How Would You Solve the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict?

senojekips said:
And did you ever stop to think,... If the Israelis would have abided by some of the conditional UN Resolutions (194 and 273 etc) and the conditions outlined in the Balfour Declaration Instead if thumbing their nose at the world,... There never would have ever been a Hamas, or an Al Qaeda, Black September or a 9/11?

Some people are so shortsighted and one eyed, that they couldn't see the back of their hand on a clear day.

Ohhh,... and you still have not answered my initial question, have you,... you've waffled and weaved around the edges but avoided answering.. so I ask again, "Would you need a religious leader to tell you that letting someone steal your land, is a bad idea", Yes or No?
Click to expand...

Sorry mate, but you are barking at the wrong tree.

Had all your "If's" been true, then count Bernadotte had probably been awarded a Nobel peace prize and died peacefully of old age, the state of Israel would have shared a (hopefully peacefull) border with the state of Palestina, Jerusalem would have been an open city governed by some kind of international entity, and the arab states would have had a significantly higher level of education and developement than we see today.

But the leaders of the western world back then suffered from LMF and it never happened.

As for your question...No I wouldn't need a religious leader to tell me that letting someone steal my land is a bad idea.

And I wouldn't need a religious leader to tell me to fight back.

But I would have needed a very charismatic and inspiring religious leader to convinse me that I should turn into a suicide-bomber, or start taking on tanks armed with nothing than rocks and the faith of Allah.
 
Out of interest would it be possible to look at Jerusalem along the lines of the Vatican, a city state in its own right administered by both parties (I know that getting an agreement on anything in the region is difficult to impossible but maybe it is an option).
 
MontyB said:
Out of interest would it be possible to look at Jerusalem along the lines of the Vatican, a city state in its own right administered by both parties (I know that getting an agreement on anything in the region is difficult to impossible but maybe it is an option).
Click to expand...

That would off course be the cheapest solution, but it's doomed to fail.
They have all ready tried it, and we all know how that ended.

I believe the answer is to let a neutral third party administer the city, and to keep it open to all parties.
 
84RFK said:
Sorry mate, but you are barking at the wrong tree.

Had all your "If's" been true, then count Bernadotte had probably been awarded a Nobel peace prize and died peacefully of old age, the state of Israel would have shared a (hopefully peacefull) border with the state of Palestina, Jerusalem would have been an open city governed by some kind of international entity, and the arab states would have had a significantly higher level of education and developement than we see today.
Click to expand...
The reason my "Ifs" weren't true, is demonstrated in my other posts outlining the terror attacks by the Israelis upon innocent Palestinians, and their subsequent refusals to abide by UN conditional resolutions for the formation of Israel, plus a list of War crimes committed in an ongoing effort to support their terrorist policies.

84RFK said:
But the leaders of the western world back then suffered from LMF and it never happened.
Click to expand...
That is without a doubt the truest statement you ever made, and our problems continue only because of that LMF is still firmly entrenched.

84RFK said:
As for your question...No I wouldn't need a religious leader to tell me that letting someone steal my land is a bad idea.

And I wouldn't need a religious leader to tell me to fight back.

But I would have needed a very charismatic and inspiring religious leader to convinse me that I should turn into a suicide-bomber, or start taking on tanks armed with nothing than rocks and the faith of Allah.
Click to expand...
In which case my statement that you over exaggerated the role played by the clerics was correct. Now I fully realise that I seem to have made a big deal of this, but it was not as you may think just to "win the point" I honestly feel that it is hundreds of pieces of misinformation such as this, being used to unfairly demonize the Palestinians. Yes, I also realise that the Clerics do whip up dissent among a percentage of their followers, and they are far from blameless, but overstating their true importance is poor propaganda that weakens our cause.

The fact that these young Palestinians are willing to knowingly sacrifice their lives, is merely an accurate measure of their utter desperation. They don't blow themselves up for the thrill of it,.. it is just one of the few weapons they have that they know makes a real impression upon their enemy and their enemy absolutely hates it, not so much for the casualties it causes, but because they know that in spite of their power in other spheres, they don't have any real answer to it.
 
Last edited:
@ Senojekips
I'm getting the feeling that we're both on the same track, heading in the same direction, but on different set of trains...

And we're both making the mistake of simplifying the matter, it's far more complicated.

My point is, the state of Israel is partly founded on terror, but also by hard cash.
A fact often overlooked is that Zionist organisations based in the UK started buying farmland in the Palestine right after the WW I, in some cases even before that, and they continued untill the British mandate administration applied som brakes there.
Most of the productive farmland they bought was owned by Turks, mostly bankiers and investors, who no longer had access to their property.
And the poor Palestinians living there were just workers who owned nothing.

Later on the same Zionists started buying patches of farmland belonging to the Palestinian farmes who actually owned some property.

The strange thing here is that while the Turks were governing Palestine (untill the end of WW I) there was little to no friction between "arabs" and jews, they were living in peace and basicly minding their own lives.

The unrest in the 1930's started when the zionist organisations started relocating jewish settlers on their property in Palestine, with far more financial backing than any "arab" farmer could ever dream about.
Then came WW II and we all know what happened, and the LMF is still a major problem.

Now back to the point of Islamic clerics...
While the Fatah was busy filling theri pockets, and figthing Israel, the Hamas rose as the only alternative who cared for the population, while fighting Israel at the same time.
That effectivly drowned any possible voice advocating moderation and negotiation, and we made this happen by supporting the Hamas with humanitarian aid.

The Hamas is a religious organisation, they recruit people on religious grounds, and as bitterness and hate has turned out to be the best way of recruiting, they fuel that hate and bitterness to the maximum.
Providing their followers with a false hope that they can actually make Israel disappear, and that by trying (and failing) the committed followers is granted a ticket to Paradise.
That off course is a struggle the Islamic world will support.

Did I ever say that Israel is innocent here?
Well, they're far from innocent, by expanding into the Palestine territories from the very start, and applying the "big hammer" on every small problem they encounter, they are fueling the hate.

Enforcing the borders of pre 67 and keeping the two parts in check while giving both unlimited access to Jerusalem is the only way I can think of.
That could provide Israel the safety required, and it could give the Palestinians the feeling that they have actually gained something by agreeing to peace.
 
84RFK said:
@ Senojekips
I'm getting the feeling that we're both on the same track, heading in the same direction, but on different set of trains...
Click to expand...
I'll settle for that.

You say that, "We simplify the matter", like it's a bad thing? I feel that the bogeyman here, is over complication, which diverts people's attention from the otherwise obvious facts of the matter. This is done deliberately because complicated problems are seen to need complicated solutions, and those people who make it complicated, want others to give up, because it's too complicated. This is why they continue to destroy Palestinian infrastructure, steal the land and occupy it, replacing it with their own infrastructure. They feel that this further complicates any possibility of returning it to it's owners.

The facts of the matter are really quite simple, but unfortunately they will cause pain for a few. Here we have 5 million people in a postage stamp sized country, the government of which displays about as much regard for world opinion as did Saddam Hussein,... whilst they have also developed WMD, and these nutters are effectively holding the world to ransom, just to get their own way.

Before any honest start can be made, certain people must be made to admit that, "No one had the "right" to give Palestine to anyone, other than to return it to it's legitimate occupants".
 
Last edited:
What do you do on the playground when two little tykes are going at it over one toy?

Governments behave like pre-school age children, just with expanded vocabularies. Personally if they can't learn to share, were I to have the power, I would remove the toy... in this case no one gets that strip of sand and rock, I'd make it uninhabitable for 1000 years. But then, that's just me, I tend to cut straight to the quick.
 
moshe said:
I favor a 2 state solution ... the Arabs want a state ... then divide Syria and Damascus.
Click to expand...
I realise that you never quite got past second grade, but Damascus is in Syria in fact it is the capital.

images
 
Yo anti troll, trolls have a reputation for total ignorance. Ever hear of "Greater Syria"? No not a new paper expert like yourself!!! Arabs believe Greater Syria includes all of Lebanon, Israel, the Sinai desert, a junk of Jordan ... meaning specifically those parts of Samaria that Jordan nationalized before Israel opened up a can of woop ass on those comment removed by moderator in 1967.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes what amazes me is idiots who spray themselves in the face as you have done. Goyim have no shame.
 
moshe said:
Yes what amazes me is idiots who spray themselves in the face as you have done. Goyim have no shame.
Click to expand...
Goyim?... You really should have kept your eyes and ears open and your big mouth shut for a while. My Gt Grandfather migrated to Palestine from England, and lived there peacefully among his Arab neighbours from 1852 - 1898, I still have many Jewish relatives living there with whom I get on very well. I was a guest and celebrated Passover with my Aussie relatives in Melbourne three years ago, and have an open invitation to visit at any time.

I think that it's time for you to wipe your face,... idiot!
 
Last edited:
Idiot the word "goyim" means nations in Hebrew. Israel the Hebrew Bible refers to as "goy" singular. Ignorant drums make the loudest noise.
 
moshe said:
Idiot the word "goyim" means nations in Hebrew. Israel the Hebrew Bible refers to as "goy" singular. Ignorant drums make the loudest noise.
Click to expand...
I am well aware of the meaning, of the word Goy/im,... and the implication as you used it, (Non Jews have no shame).
moshe said:
---snip--- Goyim have no shame.
Click to expand...
If you tend to disagree, let's ask Grey Shadow what he thinks you were implying, he'd certainly be a better speaker of Hebrew than either you or I.

Your excuses and backdowns are even more childish than your logic supporting Zionism.
 
Last edited:
well then your temper tantrum makes absolutely no sense what so ever in the least. Jews view non Jews by the term goyim. It has a Biblical source. The Torah refers to Avraham as a goy. Your flying off the handle suggests emotional issues which i clearly am not able to understand seeing you nor i knows one another other than this blog. Chill out.
 
moshe said:
well then your temper tantrum makes absolutely no sense what so ever in the least. Jews view non Jews by the term goyim. It has a Biblical source. The Torah refers to Avraham as a goy. Your flying off the handle suggests emotional issues which i clearly am not able to understand seeing you nor i knows one another other than this blog. Chill out.
Click to expand...
Well why did you lie, and imply that I never knew the meaning of the word Goy/im. You petty attempt to back out of what you said and implied, would demonstrate that perhaps you should look in the mirror before accusing others of having emotional issues.

I never "flew off the handle", I merely informed you that your assumption that I was a Goy was far from the truth. I also realise that the use of the word Goy/im has a derogatory implication when used as you did.

You also seem to have some difficulty with the English language, I am assuming that English is not your first language? I say this because of your terminology, saying such things as (Ignorant drums make the most noise???) The accepted saying is "Hollow vessels make the most noise",... something that most native English speakers would be well aware of.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top