, most of the arab links provided were to much angrier and religious websites than this jewish one. For a non-secular site, that was pretty good.

The travel restrictions within the west bank are the result of terrorism inside of Israel proper. They are going in there because attacks are being launched from there. If mexico were doing this against texas, the US would probably go in and occupy the dangerous area until it had decided the threat was neutralized. As a matter of fact, the Texas government would probably go and do something about it

Anyway, so much of this is one's perspective.
Each side thinks that they are right and that the other deserves death; nothing is going to change until that does.

Peace,

V-03

 

Vader-

Dude, point well taken. Sorry I jumped into this thread. Will read the other pages at leisure, specially page 5, where the chunk of the articles seem to be.

The Arabs are blind man, what can you say. Dictatorships tend to do that to people. One day that regions gonna explode, mark my words. Thats what happens, when you don't allow people to express themselves.

Anyway back on topic, we were talking about the Israeli Dilemma.

Actually what I was saying was that the Palestinian's had restrictions on themselves even before this current spate of violence. Remember the 1st uprising? Remember, children throwing stones against armed soldiers and tanks. violence doesn't occur without a reason. Horrible things have to happen, before something gives. Lot of what happens in the territories we don't even hear about. The fact is, that they are now resisting the conquest. Which I'm not surprised by (wouldn't you quintus, wouldn't I?).

But yes, if we go into a violence ---> terrorism or terrorism ---> violence debate, we'd be going into a chicken and egg argument.

There are settlers criss-crossing the 22%, that the palestinians eventually hope to call their home. There are Military garrisons posted, and there were even before this current uprising.

And, I'll tell you one thing, Sharon and Likud are dilly-dallying about giving back the territories. This has been Sharon's plan all along, since the 80's.

But there is no way you can keep the territories and keep Israel democratic and Jewish.

used to travel to Israel every day for work and play before the intifadeh

Vader, I'd like to add that yes before the intifadeh the palestinian's went to work in Israel proper every morning, waking up pretty early in the morning to get by the harrasment at the check-points, but they never played. Palestinians have totally different white registration plates in Israel.

so much of this is one's perspective.
Each side thinks that they are right and that the other deserves death; nothing is going to change until that does.


I agree with you. That's why I say lets cut down on arguments which are no-win situations. Arguments that involve painting groups, false-hysteria inducing etc. It leads down to an even darker path.



"Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. - Yoda."

 

Interesting link ksid. It should be compulsary viewing for all those who insist that the present situation is all Arafat's fault for not accepting the deal at Camp David.

 

Try living in a squalid refugee camp all your life, because your home's been colonized, and see how you feel.

And this is Israel's fault? The Arab nations had much more to do with this. The "Palestinian" children are indoctrinated with hatred of Israel and the Jews. My characterization still stands despite the fact there might be exceptions to that general rule.

My link does provide many answers and much documentation. You might want to reconsider your stance on that site.

 

>children are indoctrinated with hatred of Israel and the Jews

And many Israeli's aren't? I say Polunis you go visit Israel, before making generalized statements.

The Settlers try to make life a living hell for the arabs/palestinians living in and around them every chance they can. Cutting down olive groves, deprivation of the scarce resource of water. Sound like inequlity to a God fearing soul such as yourself?

I say, you should get off of your high horse. And in the meantime, read a good book like the Fateful Triangle by Noam Chomsky.

 

Great post, ksid...well-thought out.

I do have one thing to say about a comment of yours. .....

And, I'll tell you one thing, Sharon and Likud are dilly-dallying about giving back the territories. This has been Sharon's plan all along, since the 80's.

Arafat is just as bad as Sharon. He ran the PLO as a terrorist organization for decades-and was rewarded with the Palestinian Authority, an organization assembled from the PLO. The actions of the UN, by granting the PLO observer status (for a terrorist organization-come on...is this next for al-Qaeda, let's legitimize anti-americanism?-not your fault, of course, just pointing out the UN's fallacy) helped give Arafat the go-ahead to continue terrorism. I mean, why shouldn't he? Terrorism works, right? Whenever Israel retaliates, they get blasted, condemned, called on to "restrain". When Palestinian suicide bombers attack, it barely gets news coverage, at least in the US-and Israel is usually painted as being at fault for "causing it".

My point here is that a fair amount of cynicism has gripped candidates for the Israeli leadership ever since the 1972 Black September massacres. Israel hunted down and killed every one of those terrorists-and was condemned by the UN for it. Meanwhile, Yassir Arafat has been trucking along, happy as you please, dragging his feet on the peace process as much as many claim Sharon to be doing, hoping that the world will continue to pressure Israel into meeting all his demands (or perhaps de-legitimizing its' statehood) and sincerely believing that terrorism will succeed in toppling Israel.

I call him as much a criminal as any Israeli leader. His inaction has caused the palestinians as much suffering as any Israeli military struggle, and he uses terrorism and its retaliation for political capital.

Neither of them are any "partner for peace". A new, fresh generation of leaders is needed to bring back the one thing that must return before there is any chance for peace, the one thing that has been lacking in that part of the world for a very long time.

That thing is hope.

Peace,

V-03

 

"Neither of them are any "partner for peace". A new, fresh generation of leaders is needed to bring back the one thing that must return before there is any chance for peace, the one thing that has been lacking in that part of the world for a very long time.

"That thing is hope."

i agree with this 100%!

cheers!