Arab-Israeli Conflict: Part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.
Look if you want peace in the middle east, just allow the muslims to destroy Israel and kill all the jews and christians living there. Then it will be peaceful besides muslims who believe in one lineage from muhammed are right vs another set of muslims who say the lineage from muhammed should be from someone else---in which case more murder will be called for. This is what happens when you have a slave owning warmonger pedo for a prophet.
 
Jerusalem's symbolic importance is almost unparalleled, that's seen in hard liners both sides.

Its is true though that the Israelis are exploiting the lack of good leadership and unity from the Palestinians to continue devouring their land.


I think half of the problem would be solved instantly had the U.N made good on their pledge to keep Jerusalem a neutral ground belonging to neither side.

Everything else then will be up for negotiation in earnest, for the first time in history.

Now let's take a look at what Israel offered and Arafat unilaterally rejected at Camp David:

  • 100% of the Gaza Strip.
  • 92% of the West Bank.
  • A modern highway connecting them together, built free of charge.
  • Palestinians currently living in Jordan can move back to Palestine, their financial compensation paid for by Israel.

Honestly, I don't think the deal could get any better than that, so what exactly are the Palestinians holding out for?
 
Last edited:
I think half of the problem would be solved instantly had the U.N made good on their pledge to keep Jerusalem a neutral ground belonging to neither side.

Everything else then will be up for negotiation in earnest, for the first time in history.

100% of the Gaza Strip.
92% of the West Bank.
A modern highway connecting them together, built free of charge.
Palestinians currently living in Jordan can move back to Palestine, their financial compensation paid for by Israel.

I don't think the deal could get any better than the one Arafat rejected at Camp David.
The negotiating power of the Palestinians has only gone down since the Cap David accords. At this point they'd be super lucky to get a deal even close to as good as that one unless something drastic and unforeseen happens.

I wonder is Israelis might accept a right of return for Palestinians if they restricted the political power of Arab citizens of Israel while offering them dual citizenship with Palestine.
 
The negotiating power of the Palestinians has only gone down since the Cap David accords. At this point they'd be super lucky to get a deal even close to as good as that one unless something drastic and unforeseen happens.

That's what I don't get about the Palestinian leadership, what exactly is their end game here?

To give up that incredibly generous offer at Camp David, what else could they possibly holding out for? Surely they're not crazy enough to know that the mythical "pre-1967 border" is merely a negotiation starting point and not actually an acceptable demand?

What should we call the rejection a deal that include 100% of the Gaza Strip + 92% of the West Bank + Reparation for returning refugees, if not "crazy"?

The U.N loves to criticize the Israeli settlements as if it's what blocking the peace process, but history has shown that each and every time both sides sat down for a negotiation, Israel is the one that bent over backwards to make this peace thing works, while the Palestinians just throw out some impossible demands that they KNOW wouldn't work, and then walk away stomping their feet as if they're the victims here.

How can anyone look at Camp David and actually think that Arafat have any intention to move on from the status quo to a viable Two-State solution? We all know that Palestinian right of return to Israel proper would effectively brings an end to the Jewish state, is THAT why they kept insisting on it?

I wonder is Israelis might accept a right of return for Palestinians if they restricted the political power of Arab citizens of Israel while offering them dual citizenship with Palestine.

Apartheid is a no go, it's just gonna open up another can of worm.

Here's what I think: if given a choice between moving to the West Bank or Gaza Strip to live among their own kin or moving to Israel proper and live among the Jews, the Palestinians currently living in Jordan would choose the first option, especially if they get to live in all those sweet new apartments complex that Israel built, plus a nice chunk of seed money to get their lives going again.

But instead of bending over like in Camp David, Israel should insist that the Arabs League be the one footing the bill for the returning Palestinians refugees. After all, the wars the Arabs started is precisely what lead to the Palestine exodus to Jordan in the first place.
 
Last edited:
I love how Hamas has spokesmen. Yes we launch rockets at Israeli cities, but we're very civilized how dare you.

Who even lives right on the other side of the Gaza Strip wall? "Yeah, we got a great deal on this house. The synagogue is close, amazing location, it's so convenient. There's just that small problem of... constant impending annihilation from above."
 
That's what I don't get about the Palestinian leadership, what exactly is their end game here?

To give up that incredibly generous offer at Camp David, what else could they possibly holding out for? Surely they're not crazy enough to know that the mythical "pre-1967 border" is merely a negotiation starting point and not actually an acceptable demand?

What should we call the rejection a deal that include 100% of the Gaza Strip + 92% of the West Bank + Reparation for returning refugees, if not "crazy"?

The U.N loves to criticize the Israeli settlements as if it's what blocking the peace process, but history has shown that each and every time both sides sat down for a negotiation, Israel is the one that bent over backwards to make this peace thing works, while the Palestinians just throw out some impossible demands that they KNOW wouldn't work, and then walk away stomping their feet as if they're the victims here.

How can anyone look at Camp David and actually think that Arafat have any intention to move on from the status quo to a viable Two-State solution? We all know that Palestinian right of return to Israel proper would effectively brings an end to the Jewish state, is THAT why they kept insisting on it?
I think its because there is so much bad blood and expectation on the Palestinian side that they are unwilling to accept certain compromises. Agreeing to those compromises potentially damages the legitimacy of Palestinian leadership so the leadership is stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Apartheid is a no go, it's just gonna open up another can of worm.
The Arab population is growing and they are already 20%. What if they become the majority and start to take over the reins of power via the ballot box? Wouldn't that fundamentally threaten the Jewish nature of the Jewish homeland?
Here's what I think: if given a choice between moving to the West Bank or Gaza Strip to live among their own kin or moving to Israel proper and live among the Jews, the Palestinians currently living in Jordan would choose the first option, especially if they get to live in all those sweet new apartments complex that Israel built, plus a nice chunk of seed money to get their lives going again.

But instead of bending over like in Camp David, Israel should insist that the Arabs League be the one footing the bill for the returning Palestinians refugees. After all, the wars the Arabs started is precisely what lead to the Palestine exodus to Jordan in the first place.
Some of these refugees have property claims in Israel so I would think moving to Israel would be more attractive to them. But if the states of the Arab League could get together and provide an incentive package for them to abandon those claims I believe it could be possible for the Palestinian refugees to abandon their claims to return to Israel. The question would the Arab League do such a thing?
 
I think its because there is so much bad blood and expectation on the Palestinian side that they are unwilling to accept certain compromises. Agreeing to those compromises potentially damages the legitimacy of Palestinian leadership so the leadership is stuck between a rock and a hard place.

Yeah, and I feel like the centrists in Israel are having a tough time pushing back their own hardliners as well, especially since Hamas had their coup in the Gaza strip. The longer this conflict drags out, the more polarized it gets as distrusts kept growing, while the mainstream increasingly losing their faith in the peace process. As the result, everybody say they want a Two-State solution, yet no one can agree on anything to force a change from the status quo, because now everyone just throw out impossible demands that they know the other side can't swallow.

The Arab population is growing and they are already 20%. What if they become the majority and start to take over the reins of power via the ballot box? Wouldn't that fundamentally threaten the Jewish nature of the Jewish homeland?

Some of these refugees have property claims in Israel so I would think moving to Israel would be more attractive to them. But if the states of the Arab League could get together and provide an incentive package for them to abandon those claims I believe it could be possible for the Palestinian refugees to abandon their claims to return to Israel. The question would the Arab League do such a thing?

Those legitimate claims was the reason why Israel willing to shell out big money for compensation at Camp David. It would be better for the Jewish State if the Palestinians take the cash and settle in Palestine. Since Arafat turned down that offer, I don't even think the hardliners in Tel Aviv would even let centrist Netanyahu open his checkbook now.

Unfortunately, the Arab League's primary objective has always been to use the Palestinians as a political football. They never had done anything in good intentions for their "brothers", so any Arabs offerings of intrinsic value that would help leads to a peaceful resolution would be earth-shattering in itself.

As for now, both the Palestinian leadership and the Arab League still rejects Israel as a Jewish State and demands a total and complete Palestinian right of return to Israel proper, something that was and still is a larger roadblock to peace at the negotiation table than any settlements, a roadblock that the U.N Security Council seems to ignore every time this issue comes up.
 
Last edited:
Israel PM said looking to delay outpost bill vote until after Trump meet
Netanyahu says he won’t be held to ultimatums from settler flank of coalition, after reports he wants to coordinate with new US administration

By TIMES OF ISRAEL STAFF
February 5, 2017


F170205ESPOOL05-e1486308797478-635x357.jpg

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly sought to defer a Knesset vote on a controversial bill allowing Israel to appropriate West Bank land, requesting it be delayed until after a meeting next week with US President Donald Trump.

The Regulation Bill had been slated to go for its final readings on Monday evening, but Netanyahu reportedly told coalition heads Sunday night he wanted to talk it through with the new US administration first.

“I would like to coordinate the issue with the Trump administration,” he told coalition party leaders on Sunday according to Army Radio.

Netanyahu’s comments to the coalition leaders came hours after he told his own Likud party ministers the bill would come up for its second and third readings, the final votes before becoming law, on Monday as scheduled.

But members of Netanyahu’s ruling coalition’s far right, especially ministers from the Jewish Home party, are vowing to move ahead with the bill’s Monday vote.

Speaking to reporters as he boarded a plane to London ahead of meetings Monday with British Prime Minister Theresa May, Netanyahu brushed off “fake ultimatums” and pinned various rumors about the bill’s status on “false briefings to the media.”

The Regulation Bill would see several thousand homes in Israeli settlements in the West Bank built illegally on privately owned Palestinian property, offering financial compensation to the landowners and staving off any further demolitions such as the one carried out against the illegal Amona outpost last week.

While the Trump administration has mostly declined to condemn settlement building, the president has reportedly asked Netanyahu not to surprise him with unilateral moves in the West Bank and the issue is expected to be high on the agenda when the two meet in the White House on February 15.

On Thursday, White House press secretary Sean Spicer said new settlements “may not be helpful,” after Netanyahu announced he would authorize a new settlement to replace Amona, the first in the West Bank in some 25 years.

In recent months, the Regulation Bill has been pushed by right-wing lawmakers in recent months in part to offset the political fallout from the Amona evacuation.

If it passes its second and third readings, the legislation would legalize several thousand settlement homes that were unknowingly built on privately owned Palestinian land.

The bill would freeze demolition proceedings against the homes. For any homes found to have been built in good faith – that is, owners did not know the house was built on privately owned land before building there – the state would be required to seize the property from its Palestinian owners in exchange for compensation valued at slightly more than the land’s market value, as determined by an Israeli government committee established for that purpose.

The left-wing NGO Peace Now has estimated some 4,000 homes would be affected by the bill, while right-wing counterpart Regavim has put the number at about half that figure.

Netanyahu has expressed support for the bill, saying it would protect the settlement movement from “harassment” by legalizing the most common reason that lawsuits are brought against settlements.

The bill has faced strident opposition, including from Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit, who has warned that it marks the first time Israeli legislation explicitly affirms government support for settlements, and would openly curtail property rights of Palestinians in the West Bank in a way that contravenes the protections granted to occupied populations under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

While Israel has always disputed the contention of nearly the entire international community that the territory of the West Bank is under occupation, it has agreed to apply to Palestinians living there the protections given to occupied people in the Convention. To weaken those protections, Mandelblit has warned, could expose Israeli officials to international sanction at the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

The Regulation Bill was narrowly approved by a vote of seven to six in a joint meeting of the Knesset’s Law Committee and Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee last week.

The legislation — shelved late last year after Netanyahu reportedly sought to avoid any additional fights with the Obama administration before its end on January 20 — returned to the Knesset agenda last Sunday.

The final draft of the bill outlines the procedures for legalizing unauthorized construction on private Palestinian land and compensating the landowners. It also immediately freezes administrative proceedings in 16 West Bank settlements for a period of 12 months.

The bill stipulates that settlement construction in the West Bank that was carried out in good faith, without knowledge that the land was privately owned, would be recognized by the government, provided the settlers show some kind of state support in establishing themselves at the site. This support could in some cases be as minimal as having access to public infrastructure.

Under the terms of the bill, the government will be able to appropriate land for its own use if the owners are unknown. If the owners are known, they will be eligible for either yearly damages amounting to 125 percent of the value of leasing the land, a larger financial package valued at 20 years’ worth of leasing the plots, or alternate plots.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/pm-said-looking-to-delay-outpost-bill-vote-until-after-trump-meet/
 
Last edited:
Yeah, and I feel like the centrists in Israel are having a tough time pushing back their own hardliners as well, especially since Hamas had their coup in the Gaza strip. The longer this conflict drags out, the more polarized it gets as distrusts kept growing, while the mainstream increasingly losing their faith in the peace process. As the result, everybody say they want a Two-State solution, yet no one can agree on anything to force a change from the status quo, because now everyone just throw out impossible demands that they know the other side can't swallow.
I think its going to take a crisis unrelated to the conflict on either side, or both, that undermines the hardliners. If at that point a more centrist leader can take charge we might see positive changes.
Those legitimate claims was the reason why Israel willing to shell out big money for compensation at Camp David. It would be better for the Jewish State if the Palestinians take the cash and settle in Palestine. Since Arafat turned down that offer, I don't even think the hardliners in Tel Aviv would even let centrist Netanyahu open his checkbook now.

Unfortunately, the Arab League's primary objective has always been to use the Palestinians as a political football. They never had done anything in good intentions for their "brothers", so any Arabs offerings of intrinsic value that would help leads to a peaceful resolution would be earth-shattering in itself.

As for now, both the Palestinian leadership and the Arab League still rejects Israel as a Jewish State and demands a total and complete Palestinian right of return to Israel proper, something that was and still is a larger roadblock to peace at the negotiation table than any settlements, a roadblock that the U.N Security Council seems to ignore every time this issue comes up.
The thing about the Jewish state relates back to what I said though. It seems for some its the Jewish character that is the problem. Personally I feel that the only Jewish homeland should prioritize its Jewish nature over its democratic nature but that idea is very unsavory to a lot of people, even to many Jews I bet.
 
Lmao. Treating people like animals and colonizing their land MAY not be good for peace. Btw heres 48 billion dollars of military aid!
 
Lmao. Treating people like animals and colonizing their land MAY not be good for peace. Btw heres 48 billion dollars of military aid!

Who would have thought that losing countless wars you've instigated and continuing holding a zealous non-compromising stance while supporting perpetual conflict and terrorism may come back and bite you in the ass.
 
Who would have thought that losing countless wars you've instigated and continuing holding a zealous non-compromising stance while supporting perpetual conflict and terrorism may come back and bite you in the ass.

Ya we need you to compromise on how slowly we divide and conquer your land. Its your fault for opposing this!
 
Ya we need you to compromise on how slowly we divide and conquer your land. Its your fault for opposing this!

Of course you do, seeing how living in some geographical area doesn't mean the whole region belongs to you, even more so in the 1930's.
Especially if you didn't even have a country nor a collective identity until people you don't like started arriving.
 
I long for the day when the WR adopts a new rule of handling out instant dubs to spammers who lacks the ability to read the thread before posting.
 
I long for the day when the WR adopts a new rule of handling out instant dubs to spammers who lacks the ability to read the thread before posting.

You're right, got emotional.

On the case you've posted, my 2 cents the Outpost Bill is that Netanyahu is between a rock and a hard place. Trump won't ok this and after Amona his coalition won't let him cancel the bill. My guess is that he'll go towards the old Supreme Court play, he'll the bill as ridiculous as he can so that the supreme court will shoot it down and then he'll send his puppets from Likud to attack the "supreme court autocracy" or some shit so that his fan base continues to have a common straw man.
 
Of course you do, seeing how living in some geographical area doesn't mean the whole region belongs to you, even more so in the 1930's.
Especially if you didn't even have a country nor a collective identity until people you don't like started arriving.

the same bullshit euros used on the native indians. they don't have the same legal system as us to say the land is theirs thus its ours.
 
Mother fuckers. Those far-right Jewish Home fanatics have now pushed through the legislation to retroactively legalizes settler homes built on privately-owned Palestinian properties in the West Bank.

I'm equally disgusted at them as well as the whiny Fatah bitches who refused to grow a spine and make a good deal when they could have in all those years, but chose to prolong this utterly pointless conflict started by their dumb-ass Arab brothers all the way to the 21st century and gave rise to the Jewish Home and Hamas fanatics instead.

President Trump should make ONE last attempt to get the Jews and Arabs to put an end to this bullshit once and for all. And before they sit down, let them know that if they insists on continue acting like little children at the negotiation table this time around, the world should stop playing the babysitter and leave them to their own device.

---

Israel legalizes settler homes on private Palestinian land
Feb 6, 2017​

r

Israel passed a law on Monday retroactively legalizing about 4,000 settler homes built on privately owned Palestinian land in the occupied West Bank, a measure that has drawn international concern.

The legislation has been condemned by Palestinians as a blow to their hopes of statehood. But its passage may only be largely symbolic as it contravenes Israeli Supreme Court rulings on property rights.

Israel's attorney-general has said it is unconstitutional and that he will not defend it at the Supreme Court.

Though the legislation, passed by a vote of 52 to 60, was backed by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's right-wing coalition, it has raised tensions in the government.

Political sources have said Netanyahu privately opposes the bill over concerns it could provide grounds for prosecution by the International Criminal Court in The Hague.

But the far-right Jewish Home party, a member of the coalition looking to draw voters from the traditional base of Netanyahu's Likud, pushed for the legislation after the forced evacuation of 330 settlers last week from an outpost built on private Palestinian land.

With Netanyahu under police investigation on suspicion of abuse of office, an allegation he denies, Likud has been slipping in opinion polls. Opposing the law would have risked alienating his supporters and ceding ground to Jewish Home.

Last-minute appeals this week by Netanyahu to postpone the vote until after he meets U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington on Feb 15, were refused by Jewish Home, political sources said.

In London, where he met Prime Minister Theresa May on Monday, Netanyahu told Israeli reporters he did not want to delay the vote and that he sought only to update Washington ahead of time - which he said he did. The White House did not respond to requests for comment.

Netanyahu himself did not attend the vote because he was on a plane back from London when it was held.

"BLACK FLAG"

Hanan Ashrawi, a senior member of the Palestine Liberation Organization, the main Palestinian political umbrella body, said in a statement that the law gave settlers a green light to "embark on a land grab".

"Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist, racist coalition government are deliberately breaking the law and destroying the very foundations of the two-state solution and the chances for peace and stability," Ashrawi said.

The U.N. Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process Nickolay Mladenov said in a statement that the law "will have far reaching legal consequences for Israel and greatly diminish the prospects for Arab-Israeli peace".

However, Netanyahu may face little to no criticism from the White House, which has signaled a far softer approach to the settlement issue than that of the Obama administration.

"We are voting tonight on the connection between the Jewish people to its land. This entire land is ours," Likud minister Ofir Akunis told parliament.

Opposition leader Isaac Herzog of the Zionist Union said a black flag hung over the "insane law that threatens to destroy Israeli democracy".

Israeli Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit has described the law as unconstitutional and a breach of international law since it allows expropriation of private land in areas Israel seized in the 1967 Middle East war.

Under the new law, settlers could remain on the land if they built there without prior knowledge of Palestinian ownership or if homes were constructed at the state's instruction. Palestinian owners would receive financial compensation.

Anti-settlement group Peace Now said it would petition the High Court against the law that sanctions more than 50 settler outposts built without government approval.

Most countries consider the settlements illegal and an obstacle to peace as they reduce and fragment the territory Palestinians want for a viable state in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip.

Israel disputes this and cites biblical, historical and political connections to the land, as well as security needs.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-settlements-vote-idUSKBN15L2F3
 
Last edited:
I think Trump should do the morally right thing and help create a Palestinian state in Jordan since Jordan is Palestine.

Many people realize this fact including Marco Rubio, much of the GOP, and politicians like Geert Wilders.

jordan_is_palestine_by_3d4d-d6pi8im.jpg
 
I think Trump should do the morally right thing and help create a Palestinian state in Jordan since Jordan is Palestine.

Many people realize this fact including Marco Rubio, much of the GOP, and politicians like Geert Wilders.

jordan_is_palestine_by_3d4d-d6pi8im.jpg
 
Honestly, I don't think the deal could get any better than that, so what exactly are the Palestinians holding out for?

The Palestinians don't want any deal that leaves Israel intact as a state. They'd rather have dead Jews than their own state. It's hard to think of any other reason they've let so many golden opportunities go by.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top