And it only took them 3 wars and 40 years to do it. Way to go, guys. You’re really on the ball.
Rune:
But if they want the Israeli West Bank settlements gone, what can they do?
Well, no, the West Bank and Gaza were occupied in 1967, effectively at the end of the Six Day war. So it was, strictly, no wars and 21 years of occupation which led them to realise that 22% of what the generation before them had was all they would ever get.
The wall now seeks to remove from this remaining 22% most of the water resources and almost all of the farmland.
Yes, that’s correct. And never has been one might add.
Well that certainly depend on what you mean by pre-1948 land. If you mean the British Mandate, Israel consist of less than 20%, the rest belongs to the other Palestinian-Arab country: Jordan. But nothing good ever came from squabbling over such historic details and we could go back to Adam and Eve without it doing anybody anything good. The fact is that the settlements are there, and they’re being targeted by Palestinian terrorists – so they must be protected. I believe more than 80% of the settlements lies very close to the green line, most as suburbs to Jerusalem. And the Palestinians never agreed to settle for the Green Line in any meaningful way, as has been thoroughly attested by numerous polls in Gaza/West Bank, as well as official material produced by the Palestinian authority under Arafat.
Ran away 
Well you goddamn bastard you (mods!: that’s a term of endearment) I certainly did no such thing. I had pretty much said everything I had to say without repeating myself. There are people on this board with much more knowledge on this issue than me, and I seriously doubt the Israelis much appreciate my bungling attempts at talking their case, or hitching it for my personal ominous rightwing wagon. Actually I’d expect they wish for nothing so much as if everybody would just keep goddamn mum on Israel for once. If I were living in a country that under such a constant unrelenting world attention, I at least would be thoroughly fed up by now. So I expect I would have run away from this thread too if you hadn’t made it a question of personal honour.
Well, “very close” is an arbitrary and ambiguous term, but this map shows settlements (most of them built after 1988) peppering the West Bank like a blue acne. I personally cannot see how peace can come about without abandoning any settlement further than, say, a mile from the Green Line.
Again, “meaningful” is an entirely subjective term.
It seems that conflict among Palestinians for control is reaching a fever pitch. I do wonder if this has anything to do with the wall preventing them from slaking their thirst for blood on Israelis and thus taking their grievances out on each other.
Please, it wasn’t the Palestinians who had control of the West Bank and Gaza from 1948 to 1967, it was the Jordanians and Egyptians, and even before 1967, the Palestinians weren’t recognizing the '48 borders.
They recognize them now, or so they say (even though groups like Hamas still don’t), but if they get their own state within those borders, who knows how long they’ll keep on recognizing Israel’s borders? You’ll have to excuse me for doubting the goodwill or the trustworthiness of the Palestinian leadership.
Oh very well, “the people living in those houses and farming that land” who suddenly found themselves turfed off that land and out of those houses at the whim of the occupying power, regardless of the precise sovereign entity which that land and house comprised beforehand. OK?
Except, again, that happened in 1948, not, for the most part, in 1967. When you’re talking about the Palestinians, you’re dealing with two groups of people. The first group are those who lived, or who’s ancestors lived within Israel’s 1948 borders, and who left Israel to become refugees in the surrounding countries when Israel became independent. That group has always been adamently opposed to Israel’s existance, because it’s existance caused them to lose everything, and while Israel exists, they’re not getting their land back.
The second group are those who lived in Gaza or the West Bank before the founding of Israel (and who, afterwards, lived first under Jordanian or Egyptian sovereignty and then under Israeli occupation.) This group didn’t suffer large scale eviction from their homes and farms (although that has happened to some extent, especially near the Green Line). This is the group that’s more likely to be ok with the existance of Israel.
Huh? Israel was the first to attack (assuming you’re referring to the June 1967 war). Certainly they were provoked, but they were the first to cross any borders in an organized way.
Also, Israel itself signed a document in 1949 that included as one of it’s provisions:
I would humbly suggest that taking territory away from a neighboring country and refusing to give it back constitutes a “threat…against the territorial integrity”.
To make it clear, I’m not praising Palenstinians or saying that Israel didn’t have compelling reasons for what she did, nor am I praising Israel and condemning Palestinians. Just thought some facts might be in order.
Actually, most of the people in this forum are pro-Isreal, based on the proportion of posts in these kinds of threads. I don’t take a stand one way or the other, but I get the feeling that in your mind, that already makes me anti-Israel.
Uh, I’m pretty sure that’s not “undisputed”.
Are you serious? Offhand, I’d say it’s the same reason the U.S. didn’t drop a couple A-bombs on Iraq. Because leaders of powerful countries, unless they are completely insane, will use measured force, not just go ape-shit. Israel is dependent on the Western world for support. Without our support, Israel wouldn’t even exist right now. They’re not gonna go completely bonkers, start mass-murdering Palestinians, and alienate the entire world (At least I hope they wouldn’t do that). Just because Israel hasn’t gone “all out” and completely annihilated the Palestinian people doesn’t automatically mean they can do no wrong, or that there isn’t another side to the issue.
No it’s not.
Except they were blockaded, which is an act of war.
OK, as the White Rabbit might say: “I’m late, I’m late!”. Where to start? I’ve tried to cull the main points being discussed here, and I’ll address each as an issue, rather than attempt to reply to individual post or posters:
First - the actual OP: Is it working?.
I’d have to answer an unqualified “yes” on that one - at least psychologically, and on both sides (that is, the Palestinian terrorists feel intimidated by it, whether or not it is crossable). The overall number of terror incidents inside Israel proper (pre-1967) has dropped like a rock since construction of the barrier began in earnest - see this maariv article. More importantly, people feel safer, and I dare say this will, eventually, lead to more popular willingness to compormise.
Physical location of the Barrier
I fully agree with those poster who say that the barrier should have been erected mainly along the Green Line. Although I think some slippage had to be included, just so there are no “facts on the ground” created going the other way (that is - we are not willing to start future negotiations from a point where we have effectively relinquished control of everything. Negotiations 101).
Six-day war - offensive or defensive? Why does this matter?
The 1967 war (“six day war”) was, IMO a fully defensive war - the Egyptians were in violation of previous armistice agreements by blockading the Tiran straights against Israel-bound maritime trafffic, thereby blocking access to the port of Eilat, israel access to Asia (since the Suez canal had already long been off-limits to Israel-bound traffic at the time). That in itself was an act of war, even if it was accomplished without a single shot being shot.
This matters because, IIRC, the UN charter specifies that land cannot be held onto if acquired in an offensive war (I haven’t the time for cites now - at 11:15 pm here - but I’m sure someone will correct me if I’ve got this wrong)
Measures used by Israel against the Palestinian polpulation
While not a paradise, given the rate of terrorism over the past few years, and the grassroots support for it among the population of the OT’s, the security measures imposed by Israel on the OT are IMHO not excessive. It would be nice to let them live their lives without constant searches and checkpoints, but they - all of them - have to let us live our lives, too. And, as usual, the innocent suffer 
Incidentally, the whole point of the barrier is to obviate the need for this constant
massive discomfort imposed on the innocent vast majority of the Palestinian population - this alone is a good enough reason for it, IMO.
Status of Palestinian Arabs
There has never been an independent state in Western Palestine. Eastern Palestine was earmarked for Palestinian Arabs but was given to the Bedouin Hashemite family in return for services rendered during WWI. So - no independent Palestine, Ever.
What is now Israel + the OT was under Ottoman rule until 1917-1918, then under British Mandate until 1948.
In 1948, Israel was formed, its borders determined by war (this time, clearly defensive on the Israeli side). Egypt occupied the Gaza strip and Jordan occupied (and annexed, but few countries recognized this) the West Bank. Jordan formally withdrew it’s claim to the West Bank only quite recently (don’t remember the exact dates, and no time now for searches)
So, effectively, the Palestinain population of the OT’s simply passed from one occupation to another in 1967.
I might add that the Israeli occupation has been, for most of this period, relatively benign when compared to previous occupying forces.
Proportion of pro-Israel posters on SDMB
Less than I’d like, more than I expected… overall, pretty balanced, with a few posters on either extreme and most in the center.
Finally, also per OP’s request My political views
Although I am nominally an American citizen, no way I’m getting involved in intra-US politics. I don’t vote, either, because I don’t trust myself to put America First when doing so.
Politically, I’m considered moderately left-of-center by Israeli standards; economically, slightly right-of-center; in terms of Civil Liberties: Church and State, Gay (and other minority) rights, etc… I’m WAAAY left.
Dani
P.S. SentientMeat - thank you for the positive description…
Right. Let’s not re-obsfucate which side was responsible for stating the 1967 war.
But consider this question: To what extent are the Palestinians responsible for the war vs the Arab states that it should be they (and their descendants)who must pay most of the price?
Again, please note the disclaimer that I wasn’t making judgements. Yes, Israel had casus beli with the declaration of the blockade. However, Israel attacked first. It is also interesting to note that originally the Israeli battle plan did not include the occupation of the Tiran Straits and relief of the blockade. That was expected to be the result of trading the Northern Sinai back to the Egyptians.
[QUOTE=Noone Special]
OK, as the White Rabbit might say: “I’m late, I’m late!”. Where to start? I’ve tried to cull the main points being discussed here, and I’ll address each as an issue, rather than attempt to reply to individual post or posters:
First - the actual OP: Is it working?.
I’d have to answer an unqualified “yes” on that one - at least psychologically, and on both sides (that is, the Palestinian terrorists feel intimidated by it, whether or not it is crossable). The overall number of terror incidents inside Israel proper (pre-1967) has dropped like a rock since construction of the barrier began in earnest - see this maariv article. More importantly, people feel safer, and I dare say this will, eventually, lead to more popular willingness to compormise.
Physical location of the Barrier
I fully agree with those poster who say that the barrier should have been erected mainly along the Green Line. Although I think some slippage had to be included, just so there are no “facts on the ground” created going the other way (that is - we are not willing to start future negotiations from a point where we have effectively relinquished control of everything. Negotiations 101).
<snip>
Measures used by Israel against the Palestinian polpulation
While not a paradise, given the rate of terrorism over the past few years, and the grassroots support for it among the population of the OT’s, the security measures imposed by Israel on the OT are IMHO not excessive. It would be nice to let them live their lives without constant searches and checkpoints, but they - all of them - have to let us live our lives, too. And, as usual, the innocent suffer
Incidentally, the whole point of the barrier is to obviate the need for this constant
massive discomfort imposed on the innocent vast majority of the Palestinian population - this alone is a good enough reason for it, IMO.
[QUOTE]
Okay, as an Israeli perhaps you can tell us: Is the wall meant to be permanent? Or is it there simply to provide necessary conditions for negotiations leading to Palestinian independence, after which the wall might be torn down?
Also: Why are there Israeli settlements in the Territories in the first place? And is Israel prepared to evacuate them for the sake of peace? The Palestinians can’t really be independent, can they, if there are foreign enclaves within their territory and they have to allow the presence of foreign troops to protect those enclaves?
To be fair, it may be “working” for Israel, but you can’t say it’s working for Palestine.
Hmmm…on what do you base that conclusion? I would think that people who perceive themselves to be in a stronger position would be less willing to compromise, not more.
That’s all well and good for Israel, but if you only err towards what favors your own side (and I think even that’s a generous way to put it), surely you can’t be surprised if the other side doesn’t like it?
This quibbling over who started it has always puzzled me, since it seems obvious to me as an outsider that both sides are going to have to compromise if there is ever going to be peace. Each side may very well think they are in the right and supported by international law, but how does that get you anywhere?
:dubious:
I’ve got news for you - the Palestinians don’t see it that way.
But they don’t agree with your view of history, and since you both want the same land, how does it help to doggedly insist you are in the right? Again, compromise would seem the only solution to the problem, don’t you think? And I certainly don’t think “Things could be worse for them” is a valid argument.
I heard a rumor that the next phase of the security fence project is to require palestinians (who work in Israel), to submoit to RFID chips.
This makes sense, if Palestinians wish to work in Israel agree to submit to chipping, this lowers the chance that such persons will be willing to stage suicide bomb attacks.
Tell me this isn’t true!
Ha! I knew it. Endearment? You’re a wicked sweettalker 
of course I’m only posting this so you won’t say I’m running away