So Will The Sky Fall If The UN Declare Palestine a State?

[brazil84]

@EducatedFool

Are you seriously going to dwell longer on this point?

If you want to keep discussing it, sure.

Even the most extreme elements in Syria such as the Salafi 'Ar’our said that he won’t hurt Alawites if they don’t ally themselves to the regime.

Ok, so your argument is this:

(1) The opposition parties have stated that they will not “hurt Alawaites” if they come into power, so long as those Alawites did not support the current regime.

(2) Therefore, we can be confident that the opposition will not slaughter Alawites if they come into power.

Is that seriously your argument?

No need to quote anything really,

Sure there is. You are claiming that the Israeli government is making a particular argument. I am skeptical of your claim. Please back it up.

I don’t think he outright banned it, but I don’t think they would’ve got to power anyway. It’s like having a Muslim president in Israel, it’s just not viable.
I was actually pointing out that they were allowed to live safely next to Muslims. They were free to practice their religious rites.

Living next to a group is different from sharing power. In Israel, power has passed from the Likud Party to the Labor Party and back again. There is a Supreme Court which regularly rules against the government and its rulings are respected. Of the 22 Arab states, how many are like this?

Ok, so you said Arabs by culture don’t share power with rival factions right? I don’t see Israel sharing it either.

See above.

How would you define democracy then?

The government is run by elected representatives and/or persons who are appointed by those who are elected.

As you know, in every society some people are for something and some aren’t. Some would say yes and others no,

I am asking if you personally will condemn Hamas or the PLO.

I’m talking about the people living there, their were Arabs living there and they had land and homes all over it.

Just like there were Jews living there with land and homes all over it. At the time of the UN partition plan, the Arabs did not have control and the Jews did not have control. The British had control. Before that, the Turks had control.

So your claim that the Arabs were in control is just false.

Now we can’t predict what would’ve happened, but don’t you think that if the area wasn’t ravaged by all the wars those countries would’ve evolved? Don’t you think the Jews would’ve been sovereign?

No I do not. I’m not aware of Arabs ever tolerating Jewish sovereignty anywhere in the Middle East ever.

Arafat didn’t want in concession, he wanted everything back and would’ve done it violently earlier in his life. Abbas is agreeing over a smaller piece of land.

Please cite, link, and quote Abbas where he makes his biggest concession.

They never claimed that, it’s the most important city to them in the country and the second most important in all of Islam.

Nonsense, it only became important to them once they lost it. Much like a small child who wants the toy his older brother is playing with and then quickly loses interest in it once he actually has it.

Besides, in 1948 the Jews were willing to give up Jerusalem even though it was far more important to them than it ever was to Arabs or Muslims. That’s how badly the Jews wanted a state.

You know that there is just no way they could survive if they could possibly be able to work as a country with all of their refugees outside of the country.

No I don’t know that. Israel has accepted millions of Jews over the years and most Jews are only slightly more capable – at best – than your typical Palestinian Arab. The big difference is that Jews love their own people far more than they hate the Arabs. Besides, a Palestinian State could count on lots of outside help in absorbing Palestinian Arabs from all over the world.

What I also don’t understand is why that’s such a big problem to you,

For one thing, I want the demands against Israel to end. More importantly, it’s a good litmus test of the Arabs’ intentions. Do they want a state because they love their own people or because they hate the Jews? If it’s the former, then they have my support. If it’s the latter, then they deserve nothing.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@EducatedFool

Salddin was as much an Arab as Obama is an American, he even has an Arabic name.

I’m sorry but is an exceptionally moronic statement and displays a massive lack of understanding how Muslims viewed themselves during the medieval era.

Muslims during that time, did not think of themselves as Arabs, even those who’s native language was Arabic. They identified themselves by their religion.

The term “Arab” in fact was viewed as a pejorative.

Had you called Saladdin an “Arab” to his face he’d have had you executed on the spot.

Furthermore, by modern standards, he was Kurd.

As to your “he even has(sic) an Arabic name” I nearly pissed myself laughing.

Virtually all Muslims, including myself, have “Arabic names”. That doesn’t make us Arabs and if you told a Pakistani named Hassan, a Kurd named Ibrahim, or an Iranian named Ali that they were Arabs they’d have taken that comment as an insult.

I didn’t know about the donkey/mule thing nor the court testifying one. But the I did know about the special tax one and that could be compared to today’s laws such as living as a resident or as a citizen of a country.

You were unaware of the Dhimmi laws?

Then with all due respect, why have you been insisting that Muslims “shared power” with Jews and Christians in the Middle Ages.

They didn’t and the Muslims of that time would have taken your statement as an insult not a compliment.

The idea of Muslims sharing power with people who’d willfully rejected the words of the Prophet would have been outrageous.

Yes, Jews and Christians being “People of the Book” were accorded a certain amount of respect and protection, but they were second class citizens.

You might as well claim that Southern whites “shared power” with Southern blacks during the Jim Crow era and that blacks and whites “lived in peace.”

You said it yourself, “allegedly”. That would go clearly against his personality.

What possibly would make you think that. He was enforcing the Dhimmi laws. Jews and Christians were supposed to “know their place” and those who did anything that wreaked of being “uppity” or suggesting they were equal to Muslims were treated extremely harshly.

You might as well be shocked at the idea of a black man in Alabama of the 1920s being murdered for sleeping with a white woman.

They never claimed that, it[Jerusalem]'s the most important city to them in the country and the second most important in all of Islam.

Your ignorance of Islam is truly stunning. Jerusalem is most certainly NOT “the second most important in all of Islam”.

Medina is vastly more important. In fact it’s so important that non-Muslims are forbidden from entering much less living there. The same is true of Mecca.

My grand-parents told me that actually, and I lived in Syria you see. The Jewish quarter in the Old Damascus city had the Christian one on the right of it and a Muslim one a bit down the road.

Ok, first of all, I’m not sure why you’re trying to defend your idiotic claim that Jews and Muslims lived together as neighbors in Palestine by referring to Damascus, since Damascus is in Syria(which you should know if you lived in Syria).

Furthermore, Jews and Christians were forbidden by law from living in the same neighborhoods as Muslims so they weren’t, by most understandings of the word, “neighbors”.

“Neighbors” live in the same neighborhood not different ones.

Al-Manshiyya in Palestine was a mixed neighborhood, and the Jewish Quarter of Damascus had a few Muslim and Christians in it.

Nothing in that post lends credence to your claim that “most Arabs and Jews” lived next to each other in Palestine.

Damascus is in Syria and by your own admission, the Jewish Quarter only had a handful of Christians and Muslims living there.

Like I said before, under the Ottoman Empire, with rare exceptions, neighborhoods were forbidden by law from being mixed.

I must say, you really need to get better sources if you want to avoid making such severe factual errors in the future.

[Farmer_Jane]

And the reason why there are more Syrian Jews in the US than Israel is because Assad would not let them immigrate to Israel.

The fact that the Arab League and Co. is full of states that a) have a history of evicting Jews/persecuting Jews in modern history b) prohibit Jews from immigration to Israel and/or c) have maintained a consistent position that Jews are not welcome in the ‘Arab world’ and Israel is not a legitmate state should bother you. Abbas may play nice for the world stage, but as someone (I think brazil) pointed out, he just called the last 63 years of his history ‘Israeli occupation’ – meaning that all of Israel is ‘occupied’ by Jews. He may say he wants peace, but his actions -and his pandering to the electorate, whenever said people can actually vote- indicate otherwise.

Finally, this whole ‘67 borders’ thing is bullshit. The last time Israel had anything resembling borders on the West Bank was when the ceasefire line was next to a sovereign state - Jordan. By ‘67’, you mean ‘48’ armistice lines. The idea that the UN partition plan is somehow just as legit sixty three years later is a little absurd. The UN does not make states. The British pulled out and the world let everyone have at it. What’s done is done.

[YogSothoth]

Update:

Dunno what happened last year, but it looks like it is happening right now: UN upgrades Palestinian status. 138 votes in favor, 9 opposed, 41 abstained.

Of course its non-binding, not sure how it affects treaties and things like that, or if the US can veto it as part of the Security Council. What happens now? How “official” is this? Is this a kick in the pants to force both sides to talk, or does it delay things and make Israel uncooperative until its revoked or rejected somehow?

[ralph124c]

Yes, I’m glad the thread was revived. France has indicated that it would support a UN vote on Palestinian statehood-anyone lese interested?
Another chance to “miss an opportunity”?

[Trinopus]

What are the new state’s borders?

[Kolak_of_Twilo]

@Trinopus

What are the new state’s borders?

I’m not really sure. I will say I doubt they will go with this though. That plan was rather soundly rejected by one side already.

[Trinopus]

I’m one of the few pro-Israel folks I know who likes the idea of the declaration of a formal Palestinian state. I think it is promising.

On the good side, it forces the matter of recognition of Israel. It also makes the drawing or borders much more important. One of the very first thing any functional state must have is…a border! A clearly defined geographical extent.

On the bad side, if it comes to war, it can be seen as a war between states. It would no longer just be punitive strikes against militant groups; it would be the Nation of Palestine firing rockets at Israel; it would be Israel grinding in with tanks and taking over the Nation of Palestine. It makes war slightly more serious than it already is, and it makes peacemaking more urgent.

So…I’m favoring the good bits. Let’s form a real country, and step up to the real responsibilities. Stop firing rockets, recognize Israel, and get down to negotiations. They’ll be slower than glaciers, but it’s the only damn way.

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@YogSosoth

Of course its non-binding, not sure how it affects treaties and things like that, or if the US can veto it as part of the Security Council. What happens now? How “official” is this? Is this a kick in the pants to force both sides to talk, or does it delay things and make Israel uncooperative until its revoked or rejected somehow?

The permanent member vetoes apply only to actions taken by the UN Security Council. They can’t do anything about resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly, but General Assembly resolutions also carry far less weight than the Security Council’s.

[RickJay]

I’m pro-Israel, but I too see a lot of possible benefit to this. If it works (and of course it might just be forgotten in a few months) it puts Mahmoud Abbas back into the forefront of the Palestinian cause and marginalizes Hamas. As Trinopus points out it also forces some nation’s hands in terms of recognition of borders.

And a great column by Jonathan Kay about some benefits:

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/11/29/jonathan-kay-netanyahu-might-not-like-it-but-going-to-the-un-was-the-right-thing-for-abbas-to-do/

[brazil84]

I’m a Zionist and I see it as a negative. Essentially it’s just appeasement.

[Ibn_Warraq]

@brazil84

I’m a Zionist and I see it as a negative. Essentially it’s just appeasement.

How is it “appeasement”?

[newcomer]

@Ibn_Warraq

How is it “appeasement”?

You really think he thought this through and arrived at the only logical conclusion.

It’s a code word, almost but not exactly Godwinized.

BTW - Report: Israel to Build in Disputed Area

Mazel Tov!

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@Ibn_Warraq

How is it “appeasement”?

Giving any ground at all in a disagreement = appeasement, I guess.

[Shodan]

@Ibn_Warraq

How is it “appeasement”?

I’m not brazil84, but perhaps because it can be seen as a result of the rockets.

But ISTM that just saying that Palestine is a state doesn’t mean a lot until they define the borders. What would make sense is just to define the borders where they are now, but that won’t stop Hamas. Suppose they say, “OK, Gaza is part of Palestine”. Then Hamas fires more rockets at Israel. That’s an act of war, so Israel invades and conquers it. Then what? It’s not part of Palestine anymore?

Regards,
Shodan

[ElvisL1ves]

Defining the borders has been the problem for decades, since you don’t seem to have noticed. The latest version that the majority of Israelis have, in effect, voted for repeatedly is that the border goes all the way to the Jordan and includes all of Gaza. This UN action may help deter that shit. Maybe. At the very least, it helps expose it for what it is, and further isolates Netanyahu and his jingoist people from the civilized world.

[Malthus]

I have no problems handing a symbolic UN victory to boost Mr. Abbas. He needs some sort of victory, or he’s likely to be swept away, and someone less reasonable put in his place.

However, in practical terms - if Palestine is to be a “state”, will it be Mr. Abbas’ country on the West Bank, or will it include Hamas territory in Gaza as well? Because the latter seems to be a non-starter.

Really, what we are seeing is not a 2 state solution - it is going to end up being a 3 state solution.

[ralph124c]

News Flash: Israel will build 5000 more houses in the “West Bank”.
I guess its a sign that the palestinians WON’T get that land back!

[brazil84]

@Shodan

I’m not brazil84, but perhaps because it can be seen as a result of the rockets.

I do respect you quite a bit, but that’s not quite my point. “Appeasement” means giving something to an aggressor in hopes that he will behave less aggressively.

What is an “aggressor”? An aggressor is someone who engages in activity for destructive purposes.

Whoever it is who is behind “Palestine” is an aggressor. Their goal is to destroy Jewish Israel. There is a lot of evidence for this proposition, but what is most striking to me is that “Palestine” has already announced that it will not offer citizenship to Palestinian Arabs who are living in refugee camps in Lebanon, Syria, and even on the West Bank.

By contrast, Israel has offered citizenship to all of the Jews who were chased out of the Arab world.

This difference illustrates very well the difference in motivations.

By the way, if “Palestine” does not want statehood for destructive purposes, then what exactly do they want statehood for? And why did they turn down statehood back in the late 40s?

[Ibn_Warraq]

How is Abu Mazen(Abbas) “an aggressor”?

He’s not Hamas.

He’s not the one who launched rockets at Israel nor did he impose a blockade, which is an act of war, on an area.

Furthermore, putting settlements in occupied territory is illegal and certainly quite aggressive.