The words fat and chance keep running around my head for some reason. Your “final solution” would simply result in the destruction of Israel. When the Palestinians are serious about finding a peaceful solution they’ll stop their terrorist attacks.
**
Israel already has something approaching a normal country and does fairly well in the tourism department. How many other countries in that region tolerate different religions?
**
Nah, with Jews at a sudden disadvantage they can finally be driven to the sea.
Israel doesn’t deserve to be invaded. That hasn’t stopped their neighbors from doing it in the past though. You can’t seriously think your “final solution” would result in anything other then the destruction of Israel and misery for the Jews in the region?
Can anyone take a looong step back from the cliffs of insanity[sub]obligatory Princess Bride reference[/sub] and consider this issue dispassionately?
Israel, having solid ties to this land going back THOUSANDS OF YEARS, is surrounded by hundreds of millions of Muslims and outrageously out-matched in size and natural resources to boot.
Jordan is 60% Palestinian, but no, we can’t relocate the Palestinians from the disputed territories there. Instead, the lone Jewish state, someone seriously suggests, should give up its identity and become yet another Arabic Muslim nation swimming in the landmass of other Arabic/African Muslim nations.
What, exactly, is wrong with the surrounding nations offering repatriation to their lands, financial incentives to do so, resettling fees - what-have-you, and leaving Israel a tiny chunk of land to live on?
If the argument is over Jerusalem, consider this: since Israel took over east Jerusalem in 1967, including the Temple Mount, they actually returned control over that area to the Al Waqf. A true measure of compromise as they have longer ties to that parcel than the Muslims.
It seems to me that the ones doing the compromising are the Jews.
Oh, and regarding US aid: while Israel receives something on the order of $3 billion dollars, Egypt is number 2 at almost $2 billion.
Everyone deserves freedom (well, criminals don’t, thus the necessity for prisons). Now tell me, OP, what exactly the Palestinians are doing to get rid of the biggest obstacle to their freedom, Arafat?
I think the picture is more complicated than that. I seem to remember one of the major successful lulls in the conflict, a supposed 14 day cease-fire, being broken by a Sharon-ordered assisination. I also seem to remember The PLA locking up a known terrorist, only to have the prison bombed in yet another assisination attempt that failed to kill its target, but actually allowed him to escape. Just a few days ago Sharon, against the complaints of the British and the US, moved settlers into a newly constructed settlement. I think both Sharon and Arafat thrive on this conflict: without it, neither of them could remain in power. They both have to go before we can get anywhere.
Another serious problem is that, even under the most favorable agreements, “Palestine” would remain, in reality, much worse than even the “split into non-contiguous areas” situation. Most people seem to think that the “checkpoints” are for crossing over from PLA lands to Israel. But though that’s technically true in a sense, the reality is that “Israel” (now including as part of that the settlements and numerous special highways that run “Israeli-only” during peak hours, meaning Palestinians have to wait for hours, sometimes days, to cross a few miles from one part of “their” state to another) cuts even what look to be large chunks of pure PLA territory on a map into swiss cheese in a legal and logistical sense.
I seriously don’t know what could solve that situaiton. Part of it is the settlements, whose philosophy seems to be “push the Palestinians into the desert” Part of it is the radical Palestinians, whose choice of violence as a way to express dissent is precisely what made these highways and settlements into “Israeli-only” lockdowns. But short of kicking out people who’ve lived there for at least 20 years now, how can anything change?
I think, at this point, this is a little silly. As much as it might be nice if it did, historical control of land doesn’t work that way, with people claiming land just because people of the same culture or religion lived there. You might as well say that any descendants of the survivors of the people the Israelites originally took the land from have even OLDER ties to it. Israel’s legitimate claim to the land goes back to its founding in this century. While contentious, and perhaps even ineptly executed, it’s as legal and legitimate as most states are without having to claim some sort of “our ancestors licked it first!” game.
There ya go. Send the US military into the West Bank, uproot the settlements and send the residents back to Israel proper (as defined by the 1948 cease-fire lines, excepting Jerusalem proper which I’d leave in Israeli hands), and evict the Israeli military/police from the West Bank.
Then do for the Palestinian West Bank state what we’re proposing to do for Iraq in terms of getting them back up on their feet, and let them take over their own destiny in a couple of years as a genuinely independent nation.
But the settlements, and the security arrangements that they necessitate (including the resulting checkpoints required simply to travel between different parts of the West Bank), give the lie to the notion that Israel has ever proposed an independent Palestinian state in any sense that Americans and other Westerners would understand the term. The American colonists revolted against British rule over milder impositions, IMHO.
You maid this point in Collounsberrys thread also, and I must say I really don’t understand the logic. Losing US military aid would be a pretty humongous security risk for Israel, no?
Of the Palestinians I’ve met –and that’s quite a few, probably not hundreds though – none “hate Jews” but they pretty much all hate that Israel took their land and, as a result, their families have lived in refugee camps for three generations.
You can agree or disagree with their perceptions, but, as a point of fact, that’s what they hate; the actions of the State of Israel, the fact of their own landless disenfranchisement and the general circumstances (oppression) under which they live.
Any lose federation should be a federation of equal partners and not a South African-style Bantustan. This would necessitate a rotating presidency and most probably the end to Israel as an explicitly Jewish state.
The only solution is a total Israeli withdrawal (though they should still keep acess to and sovereignity of the wailing wall, but not the whole al-Asqa compound). The descision must be the Palestinians as they have the right to self-deterimination.
Not really. They were heads and tails above the Arabs even while the US refused to even sell them arms, much less give them any aid, back in the '50s and 60’s. And they’ve got a tremendous head start in terms of technology right now.
I don’t think any Arab states are going to start another war with Israel unless they were guaranteed a win.
I think that the way the Arab media (in places like Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia,etc.) reported on the fall of iraq was most telling! There was no mention of the joyful Iraqis knocking down statues…instead, moans about “US Imperialism”.
This tells me:
-these Arab dictatorships fear the truth…sooner or later, the “arab masses” are going to figure out that they’ve been hoodwinked by the corrupt bunch of criminals (which are their leaders), for the past 50+ years!
-there isn’t much difference between any of these regimes…the Arab world is backward and poor BECAUSE of these governments
What if what we are now seeing in Iraq could extend to Egypt, Syria, Jordan, SA and Iran? Then the arbs and iranian people could really have a chance for better lives!
All of these tyrants fear liberation with good reason…they have kept themselves in luxury whilekeeping their people in poverty.
I’d say the real liberation of the arab world is beginning, and people like Mubarek and Assad Jr, have a lot to lose from it!
Full disclosure: I think Sharon is a beast, I despise the current Israeli policy, and I think the Bushies policy toward Israel is pathetic.
That being said, a key problem is that the Palestinians have been asking for said freedom and self-determination, so long as they get Israel. The “two-state” solution has only been the policy of the Palestinian leadership for less than a decade and an extremely popular (perhaps commanding the allegiance of more than half the Palestinian polity) rejectionist movement still demands that the Palestinian state include all of Israel - i.e. no more Israel.
Losing US aid would hurt. Lots. But Israel would hunker down and go for the bunker mentality. It would if anything give more strength to the ultra rightists whose perceptions are that the world is out to get us and we will never be able to depend on anyone except ourselves. Us against the world.
Loose federation means very loose. More akin to the EU than to the US. Very limited federal powers but a means for lots of cooperative ventures.
RT,
Iraq has resources. The occupied areas do not. They need Israel to thrive. That is why even full withdrawl and “the Fence” is considered badly by Arab sympathizers.