Anybody with the absolute least basic knowledge of Israeli history knows that Israel already defended their 1967 borders. They also know that produced a nuclear weapon soon after the 1967 war and that the difference between the israeli military and the entire rest of the Arab world has widened exponentially since their respective positions in 1967.
You would think that having posted something as ridiculous as you did and then after having the ridiculousness pointed out to you you’d slink away quietly, but no. What you really need to do is to pick one of the many subjects that you pontificate on on this board. pick one you’re really interested in so that you’re going to be interested in reading about it. Then for at least a year or two read everything you can about it when something is published in newspapers or elsewhere on the internet. Perhaps even read a book or two on the subject. Once you’ve done this you’ll be in the novel position of being able to comment about something from a position of knowledge.
[QUOTE=Dick Dastardly]
Anybody with the absolute least basic knowledge of Israeli history knows that Israel already defended their 1967 borders. They also know that produced a nuclear weapon soon after the 1967 war and that the difference between the israeli military and the entire rest of the Arab world has widened exponentially since their respective positions in 1967.
You would think that having posted something as ridiculous as you did and then after having the ridiculousness pointed out to you you’d slink away quietly, but no. What you really need to do is to pick one of the many subjects that you pontificate on on this board. pick one you’re really interested in so that you’re going to be interested in reading about it. Then for at least a year or two read everything you can about it when something is published in newspapers or elsewhere on the internet. Perhaps even read a book or two on the subject. Once you’ve done this you’ll be in the novel position of being able to comment about something from a position of knowledge.
[/QUOTE]
After this steaming load you think it’s me who should be embarrassed and slink away? Well, I am a bit embarrassed…for you. Sadly, it’s wasted embarrassment.
Since you don’t seem to be able to grasp my point I’ll try and go through it again with smaller words. Because the Israelis were able to win in 1967 is not a predictor of future events…i.e., having won one conflict does not equate to winning all future conflicts. Because the Israelis currently have (seemingly) some level of military superiority over their neighbors today is not a predictor that this happy state of affairs will last forever. Past events don’t indicate similar outcomes in the future, and the present state of military superiority does not mean that this will always be the case, or that things won’t ever change. Except in your fantasy world.
Even if it did, the Palestinians and the Jordanians who were controlling that territory before 1967 weren’t using random rocket and artillery attacks against Israeli settlements, towns or cities. The Palestinians today, however, DO use such attacks. Going back to the 1967 borders or anything like them would give the future Palestinian a pretty nice (and defensible) base to attack many more such settlements, towns and cities than they currently can reach. In your fantasy world perhaps the Israelis should just assume that, having given up the West Bank that the Palestinians (all of them) would become docile and peaceable, and that such attacks would be a thing of the past. That you handwave away such concerns as ‘bed-wetting’ merely indicates gross ignorance of both current events and past histories in the region AND a shocking level of wide eyed naivete on your part.
Perhaps when you come back you will do some fucking research into basic human history (let alone the specific history and current events in the region under discussion) and won’t keep using the sad and ridiculous argument of ‘well, they won last time’ to base your entire position on. I’m not very sanguine that you will do so, however.
Dick Dastardly and xtisme, you both need to make this a lot less personal. Stick to the topioc and leave your views of other posters out of this forum.
Dick Dastardly, you, in particular, have a really bad habit of posting just-under-the-wire personal insults and making inflammatory personal comments that we are going to begin regarding as open insults. Knock it off.
Sure. All’s fair in war. But it’s not gonna happen, so the people that suffer the most are the ones not in charge.
Conquest sounds like someone infringed on another’s sovereign government…but I get what you are saying…hey, people with the guns and government got the shit done.
And the Balfour Declaration practically said they could have it all! It was like land just fell out of a pinata when the Mandate expired…
Actually, if Abbas had not entered into an agreement with Hamas (which was sheer desperation, not political savvy), he’d be in a better position. He made some wrong moves last year during the settlement freeze and right after.
If he cuts ties with Hamas right now, he’s got it. The Palestinians will have a state.
Fuck. Gaza is its own cesspool and the only reason why Hamas wants to be buddy buddy with Abbas is because no one listens to Hamas! Haha, they fought a bloody battle for control of the strip and now they’re kings in a prison.
I applaud Abbas for being loyal to his brethren on the other side of the Negav, but seriously, his life, career and political position is in danger if he doesn’t do something soon.
I want to see Livni and Fayyad at a negotiation table. I think that’s the best partnership. But that doesn’t mean peace will follow. It really depends on the PLO’s security forces, their loyalty, and their ability to contain and manage the population.
Your point was that the 1967 borders would be indefensible as anybody who knew the history/geography could tell you. Here are your exact words :
The Green Line would certainly not be defensible, as anyone who can look at a map and knows anything of the history of the region pretty much knows.
i pointed out that israel already disproved your contention about the 1967 borders back actually in 1967. You then changed the argument to whatever it is you’re arguing about now.
This guy called me insane a while ago and nobody said a word. I point out that he’s not the most knowledgeable poster on the board and I get bothered about it. Can you please adopt a single standard that you use for all posters? I’d appreciate not being singled out all the time like this.
[QUOTE=Dick Dastardly]
Your point was that the 1967 borders would be indefensible as anybody who knew the history/geography could tell you. Here are your exact words :
The Green Line would certainly not be defensible, as anyone who can look at a map and knows anything of the history of the region pretty much knows.
[/QUOTE]
So, the trouble here is you can’t understand my point. Well, you should have said something earlier, though I did go to pains to try and clarify what I was saying for you. Several times actually.
Sadly, I can’t MAKE you understand why anyone who looks at a map and can understand what they are looking at and who knows the history of the region which includes more than just a somewhat vague idea of what happened in 1967 would see that there are valid security concerns, and that it’s not all (or even mostly) about bed-wetting. I don’t think there is any profit to either of us in continuing this discussion…you didn’t and don’t understand even vaguely what I was getting at and think I’m clueless, and I don’t have the patience with someone as disingenuous as you are. C’est la vie. Sometimes ignorance simply can’t be fought.
And I explained to you why you were wrong in several different ways. I didn’t change my argument at all…you simply didn’t understand what that argument was and your knee was jerking so hard that it’s little wonder that was the case.
I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic but only two countries (China and America spend significantly more than japan) Japan is sixth in military spending but if they spent as much of their GDP as other industrialized nations (they are limited to spending 1% of GDP on military), they would be second or third in military spending.
If your point is that Palestine could have a Japan style “special defense force” then I don’t see how that’s any different than just having an army.
There is nothing sancrosanct about 1967 borders. Like you say, its just where reasonable minds have figured it would make sense. The starting point for borders should ignore settlements because you don’t want to reward settlement activity but you can’t ignore the fact that some of these settlements have turned desert into viable communities. Ergo the “land swap” concept. Give Israel their population centers and give the Palestinians other land plus some reasonable amount of money. Give the Palestinians some restitution for land that was confiscated and 63 years from now, people will wonder why there are two states when one would make so much more sense.
It seem to me that air superiority makes the Golan Heights strategically about as important as any other peice of land and if Israel loses air superiority then nothing can save it.
Jerusalem is the one issue that none of the folks I talk to seem to be able to provide a solution for. I stilln think giving the whole thing over to the Buddhists would work pretty well.
151,000 people can’t be evacuated easily, they can’t be evacuated peacefully, and it’s politically a non-starter. And as for East Jerusalem and the Golan, they’re part of Israel. They’ve been annexed by the country, they’re ruled the same way the rest of Israel is. Israel’s not giving East Jerusalem to the Palestinians and cutting Jerusalem in half again, and it’s certainly not giving the Golan back to Syria. If the preconditions or peace is that Israel give up East Jerusalem and the Golan, there will not be peace.
And a one state solution won’t work, not least of which because Palestinians and Israelis hate each other, and also because the Palestinians don’t want a state with Jews in it and the Israelis don’t want a state that’s not identifiably Jewish.
I know full well how Japan’s military spending works, thanks. But a de-militarized state of Palestine is more like de-militarized territory. Example:it prevents Palestinians from becoming allies with Iran and using that airspace.
Israel is not going to let Palestinians have a military. Not when their leadership and population want an active war. Israel spends more of its GDP on military than any other country in the world. It has to. So in a future two-state scenario, not only is Israel concerned with increased security precautions, but a strong Israel is also a safer Palestine.
There are two other places on Israel’s border where de-militarized zones exists: Golan Heights and parts of the Sinai…it’s not foreign to Israel’s history. Since the Palestinians and Israelis would be at a tentative peace and in no way allies, it’s reasonable to expect an outbreak of war if the PLO and Hamas were effectively harmed.
It’s also a legit concern that a Palestinian State could team up with another Arab country and, well, you have an idea how that could turn out. In 20 years, I’ll be hearing about the refugees of '11.
Make sense based on military conflict?
And you want Israel to be punished for developing what others have neglected? But seriously, it’s not going to happen. Israel has been fighting for its existence since…well, before statehood. About 100 years now. Whatever mistakes were made in 67 can’t be undone now. It isn’t how things work. And it isn’t reasonable to ask.
I find your attitude that Israel is at fault for all of this a little alarming. You kept comparing Israel to European conflicts. Why? Are you trying to say that terrorist attacks in Israel is Israel’s fault? They have negotiated. They have made agreements. It doesn’t make peace, though. Everything you say is right out of a PLO talking points memo*. Give Palestinians a military and their own sovereign government. Oh PS Who cares if they want to go to war with Israel? *
Which is what Netanyahu seems to be willing to do! But there’s not going to be a land swap based on 48 borders. There’d be a land swap based on 67 armistice lines, and the idea that you can turn the clock back to 1948 and erase all of the Arab mistakes in the region to punish Israel is ridiculous.
In 63 years, I have a feeling that Israel will still be a leader in technology, military, academia, and the arts. No one will think, “Damn! Should’ve annexed that bitch when we had the chance!”
? Air superiority?
Thank heavens you’re not in the State Department.
I just woke up. I hope I made sense. I can’t quite seem to get your position on things. What about the refugee situation? Should Jordan and Egypt help pay for restitution?
I remember a scene from James Michener’s The Source, where an utterly ignorant and “completely insociate” family of Moroccan Jews arrives in Israel in the 1960s. An Israeli points out to an American that these are the kind of immigrants who built America, but America doesn’t want them any more and it’s our loss; Israel will be enriched by them.
Israel has extended that tradition more recently, for example by accepting in a whole ethnic group from Ethiopia en mass - 120,000 of them - in the 80s and 90s.
Those people share an ethnic tie to the majority of Israelis (they are African Jews) - and even so, of course there are frictions, though the Wiki has this to say:
However, I suspect that it would be different where the poor immigrants have a stong communal identity that is directly opposed to that of the (existing) majority population, through a long conflict. That might pose more of a problem.
^^ Beta Israel is what I had in mind, plus the migrant workers that come up through Egypt. Israel has an immigration issue.
But can you imagine the havoc that five million new people would wreck on a small nation’s economy? The education, health, and social welfare systems would collapse. It took the Ethiopian Jews a few generations to really have ‘opportunities’, and they are still some of the poorest in Israel.
Well, I am a bit embarrassed…for you. Sadly, it’s wasted embarrassment.
It was like land just fell out of a pinata when the Mandate expired…