How Would You Solve the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?

[RayManKiller3]

I will make it easy on you:
What has Israel offered to make peace?
How have they tried to resolve the conflict?

Here is the only "offer" I have seen in the last yew years...



I am sorry but this is not a peace agreement it is asking the Palestinians to surrender and as a reward they will get to pick over the carcass of the West Bank for the bits that Israel doesn't want , to deliberately offer unacceptable terms is never going to bring peace nor should it ever be considered genuine.

So other than this sham of an offer what is Israel doing for peace?

Please note everything I said in my post. That may not be a great deal for Palestine, but it actually is a smoke a mirror trick to show that they are "trying", this works despite what many of you say for average people. Considering Palestine rejects EVERYTHING Israel and the U.N offers, it shows they will not be reasonable to average people. Like I keep telling you guys, people who actually research these events with such passion are in the minority.

I keep stating what what they need to do and why they need to do it in order to gain support from other countries; this would even put pressure on U.S backing of Israel. They don't do this however, they chose to alienate the countries that help them by resorting to violence against people who are innocent in the matter.


Off-topic:
Will you guys stop quoting my statement lol. I am not debating whether it is real or not. I am just stating that if you want to say that religion is the "cause" for man's problems and the deaths of people, then you must say the same thing for many other things. If you truely believe in that, you must also agree that money, gold, and other forms of material value is the "cause" of it as well, instead of the person that decides to do their actions in it's name.

While I would agree with the quote seno put out, the last statement of it is silly. Only religion allows good people to do bad things, while almost agreeable at first view, it is completely flawed and absent of the view of true religious people. When I say religious people, I am talking about those who not only talk, but walk in their view. Sheesh, I don't get what is so hard to understand about it lol. People will make mistakes even if they are "good" people, the difference is if they will try to better it. That is how religion works.

As for how or why religion was created if your views are correct, is something that I and no one else can disprove. You can't at this very moment disprove religion, just like we can't disprove evolution. They both have flaws, and the flaw of which, is what actually started life.

Like I said though, Whatever, we all have views on it (because none of it can be disproven or proven to be true or not).

 

[MontyB]

I keep stating what what they need to do and why they need to do it in order to gain support from other countries; this would even put pressure on U.S backing of Israel. They don't do this however, they chose to alienate the countries that help them by resorting to violence against people who are innocent in the matter.

Tell me do you honestly think that an Israeli missile hitting an apartment is only killing militants, also it could be argued that any country that requires its men and woman to serve really has no "innocent" bystanders.

The fact is that if you were honest you would realise that both sides are doing equally bad acts but only one of them is doing it on occupied territory.

As for getting other countries support well they already have that 112 out of 192 nations have formally recognised Palestine and many of the rest operate diplomatic missions within the Palestinian territories but the problem is that the US veto's anything and everything even remotely pro-Palestinian in the UN so they can not get formal recognition.

However if they can get 9 of the 15 votes in the Security Council and no veto it will go to the General Assembly (which it is widely believed they would pass comfortably), at this point it is expected that they have 8 votes with 2 uncertain and surprisingly the US is doing all it can to prevent the Palestinians getting those 9 votes so as far as I can tell the US has chosen its side and therefore should be ruled out of the peace process as it is not impartial.

 

[senojekips]

Considering Palestine rejects EVERYTHING Israel and the U.N offers, it shows they will not be reasonable to average people. Like I keep telling you guys, people who actually research these events with such passion are in the minority.

The reason some of us do research our facts is because we are sick of outright lies, rumour and innuendo being used as an excuse to support the Zionist agenda. All you are saying is that "Average people" are no more than fools and gossip mongers, too damned lazy and self opinionated to find out what is actually going on and sort fact from fiction.

While I would agree with the quote seno put out, the last statement of it is silly. Only religion allows good people to do bad things, while almost agreeable at first view, it is completely flawed.

I don't think you understand what is being implied

What is meant by the final statement is that religion denies that their evil doers are bad and views their "sinners" as good people, not because they are in fact any different to any other wrong doer, but because they are religious and have confessed their sins or begged their god's forgiveness. Sooo,.... without religion these people would be seen in their true light as bad people, it is only religion that excuses them.

That is what is meant by the last line of my quote.

 

[RayManKiller3]

The reason some of us do research our facts is because we are sick of outright lies, rumour and innuendo being used as an excuse to support the Zionist agenda. All you are saying is that "Average people" are no more than fools and gossip mongers, too damned lazy and self opinionated to find out what is actually going on and sort fact from fiction.

Correct, that is what I am saying (except the blatant attacks on them). I won't call them fools, but they are relying on gossip most of the time. I won't say it is laziness either, as we all have lives. This is why the average person relies on the minority to give them their view. For this case, in U.S, the public agrees with Israel.

I don't think you understand what is being implied

What is meant by the final statement is that religion denies that their evil doers are bad and views their "sinners" as good people, not because they are in fact any different to any other wrong doer, but because they are religious and have confessed their sins or begged their god's forgiveness. Sooo,.... without religion these people would be seen in their true light as bad people, it is only religion that excuses them.

That is what is meant by the last line of my quote.

I am not sure if you read what I said, but I already answered this. That is the reason it is flawed.

If you want me to I can re-state what I said that tells you why I don't agree with the quote. Like I said, it is agreeable at first view, but if you look deeper down it is false. I am not sure why you don't understand that.

 

[RayManKiller3]

Tell me do you honestly think that an Israeli missile hitting an apartment is only killing militants, also it could be argued that any country that requires its men and woman to serve really has no "innocent" bystanders.

The fact is that if you were honest you would realise that both sides are doing equally bad acts but only one of them is doing it on occupied territory.

As for getting other countries support well they already have that 112 out of 192 nations have formally recognised Palestine and many of the rest operate diplomatic missions within the Palestinian territories but the problem is that the US veto's anything and everything even remotely pro-Palestinian in the UN so they can not get formal recognition.

However if they can get 9 of the 15 votes in the Security Council and no veto it will go to the General Assembly (which it is widely believed they would pass comfortably), at this point it is expected that they have 8 votes with 2 uncertain and surprisingly the US is doing all it can to prevent the Palestinians getting those 9 votes so as far as I can tell the US has chosen its side and therefore should be ruled out of the peace process as it is not impartial.

There is a difference between purposely aiming at bystanders and aiming at armed forces. The arguement that you stated in your first paragraph is too broad and it allows a country to use whatever method they can to kill civillians. The arguement therefore is devoid of any value in human life.

I already stated both of them are not in the right. I have stated why support is not in favor of Palestine.

As far as I have read, going to the security council for a vote would not pass in Palestine's favor, especially with a U.S promised veto.

I think it would be much more beneficial to Palestine if they negotiated a treaty with Israel. If they do get their independent country with the land in the 1967 resolution, it would hold them responsible for any violent acts done. What if war between them happen? The same darn thing, Israel will occupy them and no one would be able to dispute it.

The fact Israel isn't budging to make a "fair" treaty, shows they have no worry about the U.N actually forcing Israel to accept Palestine.

 

[MontyB]

I think it would be much more beneficial to Palestine if they negotiated a treaty with Israel. If they do get their independent country with the land in the 1967 resolution, it would hold them responsible for any violent acts done. What if war between them happen? The same darn thing, Israel will occupy them and no one would be able to dispute it.

The fact Israel isn't budging to make a "fair" treaty, shows they have no worry about the U.N actually forcing Israel to accept Palestine.

The problem is that there will never be an agreement with Israel as long as there is land to be grabbed, Israel has it made in the shade right now it can do as it likes and hide behind the US veto to prevent anyone doing anything to stop them.

So the question is who is really the intransigent party here, if the US veto was removed Palestine would receive its recognition so really the only road block to peace in the middle east is the USA.

You keep arguing that Palestine must negotiate with Israel but if the only real deal on the table is "you will give in to us, we will take what we want, control your borders and water supplies and give you a token border that we can change depending on our needs" then it becomes unrealistic that peace will ever be achieved which is Israel's real intention.

Fortunately time is not on Israel's side any longer, the US is a waning power, and several of its neighbours are building professional armies with the numbers to match so one of two things will happen:
1) They will bite off more than they can chew and get hammered by an angry Turk or Egyptian.
2) Iran will supply some crazed nutter with either bio or nuclear weapons and things will get messy.

But either way Israel will come to an agreement but it will cost them a lot more than the Palestinians are asking for right now.

Either way I really don't care as I am quite happy for the whole damn region to be turned into a glass counter top.

But hey at least the world knows what it is dealing with...
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/sarkozy-tells-obama-netanyahu-liar-t93206.html

 

[senojekips]

If you want me to I can re-state what I said that tells you why I don't agree with the quote. Like I said, it is agreeable at first view, but if you look deeper down it is false. I am not sure why you don't understand that.

I don't need you to re state it as it would do nothing. What you need to do is understand the meaning of what was said. Without Religion the "sinners" would be seen as evil, which they are. Only because of the religious policy of Forgiveness are they seen as "good". Now what's so hard about that?

I can keep explaining it to you until the cows come home, but it is beyond my ability to understand it for you.

Correct, that is what I am saying (except the blatant attacks on them). I won't call them fools, but they are relying on gossip most of the time. I won't say it is laziness either, as we all have lives. This is why the average person relies on the minority to give them their view. For this case, in U.S, the public agrees with Israel.

In that case they are fools, as it is perfectly normal to be able to "have a life" without relying on false information. The truth is no harder to find than lies, you just have to be willing accept it.

I'd say that the average Joe in the US supports Israel because a corrupt political system tells him it is right, and he's too lazy to question their decision or look at why they make these statements. Look at the WMD fiasco, there were no WMDs, and the government knew it, but they did have a political agenda it go into Iraq, so you went, and you lost thousands of your countries most valuable young men and women, twice the number killed in 9/11. Not to mention the financial loss to the US taxpayers and the even larger number if innocent Iraqis.

 

[VDKMS]

Off-topic:
Will you guys stop quoting my statement lol. I am not debating whether it is real or not. I am just stating that if you want to say that religion is the "cause" for man's problems and the deaths of people, then you must say the same thing for many other things. If you truely believe in that, you must also agree that money, gold, and other forms of material value is the "cause" of it as well, instead of the person that decides to do their actions in it's name.

I would call it Power and Self-interest.

While I would agree with the quote seno put out, the last statement of it is silly. Only religion allows good people to do bad things, while almost agreeable at first view, it is completely flawed and absent of the view of true religious people. When I say religious people, I am talking about those who not only talk, but walk in their view. Sheesh, I don't get what is so hard to understand about it lol. People will make mistakes even if they are "good" people, the difference is if they will try to better it. That is how religion works.

There's a difference between honest people using religion to enhance their lives and the top clerics. It's like politics. An experienced politician once said to me: at local level you swim among goldfish, at the top you swim among the sharks.

 

[VDKMS]

So other than this sham of an offer what is Israel doing for peace?

I have not yet read the full article myself but "The documents were obtained by Al-Jazeera", not exactly a scource to be doubted by anti-Israeli minded people.

Here's the wikipedia link : Palestine Papers

 

[VDKMS]

Tell me do you honestly think that an Israeli missile hitting an apartment is only killing militants, also it could be argued that any country that requires its men and woman to serve really has no "innocent" bystanders.

The Israeli Military is a proffessional army who do not promote targeting civilians. We all know that mistakes happen and we also know that , under certain conditions, civilian casualties are allowed. What is NOT allowed however is targeting a civilian town or civilians directly.

The fact is that if you were honest you would realise that both sides are doing equally bad acts but only one of them is doing it on occupied territory.

I agree with the former but the term "occupied territory" is generally accepted but in fact disputable.

As for getting other countries support well they already have that 112 out of 192 nations have formally recognised Palestine and many of the rest operate diplomatic missions within the Palestinian territories but the problem is that the US veto's anything and everything even remotely pro-Palestinian in the UN so they can not get formal recognition.

This is the veto reason : "Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians - not us - who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them." - Barack Obama.

 

[MontyB]

I agree with the former but the term "occupied territory" is generally accepted but in fact disputable.

By whom?
The only people refusing to accept that it is not occupied territory is Israel.

This is the veto reason : "Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must live side by side. Ultimately, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians - not us - who must reach agreement on the issues that divide them." - Barack Obama.

Quite honestly I think that is a smoke screen it has become abundantly clear that neither the US nor Israel are negotiating in good faith (the continued settlement building proves this, why would build settlements on land you were going to have to give back and why would you be funding those settlements?), they are coming up with offers so they can claim to be trying reach a compromise knowing full well those offers are not sustainable or acceptable which lets them continue to take more and more land giving the Palestinians less and less negotiating power.

This is why Palestine is applying to the UN, it gives them a firm base to negotiate from and why it is so unacceptable to Israel and the US, no one is suggesting that passing the UN is going to create a Palestinian state but what it will do is curtail Israeli expansion into that area allowing for genuine negotiations to take place.

 

[VDKMS]

By whom?
The only people refusing to accept that it is not occupied territory is Israel.

Eugene V. (Victor Debs) Rostow , influential legal scholar and public servant, was Dean of Yale Law School, and served as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs under President Lyndon B. Johnson.
"The West Bank and the Gaza Strip were never parts of Jordan, and Jordan's attempt to annex the West Bank was not generally recognized and has now been abandoned. The two parcels of land are parts of the Mandate that have not yet been allocated to Jordan, to Israel, or to any other state, and are a legitimate subject for discussion - The New Republic, October 21, 1991. Resolved: are the settlements legal? Israeli West Bank policies"

Julius Stone, was Challis Professor of Jurisprudence and International Law at the University of Sydney from 1942 to 1972, and thereafter a visiting Professor of Law at the University of New South Wales and concurrently Distinguished Professor of Jurisprudence and International Law at the Hastings College of Law, University of California.

Former US State Department Legal Advisor Stephen Schwebel, later head of the International Court of Justice in the Hague, wrote in 1970 regarding Israel's case: "Where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the state which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title."

Quite honestly I think that is a smoke screen it has become abundantly clear that neither the US nor Israel are negotiating in good faith (the continued settlement building proves this, why would build settlements on land you were going to have to give back and why would you be funding those settlements?), they are coming up with offers so they can claim to be trying reach a compromise knowing full well those offers are not sustainable or acceptable which lets them continue to take more and more land giving the Palestinians less and less negotiating power.

They dismantled the settlements in the Sinai and Gaza for a good peace accord. Unfortunately Hamas was not that peacefull. The Israelis will never abandon all the settlements in the West Bank, but with a good peace accord they will dismantle some of them. The settlements are their bargaining power.

This is why Palestine is applying to the UN, it gives them a firm base to negotiate from and why it is so unacceptable to Israel and the US, no one is suggesting that passing the UN is going to create a Palestinian state but what it will do is curtail Israeli expansion into that area allowing for genuine negotiations to take place.

I don't understand why the Palestinians didn't try that before, maybe because Hamas vehemently opposed such action and/or US veto?

Why didn't the Palestinians created a state while the territories were annexed by Jordan (pre 1967)?

Many mistakes were made and many opportunities lost (by both sides) with as a result 2 generations down the drain.

Obama wants an agreement with the 1967 borders but he does not have the guts to enforce them, maybe because of the pro-israeli lobbyists in the US, the descendants from the Jews who were expelled by the Arabs! And if he loses the next presidential elections I think another extra 4 years will be added to the problem. It's a quagmire.

 

[mohamedwa]

whether the world likes it or not the only solution for an EVERLASTING PERMENANT PEACE is the disappearance of one of the 2 sides.....this idea may not please many people but its a reality.....( just apply some of the abstract logic and u'll see it urself )

 

[RayManKiller3]

whether the world likes it or not the only solution for an EVERLASTING PERMENANT PEACE is the disappearance of one of the 2 sides.....this idea may not please many people but its a reality.....( just apply some of the abstract logic and u'll see it urself )

Everyone already knows the only way to a permanent peace is to have a 1 state, however, you are ignoring the facts of how long it will take for that to work. This is why a 2 state solution is best for the long run. It has less problems and less a chance of backfiring. We would give them both their own state and see if they gain enough peace to become a 1 state.

You rather us give the land to Palestine? Not to be offensive, but I can't put my trust in an Arab government in that area right now. This is why, this will never be considered an option by any sane person. It has too much risk for a humanitarian crisis, which people will expect the U.N (U.S mainly) to help out on.

 

[senojekips]

I can't put my trust in an Arab government in that area right now.

But you can trust a regime that has kicked, beaten and murdered their way into the world's record book for condemnatory UN resolutions?

Ahh,.. your brilliant logic staggers belief,... and some people would say that man's intelligence and cognitive power is supposedly improving.

You must be "the exception that proves the rule". :lol:

 

[mmarsh]

Everyone already knows the only way to a permanent peace is to have a 1 state, however, you are ignoring the facts of how long it will take for that to work. This is why a 2 state solution is best for the long run. It has less problems and less a chance of backfiring. We would give them both their own state and see if they gain enough peace to become a 1 state.

You rather us give the land to Palestine? Not to be offensive, but I can't put my trust in an Arab government in that area right now. This is why, this will never be considered an option by any sane person. It has too much risk for a humanitarian crisis, which people will expect the U.N (U.S mainly) to help out on.

Everyone agrees with a two state solution, everyone except one person, who unfortunately just happens to be the PM of Israel whom (and his extremist followers) is bitterly opposed to the idea.

 

[84RFK]

Everyone agrees with a two state solution, everyone except one person, who unfortunately just happens to be the PM of Israel whom (and his extremist followers) is bitterly opposed to the idea.

Thing is, the same Israeli PM and the majority of his followers doesn't agree on a 1 state solution either, as long as that 1 state solution includes the people who live in the Palestinian territories... :bang:

 

[senojekips]

Everyone agrees with a two state solution, everyone except one person, who unfortunately just happens to be the PM of Israel whom (and his extremist followers) is bitterly opposed to the idea.

Thing is, the same Israeli PM and the majority of his followers doesn't agree on a 1 state solution either, as long as that 1 state solution includes the people who live in the Palestinian territories... :bang:

I like both of these posts because they highlight the simple truth of the matter,... The Israelis don't want peace, they never have, and never will.

 

[84RFK]

I like both of these posts because they highlight the simple truth of the matter,... The Israelis don't want peace, they never have, and never will.

Ah, that's not entirely correct mate, there are Israelis who have a genuine wish for peace, quite a lot of them in fact.
Problem is that those are divided in two different fractions, the ones who wants a peace including the neighbours in the Palestinian territories, and the ones who wants a peace without any disturbing Arab elements...
Since genocide and extermination camps doesn't sound like an acceptable solution to most people of Jewish descendant, same goes for chasing the Palestinians into a dispora, the latter has chosen to side with the ones who don't actually want peace.
Together these elements makes up a majority in Israeli politics.

The fact that Israel is based partially on democracy will then give an impression of a state of Israel not being interested in peace.

I still believe the first step towards peace would be a two state solution based on the pre-67 borders, and Jerusalem under international control.

 

[mmarsh]

I like both of these posts because they highlight the simple truth of the matter,... The Israelis don't want peace, they never have, and never will.

I don't completely agree with this because there are those in Israel (such as those in Labour Party) that really do realize that Israel cannot survive longterm by being an international pariah. Israel does have a Dove movement which routinely criticizes the governments treatment of Palestinians.

As you all know, I am originally from New York, some (not all, or even most) of the ultra conservative Jews that live in certain areas of the Bronx, Brooklyn and Queens views are simply terrifying. I used to watch these guys on cable access TV late at night. They can be summed up as this: They don't care much for non-Jews (except for the Israeli-hawks) and despise other sects of judiasm (whom they view as weak and cowardly), and their views when it comes to Arabs is something out of Mein Kampf. That's not an exaggeration. I have heard them discuss the finer points of mass deportation, mass castration and even extermination of those Arabs who refuse to leave.

And its these people that are currently supporting the currently Israel policy both in the US and in Israel.