Printable View
Palestine has UN status upgraded.
One may argue that the upgrade could give the Palestinian Authority more levers (peaceful) to make the push to statehood successful. Given the structure of the UN though, it may just heighten everyones frustration with the entire process.
So, are we on the path of peace and plenty for all, or are we weaving a dangerous course which will only lead to violence and disillusion?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20550864
First thing that comes to my mind:Quote:
Originally Posted by HopAlongBunny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no6EKCYLT7M
Oh good, this should prolong the struggle another good few months.
It's a beautiful thing. :sunny:
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/dailysta...51_mainimg.jpg
Does this mean they will get a Bureau of Tourism now?
I think its about time Palestine was recognized; although my gov't apparently disagrees.
While the measure certainly makes the quiet elimination of Palestine more difficult, is it enough to halt the process?
I get no inkling that there is any "will to peace" from the US or Israel.
If superpowers at the height of a Cold War could recognise each other and use the UN for dialogue to prevent nuclear war then I cannot see how this is not a good thing.
Giving a voice to a both sides changes this from a monologue to a dialog. The monologue has gone on long enough and it is clear that it hasn't resolved anything. So let them talk, let the world listen and let's see if a peaceful position can be found.
Israel doesn't want to integrate the Palestinians into a Greater Israel, nor does it want them to have their own state. This only leaves one other strategic goal they can have - to have a Greater Israel without any Palestinians in it. The behaviour and policy so far would also be consistent with this.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-q...stinan_map.jpg
So how is this going to affect the rockets targeted at Jerusalem? Will there be more or will they just have more modern guidance systems?
I always thing Idaho's diagram says it all: Israel is playing the long game. Taking just a bit more per year but the direction is pretty constant.
~:smoking:
That kinda conflates Palestine in its totality with just Gaza. When were rockets fired from the West Bank again?Quote:
So how is this going to affect the rockets targeted at Jerusalem? Will there be more or will they just have more modern guidance systems?
Looking a bit more closely than I had in the past at the map progression, I notice that the Palestinians now 'possess' land they did not 60 years ago, around both the West Bank and Gaza.
Am I merely geometrically confused, or is there a story behind that? Land the Israelis would rather have the Palestinians on? An error on the map creator's part?
All hail Greater Israel! A mere 3,000 homes to be built on Palestinian land and those crazy a-rabs refuse to participate in the peace process. I'm starting to wonder if they actually want peace with Israel. Let's all focus on obscure points in the Hamas political charter - those are the most essential topics we face.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-20552391
Well, in all honesty the Hamas in Gaza are the only ones that have the balls to act like a real government and actually achieve some results. The Ramallah government is more of a provincial administration with not much political leverage. Seriously, if I were a Palestinian I'd support Hamas and dismiss Fatah as a joke faction that is incapable of achieving any tangible results.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hax
The West Bank is less viable as it has been carved up. You can't travel across it (if you are Palestinian) without lining up at several checkpoints (and the stories about soldiers abusing people at those are grim and depressing). Gaza - while poorer and generally crappier in terms of land and aspect, at least has some freedom of movement within it.Quote:
Originally Posted by rvg
When I was in the West Bank, the Israeli's all had to leave the coach before crossing over into the Palestinian territories and whilst travelling, the only check points we came across were ran by Palestinian soldiers, all wielding SMG's whilst in little huts off the side of the road with the Palestinian flag flying high upon them. Only Israeli checkpoints I saw were at the border crossings into Israel proper and they didn't seem to really bother with the coach.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
Plus I'm pretty sure you will find that Israel essentially closed it's eyes to Hamas early on in order to weaken the PLO.Quote:
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk
Were you on the Jews only roads?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiaexz
Weirdest ethnic cleansing ever than as the Palestinian population is now 4 times as big as it was 50 years ago. At least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
I'm puzzled. Is this statement caused by:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
1. Frags pulling numbers out of his behind yet again?
2. Frags have read some "quality media who tells the truth", who pull numbers out of their behinds, and presented their lies as facts?
The populstion of the british mandate of palestine in 1945 was 1.7 million. The population in the west bank is about 2 millin, while it's a little over 1.5 mill in gaza, giving 3.5-ish million.
You've got to show me how you managed to calculate 1.7 x 4 = 3.5!
The Palestines are among highest breeders of the world it isn't uncommon that a family has over 10 children.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Söhne und Weltmacht, Gunnar Heinsohn 2003
So, that's how you got numbers who are completely wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
When even the books you read are insane and wrong, perhaps you should reconsider the way you obtain information...?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demogra...an_territories
Weirdest genocide ever
Might have something to do with nationality. It could be that until 1967, Palestinians in the West Bank were regarded as Jordanians. Dunno.
There is a sharp rise during the Libanon war, so that's possibe. But overall it looks pretty consistantQuote:
Originally Posted by Hax
Who are you arguing against, frags? Who has claimed the palestinian population is declining? The post you replied to was about land, not people.
Probably because they're not allowed to have jobs so they have nothing better to do than make children.
Edit: So you admit your numbers were wrong, HoreTore?
Israel doesn't want to integrate the Palestinians into a Greater Israel, nor does it want them to have their own state. This only leaves one other strategic goal they can have - to have a Greater Israel without any Palestinians in it. The behaviour and policy so far would also be consistent with this.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Not so consistant. The ethnic cleansing that is hinted at has this unique quality of populations decreasing, in great contrast with populations growing. Also the Palestinians who live in Israel are thriving, weirdest ethnic cleansing ever.
That is also what Heinson argues, if you don't get a lot of kids they are less likely to be sacrificed in a needless spiral of violence. They can get so many kids because they are at the tit of just about everything aid-industry. It cannot be sustained. All aid but food should be stopped at once and and carefully rationed so this unnatural situation ceases to exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by Husar
Thriving? Very much second class citizens alas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Define Israel.Quote:
Also the Palestinians who live in Israel are thriving, weirdest ethnic cleansing ever.
The part we call Israel, more than a million Arabs live in it, whole districts in Tel Aviv. Weirdest ethnic cleaning everQuote:
Originally Posted by Hax
I wonder, have you seen Jaffa?
No, but it's on my wishlistQuote:
Originally Posted by Hax
Ethnic cleansing is a much broader term than genocide. It also includes expelling people from their land based on their identity, i.e. what happened in 1948.
Nowadays Israel does evict people from their lands and colonises their land with settlers. Allthough repugnant I would not use the label "ethnic cleansing" in this case.
But the label is neither here nor there because nobody used the term in this thread until Frag came up with it.
Fragony, Fragony, Fragony... in 1947 there were less than 2 million people in the whole country. Populations have boomed across the world. Talking in terms of absolute population, rather than relative, is beyond incorrect, and well over the statistical foul line. Less than a million Palestinians were displaced in 1948. But this amounted to almost half the population of the country at that time. Those 700,000 odd are now 6 million plus in "refugee camps" (essentially towns populated by displaced people with no right of return and an expectation from Israel that they will just all go elsewhere and forget.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
A reasonable population overview:
http://www.palestineremembered.com/A.../Story574.html
I would't really call displaced, a lot fled because of the war, and a lot were driven out by jewish militia's. But that happens in every war. Not a war Israel asked for. A whole lot of Palestinians are also really from Libanon mind you
Fled or driven out by militias, then not allowed back while Jewish families were given their houses, farms and land. Could you imagine how you would feel if you lived in a crappy suburb of Antwerp, unable to go back to the country your family came from, to the house your parents were born in, in Holland?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fragony
Having to live in Antwerp would sure make me feel bad, but there's a whole lot more going on there. The palestinians are playball of radical islam, it's the radical islam that doesn't want this to end because that's inconvenient to their cause. Who attacked who, with what they thought was an absolute guarenty for succes, just about the entire arab world bringing in brute force. Failed miserably, and they even now refuse to relieve the situation and taking the 'Palestians' back, and leave feeding them to the West making them the most obese and fastgrowing population in just about the whole world because of the billions of aid they get. Sorry, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Idaho
There is so much wrong with that, that I don't know where to begin.
Back on topic...
Israel has formally committed itself to a two-state solution in the Oslo accords. The current government is filled mostly with parties who oppose the idea, but in their capacity as the government they've not put it off the table. Frankly, it shouldn't be that hard. The border would still be in dispute after you recognise them as an independant state, and would still have to be negotiated.
Getting their status upgrade is largely a symbolic move. Israel's position is apparently that self-determination, sovereign territory and international recognition thereof is not necessarily something that all people should deserve, and blocking it for the Palestinians is a legitimate strategy.
I don't see any reasonable argument in favour of such a view. I don't think the rest of the world does, either. The reason why the US voted no, and most of Europe abstained, is that it would harm the peace progress. Why does it harm the peace process? Because Israel is annoyed by the move. We should not show (or feign) understanding to someone when it's crystal clear that his objections are utterly wrong and immoral.
One objection I've heard is that with their new status under UN law they could refer Israel's actions to the ICC, and apparently one condition that France asked in return for a yes-vote was that Palestine would not do so. I personally wouldn't see anything wrong with that (referring acts of Israel to the ICC, that is), but it's at least an argument with practical substance.
Sorry, but as an American I have no particular stake in the future of the Palestinian people, and I am all done with our onetime ally, Israel. I'm with Sully on this one:
From the Iron Dome out, Obama has had Israel's back for the last two months—and, to any fair observer, for the past four years. But again and again, Netanyahu's treatment of Obama (and Americans) is best described as contempt. At what point has Israel asked how it can help its chief ally these past few years? Never. [...] Israel is no longer an ally, it seems to me. It is, at best, a subsidized, spoiled child that cannot resist acting out.
Israel at this point is nothing but a political liability for us.