Israel/Palestine Conflict: Open Discussion

[Hunter44]

I'd be nice if this guilt played a bigger role in history.

Ignoring what Hitler was doing for so long and then helping to create the state of Israel isn't a big enough role?? I think I get your point though.

[Predicto]

Ignoring what Hitler was doing for so long and then helping to create the state of Israel isn't a big enough role?? I think I get your point though.

The problem, of course, is that the Palestians were not Nazis or even supporters of Hitler at all, yet they are the ones that got displaced to make the Jewish homeland.

Israel should have been placed in the Rhineland. That would have been the fair solution.

[Jumbo]

I'm just waiting for the day when the Buddhists drop their laid-back camouflage and wipe out all the honky/swarthy-honky religious gangs.

[twa]

I'm just waiting for the day when the Buddhists drop their laid-back camouflage and wipe out all the honky/swarthy-honky religious gangs.

Our day is coming brother

[alexey]

The problem, of course, is that the Palestians were not Nazis or even supporters of Hitler at all, yet they are the ones that got displaced to make the Jewish homeland.

I do not think that it is entirely correct to put it that way.

When there was a rise in violence in 1947, Jews set forth a specific policy to stay on the land regardless of cost:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1947%E2%80%931948_Civil_War_in_Mandatory_Palestine#Rise_of_violence

The possibility of evacuating these difficult to defend zones was considered, but the policy of Haganah was set by David Ben-Gurion. He stated that 'what the Jewish people have has to be conserved. No Jewish person should abandon his or her house, farm, kibbutz or job without authorisation. Every outpost, every colony, whether it is isolated or not, must be occupied as though it were Tel Aviv itself.[8] No Jewish settlement was evacuated until the invasion of May 1948. Only a dozen kibbutzim in Galilee as well as those of Gush Etzion sent women and children into the safer interior zones

[PeterMP]

I get what your saying but IMO this is a conflict of how the Zionists treated the indigenous Palestinians (both Muslim and Christian). What we have today is the result of incidents piled up over the decades. Very few people are still alive from the times before 1948. The point im getting at is that what we have today began with Zionists throwing Arabs out of their homes and forcing them into refugee camps that later became Gaza and the West Bank

I want to point this is in fact a very shallow analysis (I'd guess other people already have, but just in case). The problem actually pre-date this even in "recent" history. Prior to the creation of the Jewish state, there was a concerted and organized effort by the Jews to move "back" to their "home" land.

There was already considerable violence between the various sides at the time of the UN resolution passed.

The British, who were in charge of the region, we're glad to see the UN step in and "resolve" the situation because it was becoming a mess, and they didn't want to have to worry about it.

[81artmonk]

Until the palistinain leaders are swaped with ones who really want peace, nothing will ever change.

What do you expect Isreal to do? When you are attacked almost every day by terrorist from the other side, I'd be bombing the crap out of them too. I exagerate of course, but Palistine isn't interested in land. They hate the jews, or at least the leadership does.

[skinfan133]

best answer, stop all US aid to both and let the two factions figure it our outside of US influence.

I say this because Isreal is often seen as being the "little US" and has a stigma on it because of that.

agreed. After finding out about the 67 Liberty Incident, I hate the fact we are close to Israel.

[Perky72]

I've been a biased supporter of both Israel when I was younger, and the Occupied Territories after that, and I think I'm fairly objective at this point. Have read all the history, causes, wars, peace efforts, etc.

After 20 or so years of this, my conclusion is that neither side truly wants peace. There are elements in both who strongly favor a prolonged conflict. Hawks in Israel want it to give them political power and ideological tools. Radical, or sometimes moderate Zionists want it so they can continue their facts-on-the-ground expansion of territory. Hamas and other radicals in Palestine want eternal strife to maintain their own power. In both cases the existence of the hawks is justified by the conflict, without it they'd lose a lot of power. Racist elements of both side want it to continue to.

Both sides at times speak peace or begin a peace process, both sides at times are the first to break that peace. And both play the international community or their allies, starting up trouble before a local peace initiative in order to have their concerns heard before they settle it down. Both sides are also exploited in turn by other interests. In Israel's case, by some in the US who either want to maintain a scapegoat, or the fundamentalists who want Israel to survive until armaggedon. The Palestinians are even more exploited, with leaders in various countries claiming to be on their side or their plight as justification for their own misdeeds, when in reality they don't care.

Think of this thought experiment as the test for true support: If Israel somehow fell and their entire population needed to be moved, would US supporters of Israel actually open their borders entirely to them? If Israel pushed all Palestinians out, would bordering countries actually give them good refugee camps and status?

Anyway, just about everything has been attempted to bring a final, equitable peace, which at least to me means a two-state solution. That no peace has been achieved tells me neither side actually wants it. Since this is the case, neither side deserves any support until they do attain peace. As a US citizen, I'm upset that my country enables this conflict, moreso towards Israel since that's certainly our "pick" and we give them billions a year.

This largely unconditional aid also falls into the trap in my second paragraph--actually finding a lasting peace might threaten all that aid from continuing, thus many in Israel would want to continue the conflict in order to maintain their monetary, diplomatic, and tech/military largesse from the US.

My "solution" is to stop giving either side any aid beyond purely humanitarian (and that aid needs to be unbroken to the source, no giving purported organizations aid that they'll use for other stuff). Since Israel relies on US aid more it would impact them more, but would still be fair. As a US citizen I'd also like my country to abstain from any UN votes on the matter until it's settled. This would force two things, both net gains for me: Either the conflict would continue as before, being more important to peace for both sides, but at least I'm not funding it; Or the pressure of no aid would be a smack in the head to both sides or at least Israel, and a final peace might actually be achieved.

I'm strongly against maintaining the status quo with my money or my government. To break it down perhaps simplistically, both sides act like 4-year old brats, and my country is unfortunately paying them to continue, and giving them slingshots to do it, and preventing their teachers from trying to punish them for their tantrums. I'm sick of that, because it's actually hurtful to the peace process. And I support both a free Israel and free Palestine, so this isn't doing them any long-term favors either. It's just a ridiculous situation, one where every participant has many things more prioritized than actual peace.

/rant

[81artmonk]

Anyway, just about everything has been attempted to bring a final, equitable peace, which at least to me means a two-state solution. That no peace has been achieved tells me neither side actually wants it.

Palistine has said it wants land. Isreal gave them land and they turned it down. Everytime isreal talks peace palistine does something to threaten isreal.

I agree to a point with your thoughts on isreal too, but IMO most of the problem lies with palistine. From what I've seen, Isreal has done quite a bit to appease palistine only to have their hand slapped away and than get attacked.

You have to remember that isreal is surrounded by nations who hate them. I'd be trigger happy too if I were in that scenerio.

[alexey]

Palistine has said it wants land. Isreal gave them land and they turned it down. Everytime isreal talks peace palistine does something to threaten isreal.

I agree to a point with your thoughts on isreal too, but IMO most of the problem lies with palistine. From what I've seen, Isreal has done quite a bit to appease palistine only to have their hand slapped away and than get attacked.

You have to remember that isreal is surrounded by nations who hate them. I'd be trigger happy too if I were in that scenerio.

Yeah both sides have hawkish fractions, but those in Israel do not have the capacity to undermine the whole process.

(obviously having a working government, institutions, etc, really helps in that... which is why, in my view, the answer to this conflict is development of institutions and economies in Palestinian lands.. That is why I am harboring some hope about this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salam_Fayyad)

[Thiebear]

the only question i think about in this:

IF Israel was to put down all of its weapons, tear down those walls and Pledge to live peacefully amongst the rest of the population.

a: peace would reign for 1000 years.

b: they would all be killed and dumped in the sea.

IF Palestinians were to put down their weapons, and abide by the latest rules (whatever they may be) and live peacefully amongst the rest of the population.

a: statehood would ensue and governance would be given over

b: they would all be killed and dumped in the sea.

i don't view them as having the same effect?

Somehow Egypt figured it out and it worked quite well.

[Jrew1223]

Alright I'm back,

This is the way I look at it:

The generation that lived before the mass migration of Jewish people lived together in co-existence. I know this because of what I have read and watched in the form of documentaries. History is written by the victors and because of that I don't put much into the ancient stories of biblical claims and so forth. We also forget that Zionism was formed during the time when German Nationalism Ideals were formed. (Read up on German Nationalism if you don't know what Im talking about. It's basically about how nation states were created by taking a group of people that would otherwise not identify with each other and bring them together by a created common history.)

What I am saying is that what we have today is the result of Jewish aggression and Palestinian defense. The reason I started this thread was to start a fire under some of your !@#$% because the biggest problem I see in our society today is that we rely on information that people tell us rather than go out and seek the information ourselves. When Operation Cast Lead happened in the Gaza Strip I remember telling my Muslim friends that if they didnt want Israel to attack then they should stop launching rockets into their neighborhoods! Instead of being stubborn and going with the information that I have been told all my life I decided to search out and see for myself what the situation was all about and what I found made me very angry...

I went back to the beginning of "this" conflict... I don't care about the possibly manipulated history that we are being taught that justifies one side over the other. I care about the people that are alive now and what is happening now and what Israel is doing to the Palestinians is disgusting. Don't take it from me... do your own research... Please...

What infuriates beyond belief is how in America today we have this huge deficit and we can pay for these BS wars in Afghanistan (Protecting our oil pipeline) and Iraq (strategic positioning) but god forbid we have money to get people jobs and pay for infrastructure improvements... How many of you know that currently we give Israel 7 Million dollars..... A DAY.... In aid? an we are contracted to give them 30 Billion in aid over the next few years? I makes me sick to my stomach that my tax money is being used to allow one group of people to ethnically cleanse another using white phosphorus and D.I.M.E. ammunition...

Please...

Prove me wrong...

-Jrew

[Jrew1223]

Palistine has said it wants land. Isreal gave them land and they turned it down. Everytime isreal talks peace palistine does something to threaten isreal.

I agree to a point with your thoughts on isreal too, but IMO most of the problem lies with palistine. From what I've seen, Isreal has done quite a bit to appease palistine only to have their hand slapped away and than get attacked.

You have to remember that isreal is surrounded by nations who hate them. I'd be trigger happy too if I were in that scenerio.

This is the way is a framed when being presented to the world community, but when you look at the details the reality comes out.

When you talk about the land that Israel would give them for which the Palestinians walked away from it makes it sound like Israel is trying to meet them half way. Reality is a different story. In the West Bank Israel has built settlements that are connected with a series of roads that only Jews can use. Also they built a wall that not just separates Israelis from the Palestinians, but walls off Palestinian villages from their farm lands which Israel annexes as part of the settlements. The land Israel offered consisted of nothing more than the non agricultural land not annexed which ends up being a series of non connecting islands making a Palestinian state not viable... No one could accept a deal like that when they want to become a nation so they walk away... but in the West the news is portrayed like Israel made a huge sacrifice and offered the best deal possible to the Palestinians and since they walked away it must mean that there is no reasoning with them and public opinion falls on the side of Israel backing them in whatever they want to do to these unreasonable irrationally hateful people... and you buy it hook line and sinker...

[Perky72]

Palistine has said it wants land. Isreal gave them land and they turned it down. Everytime isreal talks peace palistine does something to threaten isreal.

I agree to a point with your thoughts on isreal too, but IMO most of the problem lies with palistine. From what I've seen, Isreal has done quite a bit to appease palistine only to have their hand slapped away and than get attacked.

Israel has done its fair share of unprovoked incursions in order to disrupt peace processes too, or targeted assassinations. Every time I've been excited about a peace process, it's been broken up. Most of the time by Palestine, but also by Israel. This also takes place prior to negotiations. Israel and Palestinians both ratchet things up in order to gain a better position. And during negotations, both sides have often been intransigient, or put things in the plans that they knew could serve as cause to call it breached.

The Palestinians have been stupid in not accepting some Israeli proposals, but some of that is relative to what they have today (monday-morning QBing), with many growing Israeli settlements. The particulars of the conflict have changed--there wasn't much suicide bombing or violence prior to the 70s; but there weren't many if any settlements then either. The situation has gotten more difficult to negotiate, not less. But bottom-line, the political players in both seem comfortable to continue the status quo. Every day of that Israeli facts on ground will grow, so Palestinians should feel more forced to negotiate now. With no sanctions, no real punishment by the US benefactor, and flowing money and military aid from the US, Israel is not forced to negotiate, at all.

You have to remember that isreal is surrounded by nations who hate them. I'd be trigger happy too if I were in that scenerio.

Sure. But Hamas and the rest of Palestine isn't a threat to their sovereignty. The only strategic justification for keeping up the occupation is that the OT would serve as a buffer in the event of a future war with other states. But wars have gone on with the same situation, and assuming Palestine is given statehood, the loss of some checkpoint military wouldn't speed up any attack much.

[sacase]

The problem, of course, is that the Palestians were not Nazis or even supporters of Hitler at all, yet they are the ones that got displaced to make the Jewish homeland.

Israel should have been placed in the Rhineland. That would have been the fair solution.

But they were apart of the Ottoman Empire which supported the Germans in WWI. Like I said, sucks to be on the loosing side of a war, especially back then, when you could actually lose territory if you lost.

[Perky72]

the only question i think about in this:

IF Israel was to put down all of its weapons, tear down those walls and Pledge to live peacefully amongst the rest of the population.

a: peace would reign for 1000 years.

b: they would all be killed and dumped in the sea.

IF Palestinians were to put down their weapons, and abide by the latest rules (whatever they may be) and live peacefully amongst the rest of the population.

a: statehood would ensue and governance would be given over

b: they would all be killed and dumped in the sea.

i don't view them as having the same effect?

Somehow Egypt figured it out and it worked quite well.

The scenario does inform us of some levels of antipathy. But Israel wouldn't throw it's arms down, they'd remain more than capable of defending a multi-national attack, and assuming a lasting peace is settled, I'd certainly support giving them enough aid so that they continued to have military dominance and no real fear of losing a potential war. If the Occupied Territories continued their occasional missle attacks, I'd also support purely retaliatory strikes, similar to how Israel deals with Hezbollah in Lebanon.

But prolonged occupation for decades isn't a good solution.

I'd also like to add an option c to your Palestinian effect: Israel would continue to expand their settlements, and move Palestinians, until Palestinians were left with an extremely fragmented, small, or no territory.

Currently of the two sides Israel is certainly succeeding more in "driving the other into the sea", as territorial conquest goes.

[twa]

Zionism was in play way before you claim,beginning after the diaspora and certainly a force in the 1800's.

In 1861 the zion society was formed

[Prosperity]

But they were apart of the Ottoman Empire which supported the Germans in WWI. Like I said, sucks to be on the loosing side of a war, especially back then, when you could actually lose territory if you lost.

Palestine was a British mandate...

they were on the winning side (in ww2) last time I checked

[sacase]

Palestine was a British mandate...

they were on the winning side (in ww2) last time I checked

The modern problems started prior to WWII. They were apart of the Ottoman Empire, when they lost they became part of the British Mandate. Palestine was supposed to be Syria, however, the French took that land. So Blame the french (Joking). But they actually had an agreement in place to give Israel land and give palestine the land where syria is, then at the last minute it was reniged on. There were problems before that the though. Look at the history around the late 1800 to before WWII and you will see that it didn't start in WWII.

[Prosperity]

The modern problems started prior to WWII. They were apart of the Ottoman Empire, when they lost they became part of the British Mandate. Palestine was supposed to be Syria, however, the French took that land. So Blame the french (Joking). But they actually had an agreement in place to give Israel land and give palestine the land where syria is, then at the last minute it was reniged on. There were problems before that the though. Look at the history around the late 1800 to before WWII and you will see that it didn't start in WWII.

If you are saying none of this would have happened if Palestine stayed an independent country instead of being conquered by the Ottomans... then yes I'd agree with you. But fact, is, the British controlled that area at the time. And really, they are the ones that ****ed up the whole situation by basically promising the Arab Palestinians and the Jews the same land.

so I blame the British

[sacase]

If you are saying none of this would have happened if Palestine stayed an independent country instead of being conquered by the Ottomans... then yes I'd agree with you. But fact, is, the British controlled that area at the time. And really, they are the ones that ****ed up the whole situation by basically promising the Arab Palestinians and the Jews the same land.

so I blame the British

OK British and the French

[SoCalSkins]

so I blame the British

You must be Persian.

[djbubba4life]

well theyve only got until 2012 so well see who wins

[Thiebear]

Would you give up Statehood

Would you give up the ability to govern your own territories.

because of say 11,000 people a year moving in

or say 300 houses are built?

As of mid-June 2007, a Palestinian civil conflict was unfolding, as Hamas had taken control of the Gaza Strip from the Fatah-led forces while Fatah controlled most of the West Bank.

In June 2008, Hamas and Israel agreed to a cease-fire which has somewhat held in the following months.

[edit] 2009 Israeli elections

In January 2009, prior to the February 2009 Israeli elections, the then election front-runner and leader of Israel's right-wing Likud party, Benjamin Netanyahu, informed Middle East envoy Tony Blair that he would continue the policy of the Israeli governments of Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert by allowing "natural" growth of settlements in the West Bank, in contravention of the Road Map, but not building new ones[21]

Hillary Clinton said that Israel was in breach of the road map with its plans to demolish 80 Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem that Israel claims were built illegally. [22]

[edit] 2009 President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu debate on settlement freeze

In June 2009 Netanyahu announced Israel's acceptance of the Road Map while simultaneously rejecting a settlement freeze which is a main Israeli requirement under the Road Map [23] In rejecting President Obama's call for a settlement freeze Netanyahu also claimed that settlement expansion, so called "natural growth", was needed to allow settlers to raise families by moving to new larger houses rather than move to existing houses either elsewhere in the so called Occupied Territories or in Israel itself. [24] In June 2009 the construction of 300 new houses in the West Bank was announced by Defense Minister Ehud Barak. [25] Most of these "new" houses were already built or in the process of completion. The Defense Minister's permit for construction was just another layer on top of those already given earlier.

I know i'm not there, but i'd suck up the 300 houses to get the statehood, because with statehood comes all kinds of benefits you don't currently have..