The Israeli-Palestinian conflict

[Loki]

How do you view the current ongoing conflict between the Palestinians and Israel? Palestinians are comitting terrorist acts against Israel, but Israel is occupying Palestinian territory.

What's your opinion?

 

[Satt]

I say we let them just go at it full force and whoever is left standing gets the land. Case closed.
:cheers:

 

[sgtmac_46]

How do you view the current ongoing conflict between the Palestinians and Israel? Palestinians are comitting terrorist acts against Israel, but Israel is occupying Palestinian territory.

Correction, Loki, the Palestinians claim it's their land. However, many Palestinians are, in fact, Jordanians.

What's more, there isn't a spot on the planet wasn't formerly owned by other than those living on it.

How'd you feel if a former tenent showed up and demanded you leave, post haste, because 60 years ago the previous owners STOLE the land for their grand parents?

Further, this issue is driven by more than just Palestinian nationalism. This issue would have long ago died or been resolved had it not been for Islamic views that a non-Islamic nation in the Islamic world is an insult. Otherwise, why would Iran care?

I say we let them just go at it full force and whoever is left standing gets the land. Case closed.
:cheers:

If that occurred, it would be Israel (for now).

 

[Jonathan Randall]

How do you view the current ongoing conflict between the Palestinians and Israel? Palestinians are comitting terrorist acts against Israel, but Israel is occupying Palestinian territory.

What's your opinion?

I think there are extremists on both sides who will sabotage any peace proces. Both sides have, at various times, behaved badly. Certainly, though, I believe Israel has the right (and duty) to protect herself against these horrific suicide bombings that directly target civilians. I also think that continuing to build and allow settlements in areas that were promised to be returned is negotiating in bad faith. It is a complex situation with so many grey as well as black and white areas. The U.S., however, is strategically aligned with Israel and, should push come to shove, they are our ally and the Palestinians are not.

 

[arnisador]

How do you view the current ongoing conflict between the Palestinians and Israel?

They're both right. They both have valid claims. They need to find a way to work it out--and I have no ideas in that regard.

 

[sgtmac_46]

They're both right. They both have valid claims. They need to find a way to work it out--and I have no ideas in that regard.

It will never occur until the Palestinians, and Islamic interests that support them, acknowledge Israel's right to exist.

All compromise is predicated on agreeing that Israel has the right to exist. As evidenced by Irans leader the other day, we are still a LOOOONNNNGGGG way from that.

Keep in mind, just acknowledging that Israel has the right to exist has got Anwar Sadat assassinated.

 

[arnisador]

IAll compromise is predicated on agreeing that Israel has the right to exist.

Yeah, I agree. We're a long way from that, but it's essential.

Next up: China agrees that Taiwan is a separate country.

 

[sgtmac_46]

Yeah, I agree. We're a long way from that, but it's essential.

Next up: China agrees that Taiwan is a separate country.

I think we'll have an agreement between China and Taiwan LONG before we have such an agreement with Israel.

China and Taiwan have found common ground as of late.....trade. China has discovered capitalism, and found Taiwan to be a very useful trading ally. That doesn't guarantee that Beijing won't send tanks and planes to retake the country, but it is a start. They are actually talking and seeing each other as beneficial.

Given the way China has been inclined to give relative autonomy to such places as Honkong, so long as it produces, I think China might be able to come to a mutually beneficial agreement with their 'rogue state'.

One more thing China and Taiwan have going for them that Israel and the Islamic world does not....They are all chinese, and the share a common culture. Their division is purely political.

 

[Loki]

Correction, Loki, the Palestinians claim it's their land. However, many Palestinians are, in fact, Jordanians.

What's more, there isn't a spot on the planet wasn't formerly owned by other than those living on it.

It's agreed that it's Palestinian land by both sides. Israel has no false vision of ever annexing Gaza, Schem, Jenin, Hevron or any other area massively populated by Palestinians. Since Palestinians are a people, and a people have a right to self-definition, they have a right to land.

The statement that many Palestinians are (former) Jordanians is irrelevant. Many Americans are former Brits.

Further, this issue is driven by more than just Palestinian nationalism. This issue would have long ago died or been resolved had it not been for Islamic views that a non-Islamic nation in the Islamic world is an insult. Otherwise, why would Iran care?

True, but that's the Arab-Israeli conflict. I'm focusing on the Palestinian-Israeli aspect, a part I believe is large enough to be treated seperately.

 

[ashkin]

War isnt going to sort it out, I would have a meeting over it or something.

 

[Loki]

I also think that continuing to build and allow settlements in areas that were promised to be returned is negotiating in bad faith. It is a complex situation with so many grey as well as black and white areas.

Very true. Though I'm not fully up to date, I'm under the impression that the building of settlements in disputed territory has been frozen. The whole issue of building settlements was an experiment. Israel found itself with Gaza and the West Bank after the Six Day War, and all the Palestinians that came with it. It didn't want to grant the Palestinians citizenship, and it didn't want to simply give up those lands, so what did Israel do? It create facts: there are Israeli settlements in these territories. That makes it harder to give them back.
In some cases this experiment succeeded. The settlement of Ariel is acknowledged by Palestinian authorities as part of Israel. Many other cases failed. Gush Katif, an Israeli sector in the Gaza Strip, was recently evacuated and returned to Palestinian control. Though people can justly criticize Prime Minster Sharon for being a conservative leader executing a liberal agenda and acting against his own voters, it's very hard to see an agreement with the Palestinians where Gaza isn't under their full control.

They're both right. They both have valid claims. They need to find a way to work it out--and I have no ideas in that regard.

When the UN decided to split then-Palestine into two countries, Israel for the Jews and Palestine for the Arabs, some Arabs said yes (the Israeli-Arabs of today) and others said no (Palestinians). Israel got the land allotted to it and was then attacked by several Arab countries. In 1967, Israel launched a preemptive strike and took control of the West Bank and Gaza (much of the territory offered to Palestinians originally) the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights. Sinai was returned to Egypt in exchange for peace, borders with Jordan were establish and peace was reached, and there is debate whether the Golan should be returned to Syria in exchange for peace (with the recent investigation into the assassination of Lebanese PM Hariri and the implication Syria was involved, it doesn't look like that'll be heading anywhere soon).

The 1993 Oslo Accords Palestinian negotiators accepted the Green Line borders (before the war of 1967). In Camp David in 2000, Arafat rejected a similar proposal. The offer is still open, the only problem is that now there's no one to talk to.

 

[sgtmac_46]

. The statement that many Palestinians are (former) Jordanians is irrelevant. Many Americans are former Brits.

Yes, who currently occupy lands formerly occupied by native Americans. We're not likely to turn it back over any more than the Israelis are likely to pack up and leave. As I pointed out, there isn't a spot occupied on this planet, that wasn't formerly occupied by others, most of whom were forced off the property by the current occupants.

The two are inseperable, as it is the Arab-Israeli conflict that has largely driven the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Moreover, until the other Arab (and non-arab, such as Iran) states allow a negotiatiated settlement, there never will be.



Ultimately, however, there are dozens of land disputes all over the world. The Israeli-Palestinian one just happens to be more 'trendy'. It's en vogue to take the side of the Palestinians. They've historically had a good PR machine, First, thanks to the former Soviet Union, then thanks to all the publicity and attention the Arab states oil money can buy.

What's more, the Palestinian's have suffered less than other regional disaffected peoples. The Kurds have traditionally suffered far more than the Palestinians. But, because that was an Muslim-Muslim conflict, and didn't involve Jews, the Arab League considered the Kurds 'An internal security issue', not something for other Islamic nations to become involved in.

What's more, the Islamic nations represent one of the largest voting blocks in the UN general assembly. As such they've been able to push through large numbers of UN resolutions against Israel, something they never bothered to do against fellow Islamic despotic regimes. The thinking apparently being 'My neighbor might be evil, but he's a fellow muslim, so we can't criticize him.....and at least he's not a jew'.

 

[Loki]

Yes, who currently occupy lands formerly occupied by native Americans. We're not likely to turn it back over any more than the Israelis are likely to pack up and leave. As I pointed out, there isn't a spot occupied on this planet, that wasn't formerly occupied by others, most of whom were forced off the property by the current occupants.

Israel HAS packed up and left during the August disengagement.

What's more, the Palestinian's have suffered less than other regional disaffected peoples. The Kurds have traditionally suffered far more than the Palestinians. But, because that was an Muslim-Muslim conflict, and didn't involve Jews, the Arab League considered the Kurds 'An internal security issue', not something for other Islamic nations to become involved in.

What's more, the Islamic nations represent one of the largest voting blocks in the UN general assembly. As such they've been able to push through large numbers of UN resolutions against Israel, something they never bothered to do against fellow Islamic despotic regimes. The thinking apparently being 'My neighbor might be evil, but he's a fellow muslim, so we can't criticize him.....and at least he's not a jew'.

Good points!