# Israel/Palestinians: Your Take **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 22, 2016, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840 "2016-03-22T07:26:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![Commodore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b2d939/32.png) [@Commodore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Commodore)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/361 "2016-07-06T03:33:23Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > You got some foamy spittle right there on your chin. Read the response is to post 326 DWMarch was on about twerp.:rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/362 "2016-07-06T03:45:14Z")
wut ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/363 "2016-07-06T04:58:08Z")
Good bye Aladdin, hello Roger Rabbit. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/364 "2016-07-06T05:59:33Z")
> [@Commodore](#): > > I am totally against communism and don’t support Islamist at all and look down on extreme right wing just as much as I do the extreme left wing. > Anyone who supports communism is a moron ! > Anyone who supports Islamist is a moron ! > Anyone who supports the extreme left or right is just a mongrel cunning low life bastard in my books or a fool. > > I don’t support the so called Jews ? that’s the ones who reject Holy Moses, because they are not of Gods people. thing is I know the difference. “so-called Jews?” Last guy I heard use that term was Farrakhan. Some company you got there. Jews are winners who don’t go around the world blowing themselves up for Yahweh, who achieve things, etc. You got a problem with them? Those who hate the Jews, be they communists, alt-right types, and most especially Islamists, with the Palestinian ones being the worst, are losers. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/365 "2016-07-06T07:26:02Z")
> [@Commodore](#): > > I happen to be a Hebrew and support true Orthodox Judaism who stand behind Holy Moses, but not the so called Jews who are lost in the evil of Talmudic or radical Zionist, who worship the Golden Calf. > > I am a Catholic, not a Roman Catholic ? and I don’t support fundie Christian Jew haters at all, under the banner of fundie there are many types of such, some fully support the Jews as well you know and some can even go as far as wanting to cause WW3 as they see themselves as wanting or working to bring 2ed coming about themselves and I see just them as working for Satan and just lost and in slaved by demons who support radical Zionist agendas. > Such radical Zionist are not of God at all but just doing the will of Satanic mad men. I’m sorry - I’d rebut you, but I have no idea what you’re trying to say. Is English not your native language? You say you’re a Hebrew, אז אם אתה רוצה, אפשר להמשיך את השיחה בעברית. ---
**Author:** ![DWMarch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dwmarch/32/1010_2.png) [@DWMarch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DWMarch)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/366 "2016-07-06T08:04:31Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > I’m sorry - I’d rebut you, but I have no idea what you’re trying to say. Is English not your native language? You say you’re a Hebrew, אז אם אתה רוצה, אפשר להמשיך את השיחה בעברית. **Alessan** , your level-headed and reasonable responses to posters who say astoundingly ignorant things about your people and your nation make you one of my favorite dopers. I am not a Hebrew (that I know of, never did do the research) so I have no idea what your quote says but for some reason my mind translated it to “LIKE A BOSS.” ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/367 "2016-07-06T12:39:03Z")
Hey, thanks! But I fear you give me too much credit. These discussions, and the ignorance displayed in them (and not just on one side), often make me irrationally angry, which is why I’ve learned to largely avoid them. What you read as level-headedness is often a result of typing with clenched jaw and balled fists\*, forcing myself to remain calm. - It ain’t easy on my keyboard, either. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/368 "2016-07-06T13:42:03Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I was under the impression that Fatah supported a two state solution. It was my understanding that they would be happy to accept the 1967 borders and this was one of the reasons why the settlements were so pernicious to the peace process. > > This includes the partition of Jerusalem. The two sides agree to a two state solution, but fundamentally disagree on the “right of return” and the status of Jerusalem. > [@](#): > > And how did they become a safe subject for propaganda? Easy: they are Jewish nationalists in an area that is Muslim-majority. Muslims have historically tolerated Jews and other “people of the book” - but as tolerated minorities. The notion of such minorities having their own countries, much less defeating Muslim nations in wars, is fundamentally objectionable - no matter how nice or nasty they are. > [@](#): > > OK, so there were other options and Hamas won. So that means that Israel had nothing to do with it? Are you saying that Hamas is driven more by religious fanaticism than by grievances over Israel’s actions? :dubious: Certainly. They are just an offshoot of a much larger movement that exists elsewhere - the Muslim Brotherhood, who if you may recall briefly ruled in Egypt (before being tossed out in a coup). You aren’t claiming that the Egyptian ones were motivated by Israeli bad hats, are you? > [@](#): > > You mean like Menachem Begin? Wasn’t Irgun assimilated into the IDF? In any event, there is a difference between what Zionists did in the effort to create a Jewish state and what they would do if they were made to suffer all the indignities that Palestinians have suffered over the better part of a century. You are forgetting that the Zionists in the run-up to the creation of the state did suffer all sorts of “indignities” when ruled by the Turks and then the Mandate - and worse: they had to watch as the Brits closed the borders to Jewish immigration just as the Nazis were gearing up to slaughter European Jewry. Yes, Begin became PM and yes he was leader of the Irgun - but that was many, many years later. Doesn’t change the fact that the Haganah suppressed them _at the time_ in direct response to Irgun terrorism. This is no different from Arafat going from terrorist leader to leader of the PLO: people’s roles change over time. > [@](#): > > Do you honestly think the hardcore Zionists would “just take it” if Hamas took over tomorrow and subjected Israeli Jews to all the indignities suffered by Palestinains over the better part of the last century? I suspect they would organize something like Hamas pretty quickly. > > This is not to excuse the behavior but you can no more blame the Palestinians for their reaction to Israel’s behavior than you can blame Israel for their reaction to terrorism. Sure I can: I can blame them for being dumb. Repeating endlessly the same tactics that haven’t worked and have caused them nothing but misery = dumb. Do something different. > [@](#): > > “violent suppression”??? > > Wasn’t Menachem begin the leader of irgun? Didn’t they elect Menachem Begin prime minister if Israel at some point? > > [The Saison - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hunting_Season#The_decision) > > “Subsequently, protests increased among the Yishuv against the [hunting] Saison and by the end of March the Agency aborted it. In May 1945 the Irgun resumed its activities against the British, although to a lesser extent. In late October 1945 the Jewish Resistance Movement was established, joining Haganah, Irgun and Lehi together in a violent struggle against the British Mandate.” > > History may not be as you remember it. Huh? Nothing you have posted contradicts what I wrote. The Irgun was ‘violently suppressed’ at the time. That doesn’t mean each and every one of them was killed, or that they became non-persons for all time. History is full of terrorists who went on later in life to become statesmen - would that the Palestinians followed that route. > [@](#): > > IIRC both sides made a peace deal. Israel did not dictate the terms of the deal, the terms were negotiated. I never claimed otherwise. What has that to do with anything? > [@](#): > > So there is no way that the Palestinian refugee crisis could end without the destruction of Israel? Then why does Fatah think that a two state solution would be a solution to the refugee crisis? Because they will not agree to a peace deal unless it contains a “right of return” - namely, that all of those millions of Palestinians currently languishing in refugee camps get to “return” to Israel (not to Palestine). They are supposed to “return” to the same villages their families left, in '48. That’s what a “right of return” means. Unfortunately, Israel already has a population; the sites of those villages, left in '48, are now under Israeli farms, factories or cities. How is this supposed to work? > [@](#): > > And Syria was on the verge of doing so as well. Its not like Sadat and Begin signed a deal and became allies. As I pointed out, the “peace” they were agreeing to was not a “peace” at all, but a “truce”. The difference is that the one means war is over and normal national relations begins; the other is a temporary halt to active hostilities, with the expectation that they would resume in the future. Would you trust a nation that had been to war with you multiple times, that would only agree to a “truce” when they were weak, and that were covertly building nukes? > [@](#): > > And if they don’t believe that being shitty to the Palestinians and engaging in settlement activity is an existential matter? Sure. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/369 "2016-07-06T13:51:59Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > So on the one hand other Arab nations and the UN are keeping the Palestinians down by forcing them to stay in refugee camps and on the other hand the Palestinians are spurning offer to live in a place that is a fair sight better bumblefuckistan, middle east. Maybe they aren’t being forced to stay there by their mean arab cousins. Well, sure - it is all of a piece. Palestinians have been fed a steady diet of exaggerated ethno-nationalist hopes; they are told, over and again, that all they must do is wait and Israel will be wiped out (somehow), or agree to leave, or something, and then they can go back to the villages their ancestors left from. More, they are told that giving up that dream is a sort of treason. Like people everywhere, many of them buy into that very attractive fantasy, all the more so as their current situation - living on handouts in camps - is so miserable. Thing is, the Arab countries and the UN are actively encouraging this situation - the one by refusing to allow Palestinians to become citizens (you may recall that frustration with that situation in Kuwait led Palestinians to support Saddam’s invasion); the UN, by establishing - uniquely - a specialist agency devoted only to Palestinian refugees, and unlike any other refugees in the whole world, this agency has a mandate specifically designed _not_ to resettle them anywhere. Is it any wonder in such an atmosphere that Palestinian refugees reject being resettled in a first world country? They have been promised by everyone - their own leaders, other Arab states, the UN - a world organization - that they can go back to their very homes that they left; settling for anything else, they have been told, is a kind of treason. Why should they believe that the dream they have been sold for almost 70 years is simply impossible? ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/370 "2016-07-06T16:15:21Z")
> [@Commodore](#): > > I don’t support the so called Jews ? that’s the ones who reject Holy Moses, because they are not of Gods people. thing is I know the difference. You have now played your silly “so called Jews” game once too often. Knock it off. I realize that you subscribe to some Christian group that holds this sort of belief. However, the phrase “so called Jews” has been a phrase used by hate groups since the late 1940s and it is not accurate, factually, regardless what you preachers have told you. Knock it off and if you need to open a thread to witness on your beliefs, then open that separate thread and stop dragging your religious beliefs into threads on other topics. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![Deeg](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/deeg/32/2955_2.png) [@Deeg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Deeg)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 8:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/371 "2016-07-06T20:10:55Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > What did she do - devote the rest of her life to killing Russians? No, she escaped - moved to another country, built a new life elsewhere. So did the ethnic Germans uprooted by the Soviets (well, those that survived). > > It isn’t justice, but it is what people tend to do. Except Palestinians. Why is that? Well, for one, because those supposedly ‘on their side’ won’t let them - they would rather Palestinians stay for more than 60 years in ‘refugee camps’. We already have a refugee crisis, we don’t need to add even more by requiring the Palestinians to move out just so they can get justice. Instead of making Palestinians leave the West Bank wouldn’t it be preferable for Israel to stop their illegal actions? I am not making my self clear. My stance is that Israel should give full legal justice to Palestinians and stop taking their land. Palestinians shouldn’t have to negotiate for this and it should happen NOW. Yes, we’d like Hamas to stop shooting rockets into Israel but it should not be linked to the legal system. Israel should change unilaterally because they have created a situation where Palestinians have no non-violent means to address crimes. Once Palestinians have a real, viable avenue then we can start negotiating. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/372 "2016-07-06T20:14:11Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > The two sides agree to a two state solution, but fundamentally disagree on the “right of return” and the status of Jerusalem. Hunh. I thought that the point of the two state solution was to get around the right of return issue. WTF would be the point of a two state solution that also included a right of return? I thought the idea was two states along 1967 borders plus some restitution by Israel in lieu of the right of return. > [@](#): > > Easy: they are Jewish nationalists in an area that is Muslim-majority. > > Muslims have historically tolerated Jews and other “people of the book” - but as tolerated minorities. The notion of such minorities having their own countries, much less defeating Muslim nations in wars, is fundamentally objectionable - no matter how nice or nasty they are. Really?? So if Israelis said “Hey guys we’re gonna go because we got a better offer somewhere else” the Arabs would be like “NO FUCKING WAY!! Come back here and fight!!! We’ll beat you this time.” I keep getting the impression that they would be pissy with pretty much anyone that came along and did what the zionsits did. If the Kurds did it, there would be a Kurdistan/Palestinan conflict. > [@](#): > > Certainly. They are just an offshoot of a much larger movement that exists elsewhere - the Muslim Brotherhood, who if you may recall briefly ruled in Egypt (before being tossed out in a coup). You aren’t claiming that the Egyptian ones were motivated by Israeli bad hats, are you? No but the ones in Gaza sure seem to be. > [@](#): > > You are forgetting that the Zionists in the run-up to the creation of the state did suffer all sorts of “indignities” when ruled by the Turks and then the Mandate - and worse: they had to watch as the Brits closed the borders to Jewish immigration just as the Nazis were gearing up to slaughter European Jewry. > > Yes, Begin became PM and yes he was leader of the Irgun - but that was many, many years later. Doesn’t change the fact that the Haganah suppressed them _at the time_ in direct response to Irgun terrorism. > > This is no different from Arafat going from terrorist leader to leader of the PLO: people’s roles change over time. And did the Israelis ever stop thinking of him as a terrorist leader? > [@](#): > > Sure I can: I can blame them for being dumb. Repeating endlessly the same tactics that haven’t worked and have caused them nothing but misery = dumb. Do something different. They don’t seem to have a lot of attractive alternatives. And the Israeli response seems to be “we are stronger than you so whatever deal we reach is going to be much more favorable to us than to you” I can see why that’s tough to swallow. > [@](#): > > Huh? Nothing you have posted contradicts what I wrote. The Irgun was ‘violently suppressed’ at the time. That doesn’t mean each and every one of them was killed, or that they became non-persons for all time. History is full of terrorists who went on later in life to become statesmen - would that the Palestinians followed that route. So Fatah did not suppress terrorists in the west bank? > [@](#): > > I never claimed otherwise. What has that to do with anything? All the Palestinains options that you are proposing seem to be much less even handed. Israel gives Palestine stuff Israel isn’t really very interested in anyway but Israel gets Jerusalem and Palestinians stop asking for their shit back. > [@](#): > > Because they will not agree to a peace deal unless it contains a “right of return” - namely, that all of those millions of Palestinians currently languishing in refugee camps get to “return” to Israel (not to Palestine). They are supposed to “return” to the same villages their families left, in '48. > > That’s what a “right of return” means. > > Unfortunately, Israel already has a population; the sites of those villages, left in '48, are now under Israeli farms, factories or cities. > > How is this supposed to work? If that is non-negotiable for the Palestinians then there is simply not a deal to be had. > [@](#): > > As I pointed out, the “peace” they were agreeing to was not a “peace” at all, but a “truce”. The difference is that the one means war is over and normal national relations begins; the other is a temporary halt to active hostilities, with the expectation that they would resume in the future. > > Would you trust a nation that had been to war with you multiple times, that would only agree to a “truce” when they were weak, and that were covertly building nukes? Without trust, even peace treaties are meaningless. > [@](#): > > Sure. I think we agree that they should do this. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/373 "2016-07-06T20:16:57Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Well, sure - it is all of a piece. Palestinians have been fed a steady diet of exaggerated ethno-nationalist hopes; they are told, over and again, that all they must do is wait and Israel will be wiped out (somehow), or agree to leave, or something, and then they can go back to the villages their ancestors left from. More, they are told that giving up that dream is a sort of treason. Like people everywhere, many of them buy into that very attractive fantasy, all the more so as their current situation - living on handouts in camps - is so miserable. > > Thing is, the Arab countries and the UN are actively encouraging this situation - the one by refusing to allow Palestinians to become citizens (you may recall that frustration with that situation in Kuwait led Palestinians to support Saddam’s invasion); the UN, by establishing - uniquely - a specialist agency devoted only to Palestinian refugees, and unlike any other refugees in the whole world, this agency has a mandate specifically designed _not_ to resettle them anywhere. > > Is it any wonder in such an atmosphere that Palestinian refugees reject being resettled in a first world country? They have been promised by everyone - their own leaders, other Arab states, the UN - a world organization - that they can go back to their very homes that they left; settling for anything else, they have been told, is a kind of treason. Why should they believe that the dream they have been sold for almost 70 years is simply impossible? Because parents love their children and want good things for them even if those good things are in Canada. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/374 "2016-07-06T21:03:14Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Because parents love their children and want good things for them even if those good things are in Canada. You would think, wouldn’t you. Rejecting funded citizenship in a first world country to pursue an impossible ME feud sounds completely nuts: yet it happened. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/375 "2016-07-06T21:19:11Z")
> [@Deeg](#): > > We already have a refugee crisis, we don’t need to add even more by requiring the Palestinians to move out just so they can get justice. Instead of making Palestinians leave the West Bank wouldn’t it be preferable for Israel to stop their illegal actions? > > I am not making my self clear. My stance is that Israel should give full legal justice to Palestinians and stop taking their land. Palestinians shouldn’t have to negotiate for this and it should happen NOW. Yes, we’d like Hamas to stop shooting rockets into Israel but it should not be linked to the legal system. Israel should change unilaterally because they have created a situation where Palestinians have no non-violent means to address crimes. Once Palestinians have a real, viable avenue then we can start negotiating. On the one hand, Israel should cease seizing Palestinian lands for “settlements”. On that we agree. On the other hand, you’d make Palestinian participation in negotiations contingent on Israel doing that _first_. That is an absurdity, leading to a wholly perverse result. The ONLY thing that can practically guarantee Israeli hard-liners cease bad behaviors such as seizing Palestinian lands, is for Palestine to gain some sort of sovereignty over its own lands – and the only way to do that, is to either defeat Israel in war (not gonna happen) or for Israel to agree to it via peace negotiations. In short, if Palestinians follow your prescription, the Israeli hardliners can in effect shelve the one thing that can stop them - Palestinian sovereignty - simply by making provocations: every time it looks like the peace process is advancing - seize another ‘settlement’ and dare the Israeli state to evict 'em. There is an expression for this sort of self-defeating stance: “to cut off your nose to spite your face”. There is an Israeli equivalent: demanding that Palestinians cease all terrorist acts prior to Israeli participation in negotiations (in effect handing Palestinian extremists a ‘veto’). The difference of course is this: the status quo is greatly to the disadvantage of the Palestinians. The Israelis already have effective sovereignty over _their_ state. In short, we agree that Israeli “settlers” should stop; we disagree - fundamentally - on what the Palestinians ought to do if they don’t. You seem to be saying they should refuse to negotiate, which I regard as highly foolish. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/376 "2016-07-06T21:56:56Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Hunh. I thought that the point of the two state solution was to get around the right of return issue. WTF would be the point of a two state solution that also included a right of return? I thought the idea was two states along 1967 borders plus some restitution by Israel in lieu of the right of return. Really? That’s a pretty fundamental misunderstanding. The “right of return” (to Israel) is the bone of contention (the other being Jerusalem) on which the peace process foundered. > [@](#): > > The argument over the existence of such a right has perpetuated the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, and the failure of the peace process is due, in large part, to the inability of the two parties to achieve a solution with justice for both sides. > > The majority of Palestinians consider that their homeland was lost during the establishment of Israel in 1948, and see the right of return as crucial to a peace agreement with Israel, even if the vast majority of surviving refugees and their descendants do not exercise that right. The Palestinians consider the vast majority of refugees as victims of Israeli ethnic cleansing during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, and cite massacres such as Deir Yassin. All Palestinian political and militant groups, both Islamist and socialist, strongly support a right of return. The Palestinian National Authority views the right of return as a non-negotiable right. > > Almost all Israeli Jews oppose a literal right of return for Palestinian refugees on the grounds that allowing such an influx of Palestinians would render Jews a minority in Israel, thus transforming Israel into an Arab-Muslim state. In addition to the right-wing and center, a majority of the Israeli left, including the far-left, opposes the right of return on these grounds. The Israeli left is generally open to compromise on the issue, and supports resolving it by means such as financial compensation, family reunification initiatives, and the admittance of a highly limited number of refugees to Israel, but is opposed to a full right of return.[105] The vast majority of Israelis believe that all or almost all of the refugees should be resettled in a Palestinian state, their countries of residence, or third-party countries. The Israeli political leadership has consistently opposed the right of return, but it has made offers of compensation, assistance in resettlement, and return for an extremely limited number of refugees based on family reunification or humanitarian considerations during peace talks. > > Israel’s first offer of any limited right of return came at the 1949 Lausanne Conference, when it offered to allow 100,000 refugees to return, though not necessarily to their homes, including 25,000 who had returned surreptitiously and 10,000 family-reunion cases. The proposal was conditioned on a peace treaty that would allow Israel to retain territory it had captured which had been allocated to a proposed Palestinian state, and the Arab states absorbing the remaining 550,000–650,000 refugees. The Arabs rejected the proposal on both moral and political grounds, and Israel quickly withdrew its limited offer. At the 2000 Camp David summit 52 years later, Israel offered to set up an international fund for the compensation for the property which had lost by 1948 Palestinian refugees, to which Israel would contribute. Israel offered to allow 100,000 refugees to return on the basis of humanitarian considerations or family reunification. All other refugees would be resettled in their present places of residents, the Palestinian state, or in third-party countries, with Israel contributing $30 billion to fund their resettlement. During this time, most of the original refugees had died without any compensation. Israel demanded that in exchange, Arafat forever abandon the right of return, and Arafat’s refusal has been cited as one of the leading causes of the summit’s failure. > > The Palestinian right of return had been one of the issues whose solution had been deferred until the “final status agreement” in the Oslo Accords of 1993. Not only was there no final status agreement, but the Oslo process itself broke down, and its failure was a major cause of the Second Intifada and the continuing violence. > > In 2003, during the Road map for peace, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom stated that the establishment of a Palestinian state was conditional upon waiving the right of return. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said that the Palestinian Authority must also drop its demand for the right of return, calling it “a recipe for Israel’s destruction”.[106] > > In 2008 the Palestinian Authority issued a statement “calling on all Palestinians living abroad to converge on Israel by land, sea and air” to mark Israel’s 60 anniversary. The notion of confining the “right of return” to Palestine was expressly rejected: > [@](#): > > In 2002, former representative of the Palestinian Liberation Organization Sari Nusseibeh proposed a settlement between Israel and Palestine which would grant Palestinians a right of return to a Palestinian state, but not to Israel. The proposal failed. > **[Palestinian right of return](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_right_of_return#Historic_attempts_at_resolution)** > > The Palestinian right of return\[a\] is the political position or principle that Palestinian refugees, both first-generation refugees (c. 30,000 to 50,000 people still alive as of 2012\[update\]) and their descendants (c. 5 million people as of 2012\[update\]), have a right to return and a right to the property they themselves or their forebears left behind or were forced to leave in what is now Israel and the Palestinian territories (both formerly part of the British Mandate of Palestine) dur The r... What they mean by a ‘right of return’: > **[Why Palestinians have a right to return home](https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2011/9/23/why-palestinians-have-a-right-to-return-home/)** > > A thorough examination of the legal rights of all those displaced by the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. > [@](#): > > Really?? So if Israelis said “Hey guys we’re gonna go because we got a better offer somewhere else” the Arabs would be like “NO FUCKING WAY!! Come back here and fight!!! We’ll beat you this time.” > > I keep getting the impression that they would be pissy with pretty much anyone that came along and did what the zionsits did. If the Kurds did it, there would be a Kurdistan/Palestinan conflict. Funny you should mention Kurds. The Turks have done to the Kurds much of what the Israelis have done to the Palestinians - yet few in the ME (aside from the Kurds) seem to care. Turkish abuses of Kurds do not provoke widespread outrage. Why? > [@](#): > > And did the Israelis ever stop thinking of him as a terrorist leader? They may have disliked him, but they negotiated with him as leader of the PLO. > [@](#): > > They don’t seem to have a lot of attractive alternatives. And the Israeli response seems to be “we are stronger than you so whatever deal we reach is going to be much more favorable to us than to you” I can see why that’s tough to swallow. Serious question: have you ever engaged in significant negotiations? People in negotiations have this thing known as “bargaining power”. Some have more of it, some have less. Those with more can demand more; those with less are worse off. This is, like, universally true. The Palestinians have a weak hand, compared with the Israelis. They are disorganized. They are split into two hostile camps. They lack military power. They used to have powerful allies, such as Egypt and Syria: both are now uninterested in helping them. They have world sympathy, but not much else. This lack of bargaining power means that, in negotiations, they are in no position to make extravagant demands:\* it is simply the way of reality that the stronger the bargaining position, the more you get in negotiations. - such as, “hand over half your capital city to us, and oh, by the way, get ready to receive five or six million people who hate your present population and wish to replace it”. > [@](#): > > All the Palestinains options that you are proposing seem to be much less even handed. Israel gives Palestine stuff Israel isn’t really very interested in anyway but Israel gets Jerusalem and Palestinians stop asking for their shit back. Their “shit” being - most of Israel via the ‘right of return’ (which you can see upthread means ‘to return to our original villages’), including half their capital city. Yes, it would be a rare negotiation in which the by-far weaker party walks away with the spoils. When does that ever happen? That isn’t ‘even handed’, that’s nuts. If I only have $50 and I want a new car, it isn’t ‘even handed’ for the car dealership to give me a car for $50. > [@](#): > > If that is non-negotiable for the Palestinians then there is simply not a deal to be had. That’s the point I have been making. If the Palestinian position is “there is no deal to be had”, then there is little to restrain the Israeli Right Wing types from simply saying ‘these guys are totally unreasonable, you can never make peace with them, so let’s just take what we want and wall off the rest’. Unfortunately, that narrative is winning in Israel, and what is causing it to win is, above all, Palestinian insistence on ‘return’. Which is why I say anyone with real sympathy for Palestinian plight ought to be working to convince them insisting on a ‘right of return’ is silly and counter-productive. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/377 "2016-07-06T23:04:04Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > You would think, wouldn’t you. Rejecting funded citizenship in a first world country to pursue an impossible ME feud sounds completely nuts: yet it happened. Were the terrorists threatening your family if you wanted to leave? If they were not under a compulsion and they were rejecting an offer of citizenship in Canada, is the right of return just a symbol of having “won”? Because ISTM that they already have a right of return but Israel is never going to let them exercise it and you can either let your children and their children suffer to make a point or you can move to Canada and bitch about the fucking Israelis from the comfort of a first world nation (or their own nation of Palestine) the way the Koreans bitch about the fucking Japanese from Los Angeles and Seoul. Eventually the Israelis will feel horrible about their treatment of the Palestinians and let them open up casinos and give them preferences in college admissions. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 6, 2016, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/378 "2016-07-06T23:32:09Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Really? That’s a pretty fundamental misunderstanding. The “right of return” (to Israel) is the bone of contention (the other being Jerusalem) on which the peace process foundered. > > The notion of confining the “right of return” to Palestine was expressly rejected: > > [Palestinian right of return - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_right_of_return#Historic_attempts_at_resolution) > > What they mean by a ‘right of return’: > > [Why Palestinians have a right to return home | Conflict | Al Jazeera](http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2011/09/2011922135540203743.html) So it seems that they are entitled to a right of return (a right of return to Palestine is not really relevant AFAIC). IIRC Israel made offers to buy off the Palestinian right of return, was the offer not generous enough to satisfy their honor? > [@](#): > > Funny you should mention Kurds. The Turks have done to the Kurds much of what the Israelis have done to the Palestinians - yet few in the ME (aside from the Kurds) seem to care. Turkish abuses of Kurds do not provoke widespread outrage. Why? For the same reason that there wouldn’t be middle east outrage if the Palestinians were treating Israelis the way Israelis were treating the Palestinians. I am also surprised by the lack of outrage at Turkish treatment of Kurds (and Cypriots and Armenians). If America started to restrict immigration and promote suffering to maintain our Christian identity, people would think we were assholes too. > [@](#): > > They may have disliked him, but they negotiated with him as leader of the PLO. And the Palestinians negotiated with Menachem Begin, neh? > [@](#): > > Serious question: have you ever engaged in significant negotiations? > > People in negotiations have this thing known as “bargaining power”. Some have more of it, some have less. Those with more can demand more; those with less are worse off. > > This is, like, universally true. > > The Palestinians have a weak hand, compared with the Israelis. They are disorganized. They are split into two hostile camps. They lack military power. They used to have powerful allies, such as Egypt and Syria: both are now uninterested in helping them. They have world sympathy, but not much else. > > This lack of bargaining power means that, in negotiations, they are in no position to make extravagant demands:\* it is simply the way of reality that the stronger the bargaining position, the more you get in negotiations. > > - such as, “hand over half your capital city to us, and oh, by the way, get ready to receive five or six million people who hate your present population and wish to replace it”. Yes I have been involved in several types of negotiations and what you say is not exactly true. Sometimes negotiating means you giving me something of yours in exchange for me giving you something of mine. Like when I negotiate the terms of a merger or asset acquisition. Other times negotiating means pleading to a misdemeanor instead of standing trial on a felony. Still other times it means trying to achieve a result that resembles fair or what a court would call fair. This is one of the fundamental differences of perspectives that I see between the two sides. Israel thinks that because it is in a strong negotiating position, it should get more. After all, who is to say what is fair? Palestinians think that there are international laws that say they are entitled to things like the right of return and they are willing to see their grandchildren’s grandchildren live in squalor to see justice be done. > [@](#): > > Their “shit” being - most of Israel via the ‘right of return’ (which you can see upthread means ‘to return to our original villages’), including half their capital city. > > Yes, it would be a rare negotiation in which the by-far weaker party walks away with the spoils. When does that ever happen? In court. It happens all the time in court with rule of law. The Palestinians think they are entitled to that shit but there is no rule of law in international relations and if Israel insists on might makes right then their claim on Israel will only last as long as they are mighty. > [@](#): > > That isn’t ‘even handed’, that’s nuts. If I only have $50 and I want a new car, it isn’t ‘even handed’ for the car dealership to give me a car for $50. It is if you think the dealership stole the car from you. > [@](#): > > That’s the point I have been making. > > If the Palestinian position is “there is no deal to be had”, then there is little to restrain the Israeli Right Wing types from simply saying ‘these guys are totally unreasonable, you can never make peace with them, so let’s just take what we want and wall off the rest’. Unfortunately, that narrative is winning in Israel, and what is causing it to win is, above all, Palestinian insistence on ‘return’. > > Which is why I say anyone with real sympathy for Palestinian plight ought to be working to convince them insisting on a ‘right of return’ is silly and counter-productive. Or give them nukes. ---
**Author:** ![DerekMichaels00](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/f14d63/32.png) [@DerekMichaels00](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DerekMichaels00)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/379 "2016-07-07T00:15:32Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > So it seems that they are entitled to a right of return (a right of return to Palestine is not really relevant AFAIC). IIRC Israel made offers to buy off the Palestinian right of return, was the offer not generous enough to satisfy their honor? > > For the same reason that there wouldn’t be middle east outrage if the Palestinians were treating Israelis the way Israelis were treating the Palestinians. > > I am also surprised by the lack of outrage at Turkish treatment of Kurds (and Cypriots and Armenians). If America started to restrict immigration and promote suffering to maintain our Christian identity, people would think we were assholes too. > > And the Palestinians negotiated with Menachem Begin, neh? > > Yes I have been involved in several types of negotiations and what you say is not exactly true. Sometimes negotiating means you giving me something of yours in exchange for me giving you something of mine. Like when I negotiate the terms of a merger or asset acquisition. Other times negotiating means pleading to a misdemeanor instead of standing trial on a felony. Still other times it means trying to achieve a result that resembles fair or what a court would call fair. > > This is one of the fundamental differences of perspectives that I see between the two sides. Israel thinks that because it is in a strong negotiating position, it should get more. After all, who is to say what is fair? Palestinians think that there are international laws that say they are entitled to things like the right of return and they are willing to see their grandchildren’s grandchildren live in squalor to see justice be done. > > In court. It happens all the time in court with rule of law. The Palestinians think they are entitled to that shit but there is no rule of law in international relations and if Israel insists on might makes right then their claim on Israel will only last as long as they are mighty. > > It is if you think the dealership stole the car from you. > > Or give them nukes. how bout the Palestinians stop acting like radical Islamic losers? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2016, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840/380 "2016-07-07T00:15:45Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > . . . Or give them nukes. Possibly the worst idea anyone has floated since wooden barbecue grills. Death in very large numbers, followed by retaliations in very large numbers, possibly dragging the world’s superpowers into an escalating war… This is stupider than eating peas with a toilet plunger. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/israel-palestinians-your-take/749840.md?page=20)