Mousawa: An Alternative to a Two-State Solution
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas are heading to Washington for talks on the future of the peace process.
Netanyahu is scheduled to visit Washington on May 17, and Abbas is heading to the US on May 28 for talks with U.S. President Barack Obama, whom many Arabs are pinning hopes on for forcing Israel to implement previous peace agreements.
For the past 10 years, the "two-state solution" has been the mantra of the United States, and of most countries involved in bringing a lasting peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians. But now, Netanyahu is calling for what he says is a fresh approach to peace with the Palestinians.
"The fresh approach that I suggest is pursuing a triple track toward peace between Israel and the Palestinians: a political track, a security track and an economic track," said the prime minister via satellite to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) annual conference in Washington.
Mr. Netanyahu made no mention of a two-state solution.
In reality, the two-state option has been dead for a long time, and with all fairness it was not killed by Mr. Netanyahu. Several Israeli governments have contributed to its demise, including those who pretended to seek it the most, such as the last government of Ehud Olmert and the Kadima party. Israel has succeeded in creating "facts on the ground" with about 290,000 settlers living in the West Bank and another 185,000 settlers in East Jerusalem. It is increasingly hard to imagine Israel evicting nearly half a million people (about 7 percent of its population) from their homes. So, what will Prime Minister Netanyahu offer in terms of peace?
Mr. Netanyahu is coming to Washington to yell, "Iran...Iran, and not Palestine."
"Something significant is happening today in the Middle East," Netanyahu continued to tell the adoring crowd at the AIPAC conference by video-link. "For the first time in my lifetime, I believe for the first time in a century, Arabs and Jews see a common danger."
Translation: Forget about Palestine.
Earlier, Mr. Netanyahu had thrown the recognition of Israel as a "Jewish state" as a precondition to the resumption of peace negotiations, but now it seems that he has changed his tone.
"We are prepared to resume peace negotiations without any delay, without any preconditions. The sooner, the better," Netanyahu said ahead of his trip to Washington.
Translation: Netanyahu was advised by President Shimon Peres, who has recently been in the U.S. on a "hasbara" tour, to soften his hawkish tone before meeting with Obama.
Meanwhile, Mahmoud Abbas still dreams of a two-state solution.
"We will go to Washington on May 28 to talk with the US administration about our conditions to resume peace negotiations with Israel in the future. Our conditions and demands are based on the two-state solution and Israel's halt of settlement building as well as house demolitions," Abbas said after a meeting with Jordan's King Abdullah II.
Translation: We will go to Washington to beg Obama for a solution.
Mahmoud Abbas' term as president expired in January. Negotiations with Hamas have stalled. His sons have been recently exposed in Arab media as making millions out of USAID contracts. His popularity in the Palestinian territories is at an all- time low.
Meanwhile, there is realization amongst Palestinians residing in the West Bank and East Jerusalem that their dream of a state of their own has all but disappeared. More Palestinians have been vocal about a binational state that provides full democratic rights for citizens of all ethnic and religious backgrounds. A movement that began amongst Palestinians with Israeli citizenship is now making its way to East Jerusalem and to the West Bank. It is called "Mousawa" which means equality...perhaps this is what Abbas should be talking about with Obama.
Jamal Dajani produces the Mosaic Intelligence Report on Link TV.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Obviously, what the Palestinians need is an independent state. That will provide an immediate basis for their political needs and security, with these needs met, economic improvement is likely to follow. What should stop Israel and the world community from agreeing and meeting with these needs?
While a two state solution would be nice, there may be an insurmountable problem. A viable Palestinian state which contains hundreds of Israeli settlements is not possible; getting Israel to cede the settlements does not seem likely. An inclusive state which guarantees all freedom of religion may be the only practical option.
There should be one state and it is called: Israel. Stop interfering with G'd's wishes. The land of Canaan was promised to the Children of Israel.
And they say Zionism is supposed to be a secular movement, huh?
Is saudi Arabia secular?
It is horrifying to read the hatred day after day on these Israel threads.
and this is supposed to be a liberal site...hmmf!
As the late William F. Buckley wrote, the American Left is the best place to look for anti-Semitism these days. While he was wrong on all but two issues, this is one of the two.
Well, some people aren't interested in the human rights of the Palestinians, so their anti-Palestinian hatred comes out. It is sad, though.
And some people are interested in Palestinian rights in Palestine but NOWHERE ELSE..
Such hypocrites go apestuff about anything happening in Palestine.
But ANY CRIME against people with P-nians by ANY Muslim country gets crickets and hurried change of subjects!!!
Therefore, such people only interested in Palestinains as a tool of attacks against Israel. Little else.
In addition, Palestinains who listen to characters who cynically use them in their hatred of all things Jewish and Israeli are often betrayed by the very same.
Such people ( and Syrians and Iranians) are famously willing to fight Israel... to the last Palestinian. As long they not doing the fighting themselves.
Woodytanaka,
Criticizing Israel treatment of Palestinains--99.9% of posts..
Criticizing Arab states and Hezbollah for harsh treatment of Palestinians-- 00.00.% of posts.
Conclusion:: Hypocrisy.
You see only hatred; I see people trying to bring the hardships of Palestinians to the attention of the world and discussing solutions and injustices that create resentment both in the Middle East and with those in the West like me who are appalled by the human rights violations Palestinians are subjected to day in and day out.
Like being forced out of their homes:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/01/world/middleeast/01jerusalem.html?_r=1&partner=MOREOVERNEWS&ei=5040
Noun verb anti-Semite. Yawn.
Skia,
Criticizing Israel treatment of Palestinains--7,000 posts .
Criticizing Arab states and Hezbollah for harsh treatment of Palestinians-- 0 posts.
Conclusion:: Total indifference to the plight millions of Palestinains.
Chaos resume
Criticizing Israel treatment of Palestinains--+/-7,000 posts .
Criticizing Arab states and Hezbollah for harsh treatment of Palestinians-- 0 posts.
Conclusion:: Total indifference to the plight millions of Palestinains.
There will be no two state solution and there will be no single state solution because there is no way Israeli Jews will allow to dissolve the Jewish nature of their state. Palestinians are doomed for a permanent inferior status until the world reacts to this in a similar way the world reacted to South African apartheid. In the meantime Israel is going to engineer for us to get into a war with Iran. We will be involved in a war spanning from Pakistan to Iraq and we will have forgotten the thorny Palestinian - Israeli issue. We will be too busy worrying about military draft that is surely coming. And after that we are going down in the same way Soviet Union went down - broke by overextension abroad with a sick economy at home. We won't have the money to pay for our soldiers return to our homeland.
I'm sorry to say that I think you have affairs laid out quite correctly. If Israel sparks a war with Iran, one way or another it will spell the end of American imperialism -- and if we're not careful, the US itself quite possibly. I think we'd be better off stepping back from this precipice with relative grace -- like the British did with their empire -- than letting it collapse all around us in a conflagration of economic decay and social unraveling, rather like what happened to the Roman Empire.
Absolutely. War with Iran would have disastrous consequences on Iraq and Afghanistan. Oil prices would rise sharply and the weak global economy would collapse. An attack on Iran could have an unpredictable and tragic outcome that could affect not only the region but the entire world.
"In the meantime Israel is going to engineer for us to get into a war with Iran."
The same nonsense has been making internet rumor mills for the last 9 years or so.
Such people are very much like the Apocalyptic crowd. Despite all evidence to the contrary, they believe in their iidee fixe.
The best defense is character assassination. ;-)
Here is a story that might lead a reasonable person to believe Israel wants us to attack Iran.
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200903u/netanyahu
And I don't think you would try to deny Israel's considerable influence within our government. Just witness the recent Jane Harman-AIPAC-Gonzales-FISA scandal.
Let's suppose I am wrong on this. Would you care to comment on the two state solution or some other peaceful resolution of the Israeli Palestinian conflict?
Wasn't the idee fixe you're refering to from 9 years ago, war with Iraq? Is the idee fixe, perhaps morphing its way on its own across the entire middle east?
Palestine- Israel for Idiots:
1. The Majority of inhabitants of Palestine and owners of 93% of the land before 1948 were Palestinian Christians and Muslims.
2. The UN in 1947 partitioned the land granting the minority Jews (mostly European immigrants) 55% of the land. The Palestinians rejected. Hence, the current problem exists for 6 decades.
3. Solution: One State where everyone shares equally in the land and their rights are protected under a new and secular government.
I don't know. I'd like to see the one state solution work but I think Israeli society has become so insular and xenophobic that I'm not sure it will be possible to get them to cooperate with an actual, just solution. I mean, just look at the 2002 Arab Peace Plan -- it hands Israel everything they've been demanding openly, provided they let go of the occupied territories and respect a set of borders that are virtually internationally recognized at this point. Israel refuses to do this outright, and the ethnic cleansing and colonization of the West Bank continues.
Few, if any of Israelis would like to join up with murd erers and/or thieves who run Palestinian politics right now.
There's zero chance referendum of joining Palestinian Authority or... horror... Hamas warlords would pass.
As usual you cannot be truthful. The Arab peace plan you always bring up does only one thing, it makes it certain Israel will again be attacked by an Arab army. Nothing else. No one with any sense at all puts much stock in the peace plan you always seem to love so much.
Hilarious post -- was it published first in "The Onion"?
The two-state solution was accepted by Jews/Israelis in 1947, but unanimously and violently rejected by the entire Arab world. With the exception of Jordan and Egypt, and some factions of Palestinian leadership, this rejection has been continuous and unbroken. Also, please note, that between 1948 and 1967, no Palestinian state was established by Arab nations and Palestinians that controlled the West Bank and Gaza. Secondly, twenty percent -- well over one million Israelis are Muslim Arabs. So, even if Israel were to cede all of the West Bank and East Jerusalem to a Palestinian state, why must those areas become Judenrein? There is no reason Jews should be forced to evacuate en masse, particularly from Jerusalem, where most Israelis living there are private home-owners and renters. There will eventually be a two-state solution, when creative and committed politicians arrive on all sides who are more concerned about a future for their people than dwelling on placing blame for what happened in the past.
No- Where do you get your facts from? the onion?
In 1948 Israel accepted the UN partition plan, the Arabs rejected the plan and attacked Israel.
Hilarious? We could do without snark, thank you.
"Secondly, twenty percent -- well over one million Israelis are Muslim Arabs. So, even if Israel were to cede all of the West Bank and East Jerusalem to a Palestinian state, why must those areas become Judenrein? There is no reason Jews should be forced to evacuate en masse, particularly from Jerusalem, where most Israelis living there are private home-owners and renters."
Hello? the Arabs in Israeli have a legal right to be there! Unlike many of the Israelis in Palestinian Territory!
Those Israelis who were legally in the Palestinian Territories before the Partition, can stay. Those squatting on property that belongs to Palestinians can be sent packing back to Israel!
But let it be understood that the "wall" will come down when the territory goes back to Palestinian ownership, and the hundreds of checkpoints and all the other "instruments" of Israeli military oppression will be sent home packing as well!!!
As usual your posting is filled with information that is far from being accurate or correct.
You know as I recall, Jews weren't so ready to "put the past behind us all" when it came to what was happening to Jews in Europe. Exactly why should we we do that for crimes against Palestinians?
Yet another comparison from you that is not applicable.
Soral, (On the Mead video)
(Sorry guys, I know it looks like I took over the thread, but I think it’s very important to address Soral’s posts and Mead's plan at the outset....I'm almost finished!)
Hopefully Parts 1,2 3 and 4 of my comments to you on the cleansing of Palestinians from the Territories will show up, in the meantime however I watched the video you posted and I have this to say:
The danger with this plan is that Israelis will approach it with their usual condescension and at best with a patronizing attitude towards Palestinians, trying to exploit both them and the plan itself to their advantage. You can bet they’ll exploit the plan so in essence they maintain the “center of the universe status” Mead mentions, as opposed relinquishing that status to the Palestinians.
The other thing is settlement dismantlement shouldn’t take place at the end of the plan, but all the way through… to prove to Palestinians that they can trust Israelis to deliver, and ensure that they won't stall this later or pull the rug under them and categorically refuse to honor this condition or merely not have the political guts to follow through on dismantlement. This is the “centerpiece” of any two-state solution plan and you can’t make it a condition to be fulfilled at the end; it’s too strategically important to the success or failure of the plan!
Continued…
Part. 2
Honestly, this plan is doomed like others before it. I believe the only things that will work are what worked in South Africa: Sanctions, Divestment and Boycott, and you know; everyone knows this is the key. Why delay this solution further? This worked successfully against South Africa, why can't it work here? This situation is more like South Africa and much less like Northern Ireland.
Why must we continue to coddle Israel and give them an excuse to stall? We are merely enabling their "habit" (clinging to the status quo) with the peace processes. Each peaceprocess has enabled them to tighten their grip more! U.S. support gives them the power to manipulate the whole world. The Mead plan is destined for that outcome.
This plan is also suspect; since it sounds somewhat like Netanyahu’s “economic plan”, except that in the end Israel will be expected to “deliver the goods, which they won’t! You can bet Netanyahu will exploit that similarity, and modify it until it becomes “his” plan, and it will fail miserably, cause greater mistrust and more resentment.
Mead’s plan is going to be used by Netanyahu and he will become a tool for Israel (if he’s not already). The only solution is the one that worked with South Africa. Mead is underestimating Israel’s resistance to sacrifice anything and their level of paranoia. If you remember anything from my posts, remember this: that grip will only be loosened by sanctions, divestment and boycotts, mark my words.
"You can bet they"ll exploit the plan"
Without believing that both sides will stick to their agreements, there's no foundation for discussion. Besides, that is why the US and EU moderate the discussions - and make sure that both sides stick to their agreements.
"The other thing is settlement dismantlement shouldn"t take place at the end of the plan, but all the way through"
This I agree with. It should be just as you say.
The fact that you are all debating this using "facts" that prove your point is exactly why this conflict has gone on for so long. There will always be a "fact" or "proof" that one side was justified to act in a violent way or one side is justified to defend themselves. You all are perpetuating the cycle of violence, frustration, and misunderstanding that has contined on for over 60 years.
The FACT of the matter is - people are dying on both sides and we need to stop looking at the past and "who hit who first" and focus on a violence-free and tolerant future!
The FACT is that G'd Gave this land to the Jews! Please do not question the words of G'd!
God is not in the real estate business!
Like I said before...people who are obviously biased should not be a part of the discussion...you are part of the problem - not the solution.
Do we need any more proof that Israel started its own wars because of religious extremism on their part?
Not unless you believe the U.N. is God!
If you believe Scripture, and it's true that God banished the Jews from their land, then only God can bring them back this land, not the U.N. and by cleansing the Palestinians from it.
Exactly why should the bronze-age myths of ignorant goat herds mean anything to anyone but the delusional. You can believe your ridiculous fiction, but you have some some nerve to expect anyone else to.
Soral,
I read most of your posts if not all in your discussion with Chaos. You stated that Palestinians were cleansed from their land in part; it was not a full cleansing; and you stated, as did Solaris who did so in a much more callous way that Jews were cleansed from Arab countries.
There is a difference, however. I condemn all forms of cleansing. At the same time, I believe that two wrongs will never make a right, which Solaris delusionally believes will. I call that mean-spirited and cruel vindication. Why should the Palestinians pay for the misdeeds and crimes of Germans and other Arabs with crimes committed against them?
That being said, while Palestinians were not totally cleansed, they being the long-suffering people they are, were and are subjected to intolerable oppression which would have broken the spirit of many a human being; therefore, the intent to cleanse is omni-present, but it's the spirit of Palestinians that is so hard to break that prevents the cleansing from being successful and total.
Continued…
There is also a big difference in that a lot of Jews who were supposedly "cleansed" in fact, left of their own volition. Israel actively invited Jewish immigrants in order to artificially bolster their Jewish majority and even when so far as to wage acts of terrorism that were pinned on local Jewish communities (as mcflard kindly pointed out, see the Lavon affair. Thanks man!)
This all documented in "The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine" by Ilan Pappe. Also, plans of expelling Palestinian villagers from their lands can be found in the archived details of Plan Dalet and in the minutes of the meetings of Ben Gurion and other Zionist leaders in the Red House in Tel Aviv from 1944-1948.
If they ever print part 2, you will see that I included that fact, but unfortunately the continuation is being delayed, as was Part 1. and then I'll have to wait for Part 2 to be Printed..."patience is a virtue".
Part 2.
You see in the case of the Jews historical data is unclear with regards to the cleansing of Jews from Arab states. In some cases they left because of the powerful influence of Zionism. Incentives both economic and aggressive were used to move Jews away from Arab states and into the Zionist fold.
Additionally, Jews are not as long-suffering as Palestinians. That is to say, while they were never really welcomed as full-fledged citizens they had certain rights and economic opportunities in other countries that Palestinians can never aspire to in their situation. It was specifically in Germany that eventually they suffered such intolerable oppression. However, up to then, they owned property, had employment and some owned businesses and were much better off than Palestinians are today.
So you see I can't accept the manner in which you diminish the situation of Palestinians as a few small cleansings here and there. No. Palestinians were forced to flee as refugees in the hundreds of thousands because they felt their lives were being threatened by the Zionists who were terrorizing them at the time. Then though the years, as you say, other cleansings happened but they add up, and when you throw into the mix the intolerable oppression they suffer which should have broken them by now and the massacres perpetrated on them at one time or another by Begin, Sharon and Olmert...you have an organized attempt at massive cleansing.
Continued…
Part 2. (corrected: Please post this version instead)
You see in the case of the Jews historical data is unclear with regards to the cleansing of Jews from Arab states. In some cases they left because of the powerful influence of Zionism. Incentives both economic and aggressive were used by Zionists to move Jews away from Arab states and into the Zionist fold.
Additionally, Jews are not as long-suffering as Palestinians. That is to say, while they were never really welcomed as full-fledged citizens they had certain rights and economic opportunities in other countries that Palestinians can never aspire to in their situation. It was specifically in Germany that eventually they suffered such intolerable oppression. However, up to then, they owned property, had employment and some owned businesses and were much better off than Palestinians are today.
So you see I can't accept the manner in which you reduce the situation of Palestinians to a few small cleansings here and there. No. Palestinians were forced to flee as refugees in the hundreds of thousands because they felt their lives were being threatened by the Zionists who were terrorizing them at the time. Then through the years, as you say, other cleansings happened but they add up, and when you throw into the mix the intolerable oppression they suffer which should have broken them by now and the massacres perpetrated on them through the years by Begin, Sharon and Olmert...you have an organized attempt at massive cleansing.
Continued…
Part 3.
I haven’t had time yet to watch the whole Mead video, but let me state this: The Jews were compensated for their suffering with a piece of land in 1948. As a result the indigenous people of that land suffered a grave injustice.
Seeing as the Palestinians were forced out through no fault of their own to give up so much to accommodate the Jews at the time; is it not right that the least the Zionists could do now is to give back everything that wasn’t allocated legally to them with the U.N. Partition?
What I see here, is a people who are extremely selfish and ungrateful and totally lacking in compassion. What I see here is a people who have absolutely no compassion whatsoever, when they suffered oppression themselves and then in order to survive inflicted an egregious injustice on Palestinians and today refuse to offer them the same compassion and generosity that was offered Israelis in 1948.
This is what I see; this is why I’m here, because in this regard, this injustice pales next to that suffered by the Zionists (and I’m not referring to the Nazi oppression), because in the end, the Zionists had a refuge given to them, were supported militarily and economically and were allowed to build a strong and viable state.
Continued…
"You see in the case of the Jews historical data is unclear with regards to the cleansing of Jews from Arab states."
To say historical data is unclear is, of course, a given. Historical data, by its nature, is rarely absolutely reliable. But to apply a blanket assertion that Arab Jews were happy to leave their homes, possessions, and friends behind when they left their former countries, is not fair. They were forced from their homes by circumstance every bit as much as the Palestinian Arab refugees.
"In some cases they left because of the powerful influence of Zionism. Incentives both economic and aggressive were used by Zionists to move Jews away from Arab states and into the Zionist fold."
Economic incentives for immigration were not great during 1948, due to the number of refugees arriving. Many were compensated with a tarpaulin and little else, until they could find work.
And these aggressive incentives, I have never heard of such things? What exactly do you believe was done aggressively, and how often was it done?
I intend to respond to the rest of your posts here, but I won't be able to until tomorrow.
"Additionally, Jews are not as long-suffering as Palestinians."
I do not think this will be a successful line of argumentation for you to pursue. Allow us to leave it at that.
"So you see I can't accept the manner in which you reduce the situation of Palestinians to a few small cleansings here and there."
As I have said with chaos below, I say there was not a complete ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from what is now Israel because there are over a million Palestinian Arabs living within Israel proper today. If there had been a full-scale ethnic cleansing, like other incidents of ethnic cleansing elsewhere in the world, there would be very few Palestinians left in Israel, but this is not the case.
This does not reduce the responsibility of those early Zionist partisans fighters who did, on distinct, recorded occasions, destroy Palestinian Arab villages. I am thinking most specifically of Deir Yassin, as that is the most heinous, clear-cut case. Other recorded instances of the expulsion of Palestinians occurred in Tiberias, Acre, and Jaffa, for example. However the expulsions were not entirely one-sided - for example, Jews were expelled from the Jewish village of Hebron during that same period. I am not equating the two sides generally, but this was not a completely one-sided conflict. Further, the vast majority of the 'cleansings' occurred during the 1948 war. And yes, I agree: most Palestinian Arabs and Jews who became refugees fled their homes, and were not physically forced from them.
"Why should the Palestinians pay for the misdeeds and crimes of Germans and other Arabs with crimes committed against them?"
This is a very difficult question. I suppose I begin by saying they need not have. Things might have been different.
Sure, there is some nominal compensation given from Germany now, but there can never be compensation for the murdered. So, so many. There can never be compensation of a value equal to those lives. Nor can there be compensation for a hundred generations of exile, of abuse, of murder, of forced conversion. I bring this up not to beg for sympathy for Jews, but to begin to answer your question. Because as your question is valid, so too is the following one: Why should Jews (and here I speak not of Israelis but of Jews) pay for the cruelty and hatred the world has shown them? Why? Surely they were not guilty of some grand crime to warrant their experiences. I can think of no just cause. I can think of no adequate compensation. What is to be done? If justice exists, where is it?
Fact: Peel Commission 80% of Palestine--Rejected by Arabs. Violence and support of WW2 Germany. Defeated. Next offer is less.
Fact: U.N.Partition 65% of Palestine--Rejected by Arabs. Resort to violence and wars.Defeated. Offer is less. Fact:
U.N. Resolution 242. 1967 PLO rejected the offer. U.N. record Oct.15, 1968, Arafat speech:..."the implementation of said resolution will lead to the loss of every hope for the establishment of peace and security in Palestine and the Middle East region." Resort to violence, became Soviet Union puppet. Defeated. in Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Kuwait, Israel. Next offer is less.
Fact: David Accord --20% of Palestine---Rejected. by Palestinains.. Resort to violence. Next offer will be smaller. Bank on it. But Palestinians and their AlAkbar failed to notice the trend. And spout the same fantasies with no connection to reality.
U.N.Resolution 242 talks for "just settlement of the refugee problem." Fact:There is NO mention of Palestinains. Fact:There NO mention of right of return. Fact: P.L.O rejected this resolution on the floor of U.N. Here's actual U.N website document. Read it.
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/240/94
I don't care for which came first (the chicken or the egg) question and who started what. The bottom line G'd gave this land to the children of Israel! There were wars and the Arabs lost. Israel won...tough luck!
Gee...you're not biased or anything, cohen238765?
And we're supposed to believe that violent Islamists are the only religious extremists that are a threat to world peace?
Rejection of U.N partition paln was an abysmal mistake by Arabs in Palestine and ME.
In their wildest dreams they though that they will be defeated by the Jews-- people they always assumed where weak through the centuries of Dhimmitude. BIG mistake.
How many times are you going to repeat that lie? Israel had moved its troops beyond the partition before many of the Palestinian's neighboring armies ever got involved. Furthermore, it was the stated intention of Zionists to claim the /entire/ territory -- east even of the river Jordan, the whole mandate -- as Jewish-exclusive territory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionist_zionism
The Arab countries voted against the partition plan but it was Israel who broke it first -- they declared their independence and mobilized against the Palestinians as the British pulled out, fatigued from attacks by the likes of Irgun. Newly minted Israel cleared out hundreds of Palestinian villages, forcibly, and even marched on Jerusalem in defiance of UN 181.
You can keep repeating your propaganda. I can always keep repeating the facts.
You have never utilized a fact, it hasn't happened. Israel accepted the partition, the Arabs did not. The Arabs attacked us, that is the history of the region. I understand the facts do not support your hatred of Israel, but the truth is we have never started a war. Never.
Some historical facts:
You are forgetting to mention that Palestine at that time was ruled by Brits who made sure to keep the balance of power in favor of the Jewish immigrants! The state of Israel was established by highly trained European Jews many of whom had served in the British army. They faced mostly a bunch of poorly armed Palestinian farmers.
Your account of the history of the region is fatally flawed. In simpler terms, its just plain wrong. Israel did not have anything closer to a well-equipeed military, the Arabs had better weapons and more of them. Arab soldiers, not farmers, attacked Israel as soon as we declared our independence.
This is what Arabs did NOT agree to in 1947.
Map of Partition.
http://mideastweb.org/un_palestine_partition_map_1947.htm
An abysmal mistake in a long line of abysmal mistakes.
The first shots were fired by Israelis, at Palestinian villagers. No amount of propaganda will cover up the Nakba, sir.
As usual you have mis-stated the start of Israel's War of Independence.
No amount of pernicious ignorance can obscure the fact that Arabs REJECTED U.N. PARTITION and invited in foreign Arab occupation forces--
never losing an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
Thanks for that moledrama:
Now facts:
See below what Arabs REJECTED in 1948. This is an official U.N. map
Map of Partition. http://mideastweb.org/un_palestine_partition_map_1947.htm
A catastrophically wrong decision.
n their greed they rejected an astonishing deal!!!!
Their solution? inviting in foreign occupiers. What lack of leadership!
And despite hundreds of thousands of terrorist attacks against Jews all over the world from 1938-2009, they can't even get back what they threw away some 60 years ago.
There's justice.
One of the reasons a one-state solution will not work as a solution to this conflict is that it is not acceptable to all parties, most particularly to Israelis. In order to implement a lasting solution to the conflict, the popular opinions of all parties involved must be engaged and convinced. cfr's Walter Russell Mead wrote a great piece about this very issue:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/18108/change_they_can_believe_in.html?breadcrumb=%2Fbios%2F3495%2Fwalter_russell_mead
There's a video of him talking about it as well. Please check it out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPvhzq696kw
Finally, a Palestinian supporter that offers a good debate point,
not the usual rehashing of bankrupt and factually wrong invective prevalent here.
Thank you, Soral.
Oh yeah, right, let's debate that for another 60 years until there's nothing left for the Palestinians to survive on. Let's have intellectual debate back and forth while a nation of millions is suffering more and more every day and losing more territory to the Israelis.
Pretty words, good intentions...but the road to he// is paved with good intentions. Israelis love to debate back and forth at their leisure while the lives of others hang in the balance. What a luxury they have! Intellectual, scholarly debate at the expense of the misery of their neighbors.
Pipe dreams might work nicely in an alternate universe, but here on earth, actions speak louder than words.
"Oh yeah, right, let's debate that for another 60 years until there's nothing left for the Palestinians to survive on"
I'd rather Palestinians survived, but I don't think it's for lack of action that they are suffering - it is the lack of the correct actions being taken by all concerned. So of course the thing is to determine which are the correct actions to take: debate. This is why Jamal Dajani wrote his piece, no? I would really appreciate your taking the time to read Walter Mead's article from cfr and tell me what you think about it.
"Israelis love to debate back and forth at their leisure while the lives of others hang in the balance."
Most people like to debate all sorts of things while their lives do not hang in the balance, and not only Israelis. Though indeed, many Israelis have died in this conflict, so it behooves them to think very hard about what to do. Indeed I imagine the debate is even livelier on the Palestinian side. But, point taken - Israelis are known to be lively debaters.
"the road to he// is paved with good intentions"
Not to me it isn't. Good intentions produce good things more often than the alternative.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
