Israel or Hamas - who do you think is in the right?

I guess it is not widely known in the West that the Dome of the Rock is, in point of fact, controlled by an Islamic foundation run out of Jordan. :wink:

As for the rest - it would appear that, rather than “doing nothing”, your plan is to “do nothing of a military nature, while addressing grievances”. I’m in partial argeement.

Points I agree on: supporting the PA, more infrastructure aid to them, getting rid of settlements in the WB (but not Jerusalem - a disunited city makes no sense).

Points I disagree with: handing over Jerusalem to the UN, granting a Right of Return, claiming Israel is not an ethno-nationalist state (why not change the name of “Turkey” while we are at it? Isn’t it insulting to all non-Turks living there? Then we can deal with such abominations as “France” and “Germany”).

Points Israel already does, but is apparently not known to do or get any credit for doing: crack down on home-grown extremists, hand over Dome of the Rock to Muslims.

The problem with your plan, excellent though it may be in other respects, it will do nothing whatsoever to stem attacks from Hamas.

As I understand it, Israel controls partially the ground underneath the Dome/Temple and Palestinians control what’s on top. If I’m wrong then I apologize, but the intention is to give them full ownership of it.

On Jerusalem, I would say a disunited city isn’t a big deal. What’s a city except a bunch of buildings together? Berlin was split. Cities in warzones are often controlled by the outside by run by people familiar with it on the inside. Owing to the nature of the conflict, I see Jerusalem as a special case warranting special status.

On the ethno-centrism, this isn’t just about a name like Turkey, but about the demands that Israel places on others on how to recognize it. Suppose the Palestinians said they’d recognize Israel as a state with a right to exist, but they just won’t ever call it a Jewish state, I would think its entirely in Israel’s favor to accept that. Also, demanding that the state be recognized as such is meaningless in that outside states have little to no power to change it. If every country in the world says Israel is just a state but not a Jewish one, does that turn everyone within it into Hindus? Its a meaningless demand that prevents some reconciliation. Recognizing it as Jewish or not does nothing for Israel so they should drop the demand

I disagree with your claim that we do nothing military with Hamas. I see direct confrontation as a continuation of the status quo, and find it useless to Israel’s goals of peace and recognition. My plan deals with Hamas militarily by shoring up the strength of Fatah who allows them to deal with Hamas. Just like how the US supplies troops and weapons and capital to countries to fight their battles for them without boots on the ground, Israel can do that for Fatah against Hamas. Its still a military operation, but they need to recognize that the weapons are not bombs and tanks, but strategic know-how, legitimacy, and indirect support.

Nope. The waqf controls it totally, including what is underneath. This has lead to a dispute with Israeli archaeologists, when the waqf completed major construction work there without any scientific survey.

The Berlin Wall wasn’t a big deal? I suspect few Germans would agree.

The city is better off united, than disunited. It was disunited before - pre-1967 - and it sucked, what with the occasional sniper fire across the “border” inside the city and all.

This is an issue of mainly symbolic importance. What is significant about the “Jewish State” demand is that it is a demand that the Palestinians recognize the right of the Jewish people to exist, and to exist there.

Otherwise, the “recognition” really amounts to recognizing the name of the country, perhaps on the understanding that the name shall remain, but not the current set of inhabitants.

Again, it is important for the reasons stated above. Why is it that symbolic gestures to provide comfort to Palestinians are “important”, while those intended to provide comfort to Israelis are “meaningless”?

I agreed with your plan of supporting the PA. I disagree that, even with such support, the PA is likely in anything like the medium or long term to be able to do anything about Hamas in Gaza. How is such a thing to be achieved?

Even if it is, it would be by bloody civil war, which is likely to be far, far worse in terms of civilian casualties that what we are seeing now. Not sure that would be an improvement. Or that the PA would win.

My mistake then

Berlin was a special case where the two sides were engaged in a cold war. Jerusalem would not be, there would be no barriers preventing one side crossing into the next, it would be a free city that does not restrict travel. This would be done in a few decades when relations have thawed a little so less security will be needed. The only thing that would stand out is that each side gets to run their parcel by their rules. I do not think that walls and guard towers will spring up, I think it would be a shared city

What is the right of existence independent of its people? You cannot claim that the state with its people have the right to exist and ALSO the state’s symbol has a right separate from that. Once the people are there and is recognized, the symbolism is meaningless ESPECIALLY if its a sticking point of contention

Again I ask, if the state of Israel and its people are recognized, but the descriptive of “Jewish State” is not, then what are they really losing by accepting that?

I believe you are making the mistake a lot of Israelis are making, which is conflating the two issues of state descriptor and actual people into one issue. I think the reason why its a sticking point is that Israelis are afraid that somehow, if someone doesn’t recognize them as Jewish, then it would mean some subtle hand is available by Israel’s enemies to displace them and be justified in doing so. What they miss by latching onto that idea is that by not having recognition in the first place, the hand is overt and their enemies completely willing to try and displace them openly.

Nothing will change whether Israel is recognized as Jewish or not. Its people are untouchable irrespective of that recognition. The only thing it seems to matter is as part of the conditions of negotiation. Give it up and move forward

Here you are addressing something I’ve already discussed, which is that my answers are strictly from what the perspective of the Israeli’s. I am not talking about what Palestinians or other countries should do. I’m talking about what Israel should do to maximize its chances for peace. Of course the first thing I would advise Palestine and other countries should do is to recognize Israel, its a petty thing to hold up negotiations over, but then again that is not the point of the topic. If you want to hear what Israel should do, its to give up silly symbols for tangible peace

Such a thing is to be achieved slowly through the long term. Most of the people alive now will not see to its resolution. I’ve described the process and how I expect change to occur already, but the gist of it is that more legitimacy for Fatah or a peaceful party within Palestine will marginalize Hamas and other terrorists, especially if the people see actual peace progress being made. Yes there will probably be a civil war, I didn’t mention that but I expect it. At some point, Fatah will grow strong enough to deal with Hamas with the support of the people and Hamas will fight back. When that happens, a lot of people will die. But you ask how that is an improvement? Here it is: it won’t be Israel being blamed for the violence, it will be Hamas. And the hearts and minds that you said couldn’t be won over because world support is overrated? What if that were on Israel’s side? Would you still brush it off?

And of course the PA would win. They would be heavily supported by Israel and the US and most of the West, overtly and covertly. The PA will not hurt for supplies and with fellow Palestinians doing the fighting, they can afford to be more extreme to deal with the terrorists

Errr… first of all you’ll notice they received so many negative comments they removed that blog post.

Beyond that I don’t think you demonstrated anything other than Israel has a free press and like all nations, some Israelis are bigots.

Had this been a statement put forth by a high level MK you might have a point, but you don’t.

No prob. It’s an obscure point, really.

This wasn’t the case when the city was divided. The notion that relations will ever thaw to the point that guarderd borders are unnecessary strikes me as a trifle utopian.

The problem lies with your use of the word “if”. Yes, IF the state of Israel and its people are recognized, there would be no need for the “Jewish state” business. The “Jewish state” business is, perforce, intended to demonstrate “…its people” - specifically, its Jewish people - are “recognized”.

I don’t get it. What the Jewish people of Israel are asking is that their erstwhile enemies, in order to be accepted as friends, agree to “recognize” them AS A PEOPLE, in a situation in which at least SOME of their enemies quite openly SAY that their position is that Jews should be “genocided” (the Hamas Charter is explicit in this). If they fail to obtain such “recignition”, then it is reasonable, on their part, to assume that their enemies have not changed their position, and do not, in fact, want to be friends.

Say what you will, it strikes me at least that this is not “meaningless” or “silly”.

Again, I disagree.

Yet one of the things you would urge the Israelis to do, is give to Palestinians “silly symbols” that they want.

I think this is utopian thinking. Hamas will paint Fatah as collaborators, with some justification. If a massacre breaks out and Israel is supporting the side doing the massacring, Israel will be blamed for the massacre, and incur all of the hatred that results. Remember what happened when Israel supported Christians in Lebanon?

I will admit that parts of my plan is predicated on people being less of an asshole to each other. The reason why this plan is different is that it is long term, going on 50+ years, enough for a great many assholes to die off first

Again, I think its an issue only because Israeli’s make it an issue. If the Israel is recognized, it doesn’t need the “Jewish” moniker. If its not recognized, then it doesn’t matter how they describe themselves. My advice to Israel would be to recognize that fact and move on. Nobody’s going to recognize Israel as Jewish before it is recognized as a state so therefore once you have Israel, you’ll have the Jewish state but not the other way around.

It strikes me as some overly circular logic that some Israeli’s think that if only they can trick other countries into calling them a Jewish state, then “Ah ha! No takebacks!” and they become a recognized state. Its a silly game that they need to stop playing

Yes, because this topic is framed as advice I’d give to Israel, not to the Palestinians

I cannot say that nothing unforeseen will happen, only that with enough money and support, the damage can be mitigated. Hell, I am not above doing dirty deeds to get results. If Hamas tries to paint Fatah as collaborators, then fake videos or attacks by Hamas to shift the blame to the other side. Eventually with support and manpower, Fatah will win out. Might take 50 years, but it’ll happen eventually

This is an excellent post that lays out exactly what I would like to see happen…

I’m not a big fan of plans that essentially rely on a change of heart on a massive scale in order to work.

I don’t believe that is the Israeli thinking on the matter. More that they wish an honest declaration of intentions - an open acknoledgement, not hedged, of the most basic issue in contention - their right to exist.

Seems to me that if the other guy will not openly and honestly declare that you have that most basic of rights - that of existence - there isn’t really any “peace”. Just a temporary halt to hostilities.

I don’t think this is a “game” at all.

The advice I’d give to both sides would be to respect each other, including respecting each other’s symbols. No lasting peace can come without mutual respect.

I wish I shared that faith.

And it’s still a long-term collective punishment of the people of Gaza for the (largely ineffective) stance of Hamas. (IIRC, Israel keeps claiming that Hamas doesn’t really represent the people of Gaza, or has that changed?)

Could you explain the difference, beyond the size of the entity being besieged/blockaded?

That was a cheap shot, and I shouldn’t have gone there. My apologies.

The headline was in the screen shot of the original piece. So if it was an exaggeration, it was the Times of Israel’s exaggeration.

Dream all you want, but don’t hold your breath. There’s no indication that the Palestinians will ever accept a peaceful coexistence with Israel. They teach their kids from the cradle that all blame lies with Israel, and have consistently refused to agree to any plan that doesn’t give them 100% of what they want. I don’t see any sign that the situation will be resolved in my lifetime, and would not be at all surprised if it continues for centuries.

Israel has at times offered reasonable proposals. Palestine has rejected them all and never proffered anything reasonable. If all the Palestinians were disarmed there might a chance for a resolution of the issue. If all the Israelis were disarmed then Israel would be obliterated.

In a siege, food and water gets cut off.

This ↑↑↑

What Westerners can not really understand that peace between many groups, tribes, countries & nations of the Mid East are so ingrained and totally taught that the other guy is & always will be the bad guy. That can not be changed in less than a 1000 years even if the majority want it to change.

It ain’t gonna happen.

An op-ed from LA Times, 1968. As true then as it is today:

http://www.factsandlogic.org/outstanding_hoffer.html

The Jews are a peculiar people: things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews. Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people, and there is no refugee problem. Russia did it, Poland and Czechoslovakia did it. Turkey threw out a million Greeks and Algeria a million Frenchman. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese and no one says a word about refugees. But in the case of Israel displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees. Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab.

Arnold Toynbee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis.

Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious, it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in this world.

Other nations — when they are defeated — survive and recover, but should Israel be defeated it would be destroyed. Had Nasser triumphed last June he would have wiped Israel off the map and no one would have lifted a finger to save the Jews. No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on.

There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or when two Negroes are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him. The Swedes, who are ready to break off diplomatic relations with America because of what we did in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway.

The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives it will be solely because of Jewish efforts. And Jewish resources. Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is to American and the West in general.

I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish the holocaust will be upon us.

This argument always misses the part about why the Palestinians would do that, and its interesting because it assumes the status quo. The only reason why the Palestinians might want to kill the Israelis is because the Israelis are on land claimed by the Palestinians. Move the Jewish homeland to a plot of land in Idaho and the Palestinians won’t care if they are armed or not. In fact, before the creation of Israel, didn’t many Jews live peacefully under Arabic rule? Its not like the Arabs and Muslims see a Jew and they instinctively want to kill them like a cat and a mouse. Its all because of the dispute

Israel has it easier now because they have the power. If Palestinians were disarmed, there will probably be more of a push into Gaza or the West Bank. Hell, many youths are armed only with stones to throw and they still get shot. Disarming the Palestinians will not bring peace. Only the settling of the land issue will bring peace

What about the part where Palestinians exterminate the Jews, then exterminate the whole middle east, and then exterminate the world? Oh, let’s just give them another inch, they’ll be nice.

Jews lived relatively peaceably - give or take a massacre or two - under Ottoman rule. There never was, for the last 500-plus years, “Arab Rule” in Israel (or indeed, anywhere else).

See, this is the part so many who debate this issue do not get: Arab ethno-nationalism arose at about the same time as Jewish ethno-nationalism. The whole of the middle east was owned, “once upon a time”, by great multi-ethnic empires - first the Ottomans, then carved up by various European colonialists, and finally split up into today’s plethora of states. The existing Arab states are of more or less the same “vintage” as Israel.

The “problem” here is not Arab, Muslim or Jew - it is ethno-nationalism. The notion that the problem is ‘the entire Middle East versus Israel’, and that it could be ‘resolved’ if only those nasty Israelis left, is cloud-cuckoo nonsense. The ‘problem’ afflicting Israel/Palestine is remarkably similar to the “problem” afflicting Lebanon, Iraq, Turkey and Syria (not to mention large parts of Europe, the Balkans, Ukraine, etc.): that various groups claim the same plots of land as their ethno-religious “lands”.

The only difference is that the world pays considerably more attention to whatever happens in Israel, than it does in (say) what happens in Lebanon or Syria; and no-one seriously suggests that the Alawites be removed from Syria, or the Christians from Lebanon, in the name of creating a lasting peace.

I’m surprised UN is not called in.If this was any other country in South America ,Europe or Central America it would be Afghanistan and Iraq thing.

-Wipe out the army
-Ban the use of army
-life time army ban and border police
-repair the damage
-life time monitoring.

Police training and country self governing.

This is same old, same old ,thing over and over:eek::eek::eek::eek: Hamas fires rockets and they get lots of damage that stop for X number of time than start the same thing over again.

Where is the US? The peace talks have never worked and in three years from now this same thing will be all over again.

Why don’t the US and UN put stop to this fighting for good.If it was any other country in South America ,Europe or Central America would.

Well they at it , built big wall like they did in east and west Germany wall.Have UN border inspectors for life time and ban on use of army.The country can do want ever it wants it just cannot have army.

I can’t tell if you’re joking

The point is that Jews and other people are perfectly capable of living under the rule of someone else. There is no intrinsic hatred of Jews by Palestinians. Disarming one side or the other will not result in any violence if you remove the land squabbles, that was my point. That’s why I dispute the claim about peace being viable if only the Palestinians are disarmed.

And assumes it with good reason – it’s not going to change.

Nice dream. Israel isn’t going to relocate overseas. The Palestinians were supposed to get their own land per the 1948 mandate, but other Arab nations mucked that up. If the Palestinians had accepted reality and directed their energy into securing their own land somewhere other than Israel, they would probably be in pretty good shape by now. But it seems it’s more important to them to hate Israel than to do things for their own benefit. As a result, their situation gets worse over time. So long as they hold on to the notion of eliminating Israel – which is likely to be indefinitely – they will suffer.

That’s probably true. And the land issue will only be settle if the Palestinians let go of their claims to Israel. Don’t count on it happening, though.