What Should Israel Do? (Poll, with actual poll attached)

Here are the options:

A: Israel should write off the Palestinian Authority as a bad experiment, re-establish control of the Gaza and West Bank, formally annex these lands, and rigorously enforce a security zone around this new territory.

B: Israel should write off the Palestinian Authority as a bad experiment, re-establish control over the Gaza and West Bank, and continue to enforce security.

C: Israel should fence off as much of the Palestinian territory as possible, rigorously controlling this border.

D: The current situation is the best to be hoped for. Israel should continue to hit terrorist targets in response to attacks on its citizens, but try to allow the Palestinian Authority the chance to stabilize and turn towards a path of peaceful coexistence.

E: Israel should completely withdraw from all lands acquired during the 1967 conflict and allow these territories to revert to their original owners or to the Palestinian Authority.

F: Israel should withdraw to its original 1948 borders, returning all other territory to the original Palestinian owners or other nation from which it was taken.

G: Israel should return to the 1947 borders suggested by the UN, returning all other territory to the original Palestinian owners or other nation from which it was taken.

H: Israel should be declared a non-state by the UN and should cease to be.

I: Other (explain)

J: Gah (I always answer every poll this way, just to be a contrarian).

for the love of God make it stop

Does option A include full Israeli rights for the inhabitants of the new annexed areas? I'd support a formal annexation, if this were the case, but younger Israelis seem to favour an annexation of the land without the incorporation of the Palestinians, either expelling the Palestinians or leaving them in legal limbo as 3rd class non-citizens living on Israeli land.

I was watching a local news magazine program the other day and they were interviewing Palestinian experts.

What the Palestinian experts said they wanted was for the Palestinian refugees to be allowed to return to the homes that they own and have the legal papers to prove they own yet they were kicked out of in 1948. And for Israel to be given a new name and allow all Palestinians to live on the land with the Jews under the new name.

Seems pretty reasonable.

Of course, Israel would never actually do any of that, and that option is not on the Poll. So I voted for option H.

Back the PLO, the lesser of many evils. 1967 borders should be fine, arabs wanted to fight and lost. Stop the colonists, stop frustrating palestinian economy, build wall, and in general stop being such bully's. If you got to hit hard, and they should when it's necesary imvho, you got to be the better person.

for the love of (Insert fake deity here), who could possibly support something as brutal as option A?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaknafien

for the love of (Insert fake deity here), who could possibly support something as brutal as option A?

---

Click on the numbers and you'll see who :yes:

Is there a single site with the maps?

Quote:

---

What the Palestinian experts said they wanted was for the Palestinian refugees to be allowed to return to the homes that they own and have the legal papers to prove they own yet they were kicked out of in 1948. And for Israel to be given a new name and allow all Palestinians to live on the land with the Jews under the new name.

Seems pretty reasonable.

---

It does :inquisitive:

So we rename Israel what? And now in this new Palestinian state can all the Jewish refugees be allowed to return to the homes that they own and have the legal papers to prove they own yet they were kicked out of in 1948. And for Palestine to be given a new name and allow all Jews to live on the land with the Palestinians under the new name ?

A

I'm of the opinion that when someone wages war against you, you wage war against them.

CR

Warmonger

You need to start a dialogue with them Whats wrong with you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Warmonger

You need to start a dialogue with them Whats wrong with you?

---

It's the kind of mentality that sent you to Vietnam all those years ago. McNamara eventually learnt his lesson, but it seems Rabbit is yet to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Back the PLO, the lesser of many evils. 1967 borders should be fine, arabs wanted to fight and lost. Stop the colonists, stop frustrating palestinian economy, build wall, and in general stop being such bully's. If you got to hit hard, and they should when it's necesary imvho, you got to be the better person.

---

All levels of Hamas have indicated that they will be satisfied with a return to 1967 borders. There won't be a formal cessation of war, merely a 10 year ceasefire, but the formula and the process by which it was arrived at replicate the process by which the IRA drew down their operations. If the Israelis are smart, they should take this up, look to make it permanent sometime in the future, and strengthen the mainstream Palestinian factions so they can clamp down on rogue violence. That is, of course, if they are really looking for peace, which I doubt more and more.

AFAICS, Israel wants the land, or at least those bits they deem valuable, but they don't want the Palestinians that go with them, fearing their incorporation will endanger the Jewish majority. Hence they have the options of either setting up an Apartheid system, making use of the cheap Palestinian labour but not allowing them full citizenship, or physically expelling them from the occupied territories. Neither is particularly noble, but they are at least more honest than this current charade whereby they annex land, virtually enslave the Palestinians, yet claim the moral high ground.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

So we rename Israel what? And now in this new Palestinian state

---

Their idea was not for it to be a Palestinian state but rather for it to be a Jewish/Palestinian state.

I must be honest that the Palestinian experts were very evasive and non-responsive when the moderator of the discussion asked them what the new name should be. I got the impression that they thought sweeping the name change issue under the rug until it it is just about to happen will help them actually reach that goal of a Jewish/Palestinian state and they think if they talk about it beforehand even though a name change is their intention, then it will shutdown their goal prematurely.

Quote:

---

It's the kind of mentality that sent you to Vietnam all those years ago. McNamara eventually learnt his lesson, but it seems Rabbit is yet to.

---

You disagree with what I said?

Quote:

---

All levels of Hamas have indicated that they will be satisfied with a return to 1967 borders.

---

Except in their charter LOL.

Quote:

---

There won't be a formal cessation of war, merely a 10 year ceasefire,

---

So that they can build up their forces and infrastruture and renew their attacks on Israel.

Quote:

---

If the Israelis are smart, they should take this up, look to make it permanent sometime in the future

---

How many times have the Israelis given up land for peace? Has it worked?

Quote:

---

fearing their incorporation will endanger the Jewish majority

---

Isnt in danger already? And if as you say they have an Apartheid system who cares how many Muslims are there? Theve got millions already. Unlike the number of Jews in surrounding nations.

Quote:

---

What the Palestinian experts said they wanted was for the Palestinian refugees to be allowed to return to the homes that they own and have the legal papers to prove they own yet they were kicked out of in 1948. And for Israel to be given a new name and allow all Palestinians to live on the land with the Jews under the new name.

---

I think this is the best, those who live in Israel are allowed to stay, those who live in Gaza and the West bank are allowed to stay, Palestinian refugees who still live in refugee camps should be allowed to return as long as the country is able to integrate them into the society. Yeah, something like that, I think that is the only way to solve this, they will only not fight each other if they cooperate instead of going their independent ways.

Thus "I" as I think this is "other".

Gawain, look at Sinn Fein's charter. See if they've changed their goal of driving out the British from the island of Ireland. See how they've gradually adapted to a changing political climate. See how Britain actively changed that political climate to what it is today.

About the Vietnam comparison - see McNamara's anecdote. And as for the Jewish majority and your interpretation of the phrase, here's Olmert:

"We must ensure that there will be a proven Jewish majority, otherwise the term Jewish state becomes empty of meaning"

Pannonian, how many bombs and rockets has Sinn Fein set off this last year? How many children are they tutoring in the need for a world caliphate and the destruction of Israel? How many times do they call for the destruction of Israel?

Quote:

---

All levels of Hamas have indicated that they will be satisfied with a return to 1967 borders.

---

Except of course for the leaders and all levels of terrorists in the organization.

How can you say that Palestine isn't waging war against Israel.

CR

well in all honesty, Israel is a fake, apartheid, fascist nation that under any other circumstances would have had regime-change affected long ago to liberate its indigenous people.. i dont see why they should get any concessions at all.

Care to explain any of that? They were created by the UN, allow all citizens to vote, and are a democracy, which blows away all your claims.

CR

Quote:

---

Gawain, look at Sinn Fein's charter. See if they've changed their goal of driving out the British from the island of Ireland. See how they've gradually adapted to a changing political climate. See how Britain actively changed that political climate to what it is today.

---

See how their all British. They dont want to drive the British from the British Isles now and call it all Ireland do they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Pannonian, how many bombs and rockets has Sinn Fein set off this last year? How many children are they tutoring in the need for a world caliphate and the destruction of Israel? How many times do they call for the destruction of Israel?

---

AFAIK the IRA has never advocated a caliphate nor supported the destruction of Israel. But if we try to make sense of your emotionally-soaked and wildly off-course mutterings, Sinn Fein still has its ultimate aim the expulsion of the British from Northern Ireland. It has changed its mean from violence to politics, but the goal is the same. When we started talk with them, violence was still very much one of their tactics. Even when there were still bombings from rogue elements, we didn't give up on talks, but strengthened the main faction so they could more effectively deal with these margins themselves. The result? A satisfactory peace that doesn't look like ending in the forseeable future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Except of course for the leaders and all levels of terrorists in the organization.

How can you say that Palestine isn't waging war against Israel.

CR

---

Fatah and Hamas prisoners voiced an initiative that legitimised resistance inside the 1967 borders, but nowhere else. Those are the hardnuts who have the respect of the militants on the outside, as they'd given up much for the cause. Encouraged by this, the head of the elected Hamas administration suggested that, without a formal recognition of each other, an Israel and a Palestine might live side by side inside the 1967 borders. The main objections to this were raised by the militant elements in Syria. Then this year, the leader of those elements suggested a 10 year ceasefire in return for a restoration of the 1967 borders.

There are close links between the Palestinian factions (especially the PLO) and the IRA. The above moves are very reminiscent, almost replicate, the process by which the IRA eventually gave up violence. Republican prisoners suggested it was time to switch to a political direction. Backed by the support of the hardcore, Sinn Fein prepared for politics and a drawdown of militancy. As the British government encouraged them with carrots, the IRA began a series of ceasefires, punctuated by bombs to keep the militants interested, but each ever longer in duration. After the last indefinite ceasefire, which lasted some 10 years, the IRA formally renounced violence.

Actually, what the Israelis have been doing to the Palestinians has been correctly characterized by the International Red Cross as war crimes and by a United Nations official as "an affront to civilization." By fake I mean it is not a real country--just like Iraq, actually.

The extremists in this thread makes me so fuzzy. :2thumbsup:

Pannonian speaks reason. Though I suspect there's even less desire for peace in either side of this war than that other war, sadly enough.

So I suppose it has to come down to genocide or something, as is the implication beneath the extremist positions in this thread. Kill them all and the problem's gone. World Peace. Hurrah. ~:) My answer? A and H. Pick your favorite oppressor and your favorite soon-to-be oppressed into extermination. Don't forget the justification too. Can't lose the moral high horse.

Oh, and Seamus: I'd love to hear your own opinion. :bow:

in a perfect world without religion they'd be able to live in peace :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaknafien

in a perfect world without religion they'd be able to live in peace :)

---

I personally think they'll just fight over something else.

Religion don't kill people; people kill people. :2thumbsup:

Religion is just the excuse for war. It has been since its inception. The gods are always on our side. Even for those who claim their nation to be secular.The king is appointed by the gods or god. Etc etc etc. It goes on and on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Religion is just the excuse for war. It has been since its inception. The gods are always on our side. Even for those who claim their nation to be secular.The king is appointed by the gods or god. Etc etc etc. It goes on and on.

---

Religion. Cause. Nationalism. Pride. Revenge. Alleged treachery. Moral High Ground.

pick an excuse, pick any excuse...

I vote for option Z...

wait 1 more month and then they can do whatever the hell I want..


the 1 month is because I'm in business in Tel Aviv right now....so please don't start any crap while I'm here :book:


P.S.- The state of Israel proved it's right to exist as far as I'm concerned as soon as I saw the strip clubs in this town :laugh4: .....I have seen the promised land!!!! :yes: :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaknafien

for the love of (Insert fake deity here), who could possibly support something as brutal as option A?

---

*Points to self

Better to have action than more doomed negotiation.

As things stand an accord is not going to be reached anywhere in the near (or even far) future.

Option A, imo, is the right option to choose as long as it is undertaken with the right intentions.

Once peace has been established, negotiation can begin.

military aggression only causes more desire for freedome hence more 'terrorists' recruited. Such conflicts in Israel, Iraq, and Afghanistan are impossible to win with traditional military techniques. For further reading, look at "Dying to Win: The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism" by Robert Pape.

Quote:

---

*Points to self

Better to have action than more doomed negotiation.

As things stand an accord is not going to be reached anywhere in the near (or even far) future.

Option A, imo, is the right option to choose as long as it is undertaken with the right intentions.

Once peace has been established, negotiation can begin.

---

This is the big problem here. I blame the UN of course :laugh4: In the old days Israel would have just done option A decades ago and this would all be over. Now these disputes linger for decades hoping the UN will step in or the rest of the world will feel bad for the poor palestinians and do something. They must learn they lost and make peace. They should have taken their nation in 48. The losers of wars do not set the agenda.

Ideally, I think Isreal should invade Jordan, annex Gaza and the West Bank, and relocate all the Palestinians to Jordan which would become the new Palestinian State. After all, the Palestinians are already a majority in Jordan, and Israel is supposed all the lands west of the Jordan river.

wow. that would be incredibly immoral and criminal, how can you support such an action?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

This is the big problem here. I blame the UN of course :laugh4: In the old days Israel would have just done option A decades ago and this would all be over. Now these disputes linger for decades hoping the UN will step in or the rest of the world will feel bad for the poor palestinians and do something. They must learn they lost and make peace. They should have taken their nation in 48. The losers of wars do not set the agenda.

---

I think I've asked it before, but I'll ask it again. What do you suggest should be done with the Palestinians? Israel wants their land, but they don't want to admit them as citizens. As I've stated earlier in the thread, I have no problems with a straightforward annexation of the Palestinian territories, if Israel proceeds to absorb the inhabitants of those territories into the Israeli state. However, as shown in the Olmert quote (and Olmert is a moderate in Israeli terms!?), Israel wants to retain a Jewish majority in order to maintain a Jewish state. This means the Palestinians, or Arabs in general, must not be allowed to outnumber Jews in Israel, lest the latter should be outvoted some time in the future.

So, should the Palestinians currently resident in the lands that Israel wants be allowed to stay, but without citizenship, as per Apartheid South Africa? Or should Israel expel them into the neighbouring states, whether or not the latter would take them (which they will not), turning them into permanent exiles without a state? Please give a straight answer, or give an equivalent answer with details. Please do not use platitudes like "The losers of wars do not set the agenda" - as the supporter of the winner of those wars, what do you suggest the agenda should be? Also be realistic and avoid an answer such as "There are Muslim countries all around who can take them in" - it is well establshed that none will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaknafien

wow. that would be incredibly immoral and criminal, how can you support such an action?

---

Well no one batted an eyelid when millions of Germans were expelled from their homes, and that was only sixty years ago. It may be harsh and even somewhat immoral, but it would probably get the job (i.e. peace) done.

need we even bring up the inherent vileness and racsism in making an entire state comprised of one ethnicity?

Quote:

---

The losers of wars do not set the agenda.

---

slight problem there , they havn't lost the war have they

I wonder if Gawain will give a straight answer to the question of what should be done with the Palestinians. People seem eager to point out that the losers of the war should be forced to accept the victors' terms, but they are less eager to specify just what those terms should be. Which conveniently allows for a permanent state of war against a threatening alien class. Helots, anyone?

Quote:

---

think I've asked it before, but I'll ask it again. What do you suggest should be done with the Palestinians?

---

They should have their own state.

Quote:

---

Israel wants their land, but they don't want to admit them as citizens.

---

I disagree. They made those arabs who live in Israel citizens. Are you trying to claim that the Israeli government wants all of palestine?

Quote:

---

Israel wants to retain a Jewish majority in order to maintain a Jewish state. This means the Palestinians, or Arabs in general, must not be allowed to outnumber Jews in Israel, lest the latter should be outvoted some time in the future.

---

Isnt this a losing battle considering the decripancy in Israel itself in birth rates of Jews and Muslims living there? If Israel really wanted to they could have annexed all this land long ago.

Quote:

---

So, should the Palestinians currently resident in the lands that Israel wants be allowed to stay, but without citizenship,

---

Israel should take no more land. Palestine should stop attacking Israel.

Quote:

---

slight problem there , they havn't lost the war have they

---

It seems you suffer from the same malady as they do. Its all over but the crying and has been for decades.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

They should have their own state.

I disagree. They made those arabs who live in Israel citizens. Are you trying to claim that the Israeli government wants all of palestine?

Israel should take no more land. Palestine should stop attacking Israel.

---

What's your opinion of the settlements in the West Bank?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Isnt this a losing battle considering the decripancy in Israel itself in birth rates of Jews and Muslims living there? If Israel really wanted to they could have annexed all this land long ago.

---

They could repeat the trick they tried back in the 1980s, and import a million or so foreign Jews to make up the numbers. They've since found that that batch of immigrants didn't integrate as well as they would have liked, but I suppose that's preferable to turning Israel into a non-denominational state that does not favour any one religion or ethnicity.

Quote:

---

What's your opinion of the settlements in the West Bank?

---

They should be made part of the new Palestinian state. If those living there want to be Palestinians they can stay.

Quote:

---

They could repeat the trick they tried back in the 1980s, and import a million or so foreign Jews to make up the numbers. They've since found that that batch of immigrants didn't integrate as well as they would have liked, but I suppose that's preferable to turning Israel into a non-denominational state that does not favour any one religion or ethnicity.

---

You do realise that Israel is an exceptionally small nation. Where would they put all these new immigrants? Besides i think turning Israel into a non-denominational state that does not favour any one religion or ethnicity would be the greatest thing since sliced bread.

so i guess everyone thinks its ok for a "Jewish" state to exist in the first place?

Isnt that what Hitler wanted, a "Aryan" state?

Quote:

---

so i guess everyone thinks its ok for a "Jewish" state to exist in the first place?

---

No there are a few mainiacs who agree with you. :laugh4: Why are Muslims more fit to have a state than Jews?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

They should be made part of the new Palestinian state. If those living there want to be Palestinians they can stay.

---

I'll have no problem with that, such a solution being one I've advocated for years now. Withdraw the Israeli state from the West Bank. Build a wall if they want, but solely on Israeli land (since it's Israel's choice to build it). If the Palestinians send a few rockets over, send 2x shells back in their general direction - it's proportional, and AFAIK entirely within Israel's rights as a sovereign nation defending its borders. And if any Israelis want to stay on Palestinian land, they'll have to obey Palestinian laws, pay taxes to the PA, and sort out their residential rights with the PA. If they're not happy with that, the PA should be able to deport them back to Israel, perhaps with Israeli help (to minimise likely violence).

Quote:

---

I'll have no problem with that, such a solution being one I've advocated for years now. Withdraw the Israeli state from the West Bank. Build a wall if they want, but solely on Israeli land (since it's Israel's choice to build it). If the Palestinians send a few rockets over, send 2x shells back in their general direction - it's proportional, and AFAIK entirely within Israel's rights as a sovereign nation defending its borders. And if any Israelis want to stay on Palestinian land, they'll have to obey Palestinian laws, pay taxes to the PA, and sort out their residential rights with the PA. If they're not happy with that, the PA should be able to deport them back to Israel, perhaps with Israeli help (to minimise likely violence).

---

It seems we have pretty much the same solution. The same for palestinians living in any land that would be seen as part of Israel . They can stay and become citizens if they want to. The biggest problem is where do you draw the new borders.

muslims are not necessarily "more fit". The fact is that the palestinans are native to that region and the Jews are not. And your use of "muslim" belies some ignorance of the situation. many palestinians are christians (orthodox and catholic) and many are also Jewish themselves.

oh, and the name of the new country should probably be simply Canaan.

Quote:

---

muslims are not necessarily "more fit". The fact is that the palestinans are native to that region and the Jews are not.

---

Your right Jews are not native to Judea LOL. Arabs are not native to that region their native to Arabia. They all migrated there. The Jews can argue they were there first. The Palestinians can argue they were there last, but the Israelis are there now and Im afraid possession is still nine tenths of the law.

Quote:

---

And your use of "muslim" belies some ignorance of the situation. many palestinians are christians (orthodox and catholic) and many are also Jewish themselves.

---

Now talk about the pot calling the kettle black :laugh4: Do you know how many Muslims live in Israel? How many Jews live legally in Palestine? Any? Funny you refer to the only democracy in the region as a Jewish state as if it were a theocracy. It seems your only gripe with them is their religion, that their not muslim. Christians make up 6% of Palestinians. Jews I imagine would be far harder to find if any. How you can deny palestine and most of the ME are not Muslim nations is beyond me. One more time Jews and Palestinians are inr eality the same people. The major difference being the religion they practice. In fact the same can be said for all of humanity. Its only our cultures that separate us.

the Jews certainly cannot argue they were there first.

Even before the end of Ottoman administration, Palestine, rather than the Ottoman Empire, was considered by the Palestinians to be their country.[citation needed] On 25 July 1913, for instance, the Palestinian newspaper al-Karmel wrote: "This team possessed tremendous power; not to ignore that Palestine, their country, was part of the Ottoman Empire."[5] The idea of a specifically Palestinian state, however, was at first rejected by most Palestinians; the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations (in Jerusalem, February 1919), which met for the purpose of selecting a Palestinian Arab representative for the Paris Peace Conference, adopted the following resolution: "We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds."

Prior to this, Palestine had been ruled by and comprised mostly of Semitic-descent Arabic peoples through Ottoman, Mamluk, and Crusader periods. Even in biblical times. Besides, even if you believe the Bible, which is nothing if not a Hebrew propagandist-history book, the Hebrews invaded the land and slaughtered its original inhabitants, which certainly does not make them the rightful inhabitants. Its like saying Americans are the rightful owners of America since they massacred all the natives.

Quote:

---

Even before the end of Ottoman administration, Palestine, rather than the Ottoman Empire, was considered by the Palestinians to be their country.[citation needed] On 25 July 1913, for instance, the Palestinian newspaper al-Karmel wrote: "This team possessed tremendous power; not to ignore that Palestine, their country, was part of the Ottoman Empire."[5] The idea of a specifically Palestinian state, however, was at first rejected by most Palestinians; the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations (in Jerusalem, February 1919), which met for the purpose of selecting a Palestinian Arab representative for the Paris Peace Conference, adopted the following resolution: "We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographical bonds."

---

And you were doing what in college. Your about 2000 years late there. These people didnt even think of a state until after WW1. There is no distinquishing trait of palestinians just like americans. Their all mutts.

Quote:

---

Prior to this, Palestine had been ruled by and comprised mostly of Semitic-descent Arabic peoples through Ottoman, Mamluk, and Crusader periods. Even in biblical times. Besides, even if you believe the Bible, which is nothing if not a Hebrew propagandist-history book, the Hebrews invaded the land and slaughtered its original inhabitants, which certainly does not make them the rightful inhabitants. Its like saying Americans are the rightful owners of America since they massacred all the natives.

---

So there never was an Israel, a Judea. No king David. All of Jewish history is a lie. That the Muslims invade and take over the land is fine with you however. I dont use this term very often nor do I easily accuse people of this but you seem awfully anti semitic to me. But then you are pretty consitant in your hate for all religions.

that doesnt offend me, I do not favor one group of people over another, its as simple as that. I don't care what religion they are. Im on the side of fairness and justice. Sure there was a kingdom of david and a kingdom of solomon, they were tiny states of minor importance and were quickly snatched up by the powers that be in their day just like they have been throughout most of modern history as well. You're right, Hebrews and Palestinians are the same, therefore a state of "Israel" is not valid. The Jews have no right to that land any more than the Palestinians, Arabs, or any other group. It should be shared with equality for all, not a fascist state that says "ethnic group X" must be the rulers and majority. thats apartheid.

heh, and in college I was a member of the Young Conservatives and Republicans club heheh :) ah, the joys of blindly and cowardly saluting the flag.

Quote:

---

The Jews have no right to that land any more than the Palestinians, Arabs, or any other group.

---

They do now. In principle I agree with you.

Quote:

---

heh, and in college I was a member of the Young Conservatives and Republicans club heheh :) ah, the joys of blindly and cowardly saluting the flag.
Today 17:29

---

It seems youve blindly gone the other way now. In either case its not healthy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

It seems we have pretty much the same solution. The same for palestinians living in any land that would be seen as part of Israel . They can stay and become citizens if they want to. The biggest problem is where do you draw the new borders.

---

1967 borders. The mainstream Palestinian groups have said they'll be satisfied with that, and the international community will materially help effect any solution based on those lines. Accept those 2 Palestinian blocks on the map in principle, then negotiate how the handover will take place, and how to reconcile the Palestinian claim to Jerusalem with Israeli control of the city.

Voiding talks while violence continues doesn't work. Talks should continue, to establish principles which both sides can agree on. Cessation of violence as a precondition should only be reserved for talks about the details, and the realisation of those details. To claim the moral high ground and refuse to talk to the other side is merely claiming that one has no need to talk to the other side. I don't disagree with the reality that might is right, but one should at least avoid the play of claiming moral superiority.

Quote:

---

To claim the moral high ground and refuse to talk to the other side is merely claiming that one has no need to talk to the other side. I don't disagree with the reality that might is right, but one should at least avoid the play of claiming moral superiority.

---

Oh come on. How many times have the Israelis tried to negotiate. They still hope too dont they or do you think they want this to go on forever or that they want all of Palestine?

Pssst according to the bible it will go on until the end of days.

negotiate? Israel can't negotiate while brutally oppressing normal people who live in the territories.

When do normal people blow themselves up in buses and marketplaces?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gawain of Orkeny

Pssst according to the bible it will go on until the end of days.

---

Damn Philistines? :laugh4:

Mind oh mind, I do find the extremists in this thread quite funny. They can do this they can do that, just don't forget the small-printed condition that they will find death, or exile, or oppression, and all the fun stuff aside from the "solution" that allows the "peace."

I'm quite aware some of you consider expelling the Jews off the land to be a very practical solution; I'm also quite aware that some of you consider the mass oppression or expelling of the Palestinians (whose very identity, to some of you, has to be "in quotations" even) to be perfectly okay. I think we should move on from that level of argument, shall we? And I'm not directing this specifically to the poster I quoted above either.

Yet another Israeli-Palestinian conflict thread turns quagmire too. Good job guys.

when pushed to no other option is when they do that. Again, I suggest the book "Dying to Win" it is an essential study of suicide operations throughout history from the Jewish Zealots to Japanese Kamikaze pilots, etc.

Then they are extra ordinary.
Ordinary people do not kill, they work hard, live by the rules, love their children, and go under the radar. They do not incite rebellion, kill innocent civilians, and disrupt the public order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marshal Murat

Then they are extra ordinary.
Ordinary people do not kill, they work hard, live by the rules, love their children, and go under the radar. They do not incite rebellion, kill innocent civilians, and disrupt the public order.

---

If that's the argument to claim sub-human status for the Palestinians, that's the lamest one I ever heard. :dizzy2:

Goddamn Sinn Fein. They are not even human, blowing up their Protestant neighbors like that for no good. Their children will never be good ordinary people, of course.

people will go to extreme lengths to acquire freedom for thereselves and families. its happened in every culture around the world, brutal methods when no others present themselves. the Jews themselves committed suicide rather than be captured by the Romans at Masada. Normal Japanese fathers and brothers and sons flew themselves into ships for the cause of their country. American soldiers have willingly undertaken "suicide missions" for their fellows.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AntiochusIII

Oh, and Seamus: I'd love to hear your own opinion. :bow:

---

Wilco. Probably tomorrow as I'd like to let things run a bit -- I really do learn from these polls and the responses thereto.

Quote:

---

negotiate? Israel can't negotiate while brutally oppressing normal people who live in the territories.

---

Oh please. But Israel can while its citizens are brutally murdered? Negotiations are a two way street.

Quote:

---

people will go to extreme lengths to acquire freedom for thereselves and families. its happened in every culture around the world

---

The Jews are probably the most oppressed minority in the history of the world and they never resorted to this . They dont want freedom they want the extermination of the Jews and the end of Israel. Im speaking of the extremists here.

Quote:

---

when pushed to no other option is when they do that. Again, I suggest the book "Dying to Win" it is an essential study of suicide operations throughout history from the Jewish Zealots to Japanese Kamikaze pilots, etc.

---

If only the Palestinians were like these noble warriors giving their lives in attacks on enemy MILITARY TARGETS. Even I would say they are brave freedom fighters. No one I know in history until now has sent their women and children to commit suicide and blow up the women and children of their enemy.

I never degraded the Palestinian people.
I would (keep reading) applaud their attacks, but there is a problem.

1.The attacks are against civilian targets (specifically) and are terrorist assaults that kill people who are not killing anyone else.
2.The attacks are suicidal, which lend a fanatical, extremist, all-or-nothing element to the conflict.

I applaud the Palestinians for working for a peaceful resolution, and hope that peace can be achieved. Killing and death is not the way to do this. Since when did peaceful, non-violent protests go out of style?

just so you dont think its an islamic thing, i should point out that the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, a secular, Marxist-Leninist organization are responsible for more suicide terrorist attacks than any other group in history. Oh, and the Jewish Zealots killed their own women and children just so they would not fall into the hands of the Romans.

^^^^^^^^^^
How does that relate to Israel-Palestine in any way?
:hijacked:

Quote:

---

just so you dont think its an islamic thing, i should point out that the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, a secular, Marxist-Leninist organization are responsible for more suicide terrorist attacks than any other group in history.

---

Now who was it who was lauding secularism over religion? Saying that man is not evil but religion is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaknafien

the Jews certainly cannot argue they were there first.... Besides, even if you believe the Bible, which is nothing if not a Hebrew propagandist-history book, the Hebrews invaded the land and slaughtered its original inhabitants, which certainly does not make them the rightful inhabitants. Its like saying Americans are the rightful owners of America since they massacred all the natives.

---

Zak'

Most of the archeological record and what independent written records do exist tend to be pretty confirming of the general history of the bible from Exodus forward -- albeit many scientists eschew supernatural explanations for the various events in favor of more prosaic versions. It is no more "propaganda" than any other typical national history -- very few of those (except for those written in the USA since 1968) start with the premise that their own people are scum and worthy of a damned good thrashing.

Both Biblical Israel and the USA secured most of the territory under their control by what has been historically referred to as "right of conquest." While never accorded a place of honor for morality, right of conquest has been an accepted component of international affairs from the dawn of time through the conclusion of WW2. It is only since that time that much of the sentiment in the Western world (and elsewhere) has wanted to deny the validity of this aspect of foreign policy. Clearly, such a denial is morally correct, but I am not sure as to its practicability.

Besides, if you take the "original indigenous" thing too far, you end up having to try to cram most of the world into the Olduvai Gorge and/or Yellow River valley. Bit of a shoehorning effort.

Quote:

---

The Jews are probably the most oppressed minority in the history of the world and they never resorted to this .

---

Who was that hairy bloke in the bible who did the suicide attack ?

Quote:

---

Who was that hairy bloke in the bible who did the suicide attack ?

---

And you believe that? :laugh4:

not to mention, Abraham was prepared to murder his own son after hearing voices in his head. These days we would lock him up for child abuse and have him mentally evaluated in a white walled hospital for his own good but in those days he was praised for it and other people made him their leader lol

Quote:

---

not to mention, Abraham was prepared to murder his own son after hearing voices in his head.

---

Arent we leaving out part of the story here?

I wonder if you realise just how relevant this story is to this confict. Its why I say the bible says it will go on until the end of days.

Ill give you a hint.

PROOF THAT THE BIBLE IS WRONG AND THAT ISHMAEL AND NOT ISAAC WAS TO BE SACRIFICED BY ABRAHAM

Hey Gawain , how come you provided a link that says the Jews don't have any claim to Israel and that it belong to the arabs , didn't you read it ?:inquisitive:

Sure I did. I was showing him why their all fighting over this, from a biblical point of view. If you think I dont want the Palestinians to have their state and would rather Israel take over all of the land think again. Again my reason for supporting the existence of Israel is that it exists. Live with it.

I was going to post the other version but I figured i would try to amuse you a bit more :)

Besides everyone heard that old tale havent they?

Deffinetly B.

The sheer number of Arab imigrants in Israel shows the fact that living a good life in liberal Israel is better than any poverty-stricken life lived under the sword of extremist islam.

Actually, most true moderate muslims nowadays hate no more Israel.... some of my relatives live there, and in the respective area there is calm and understanding between muslims and jews. Even lots of mixed marriages.

Most of the hate between nations is supported by small groups of individuals on each side.

Palestinian state was a failed experiment. It should be shut down, and restarted. Actually, in the last months the Palestinians fought no more against Israel but rather among themselfes.... this is where a terrorist guvernment eventually leads - civil unrest, poverty, death, and loss of any hope for a good life.

Hehehe a palestinian schoolplay. You would almost forget that they are nuts.

http://www.dumpert.nl/mediabase/1613...e7f/index.html

Gah, the citizens of Israel aren't Jews. They are Khazars controlling their religious sites. Israel should be camped in Europe and have a decent chunk of Russia to survive, in the Trans-Caucasus region. If Putin agreed on it we would have Israel, bordering the Black Sea in Europe as it should be, not in the middle of nowhere on the shore of the Jordan and the Dead Sea as we have now.No sane man would willingly put himself in harms way if there are alternative solutions to it.
We have Israel because some historians can't distinguish between Khazars and Israelites. There isn't a single israelite in Palestine, they're all Khazars who should have their own private state in the bowls of the Ex-USSR.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cronos Impera

Gah, the citizens of Israel aren't Jews. They are Khazars controlling their religious sites. Israel should be camped in Europe and have a decent chunk of Russia to survive, in the Trans-Caucasus region. If Putin agreed on it we would have Israel, bordering the Black Sea in Europe as it should be, not in the middle of nowhere on the shore of the Jordan and the Dead Sea as we have now.No sane man would willingly put himself in harms way if there are alternative solutions to it.
We have Israel because some historians can't distinguish between Khazars and Israelites. There isn't a single israelite in Palestine, they're all Khazars who should have their own private state in the bowls of the Ex-USSR.

---

:speechless:

I've seen a lot of Israel threads for my sins, and that has to be the single most weird contribution of my experience.

I'll regret asking, I'm sure, but could you explain what you mean for those of us from planet earth?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Banquo's Ghost

:speechless:

I've seen a lot of Israel threads for my sins, and that has to be the single most weird contribution of my experience.

I'll regret asking, I'm sure, but could you explain what you mean for those of us from planet earth?

---

What he probably means is that the real Israeli's have been extinct for a while, few centuries or so, so are the real Palestinians by the way but hey.

Bah, I hit the wrong option. I was the only to vote for it too (except I didn't). The original 1948 two-state boundaries, with a clearly defined and defensible boundary between the two. If the Palestinians behave, leave the border open and let free trade work it's magic. If they continue to bomb Israel after they get what they claimed they've wanted all along, close the border and let them solve their own problems. Either way, Israel's hands would be clean and all those people claiming all the problems of the Middle East begin with Israel might need to rethink their positions.

Khazar was a medieval steppe kingdom of wich the rulers (and many people) had converted to Judaism, and jews were unsurprisingly better off there then other parts of Europe or even the middle east. I imagine they had a pretty large genetic impact, though suggesting that the Semetic component is gone goes pretty far.

E or F sound pretty reasonable to me, though I don't know if F leaves enough room for Israel to be an economically viable nation. A, B, C and H are wrong.