The Palastinian problem is a preplexing one for sure, I have been reading up on it, and saw a few interesting things. Did you guys know that Jordan is 70% palastinian, and that in the '50s they opened their borders to the Palastinian refugees, and what did they do? They tried to overthrow the King and the Jordanian ruler had to bring out the tanks and kill thousands of them to quell the revolt, so they closed their borders too. Palastinians are living in Syria, Jordan, and all over the Arab world and are denied citizenship, because the ARAB governments dont' trust them. I know this is generalizing, but it seems that Israel is getting a lot of heat for retaliating against these people and none of the ARAB world has stepped forward and said...hey, you can have a small piece of OUR country. Heck, most of the Arab world was created this century anyway. Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Israel etc..etc... The only answer in my opinion is for Israel to go into each house and take away their weapons, and then build a wall between them and the Palastinian state. Yes, give them back the west bank and let them rule themselves, but don't allow them access into Israel without a thorough search. I also think Sharon must go, the guy has no clue how to deal with an enemy that is not a military target. DaDakota
I think the percentage is closer to 50-60% of Jordan being Palestinian...but regardless your right they are treated horribly through out the Middle East. I don't believe Palestinians are allowed to own property in Lebanon...etc. But the fact is...even if the Palestinian situation wasn't that bad, most Muslims still wouldn't like Israel simply due to their repeated (at least perceived) efforts to sabotage The Dome of the Rock.
Boy, Agreed, but if you defuse the Palastinian issue it would limit the rest of the Arab world's political stance. DaDakota
I can't believe this did not spark further discussion, does no one care that the same Arab community that is lambasting the Jews for their treatment of Palastinians basically treats the Palastinians in thier own countries the same way? Double standard anyone? DaDakota
Wakko67, Nah, I am way to moderate to handle all the Treeman stuff. I do like interesting discussions though, and no one seems to care that the Palastinians are mistreated all over the Arab world too... DaDakota
No, actually I find that interesting, I'm just messing with ya. It seems like whenever I come to the hangout I learn something new about these troubling times.
No Arab country actually wants the Palestinians in their territory. Why do you think they're all constantly pushing for "right of return"? It is not because the governments there actually care about the Palestinians.
Treeman, Why not allow the Palastinians right of return. Israel should give up the west bank and seal it's borders. DaDakota
DaDa, They want the West Bank and the right to return to homes in Israel proper and become Israeli citizens. Once the Palestinians constituted a majority they could elect a government which decided to become a part of Palestine. Right of return == the end of the nation of Israel.
I meant right of return for the Palestinians from other countries to return to the Palastinian land. If that is what is meant by right of return, then I can clearly see why the Israelis will never allow it. DD
hhhmmmm Well. . . . . .Treeman. ...sounds like a reason to close the american borders, eh? So basically Palestinians cannot get citizenship in isreal not matter what. . . . simply because of their heritage Is America the easiest country in the world to get citizenship? Which countries are easier . . . harder? or does that depend on where ya coming from? America *is* truly unique and great Rocket River
DaDa: I think the fact that nobody thinks the Arab world is all that nice about human rights sort of gets obscured... ...but what if the Saudi Arabians did start protesting vigorously for a democracy? I could imagine a huge quandary, there. On the one hand, popular revolutions have not always been friendly to the US. Could very likely be more religious than the current monarch. However, does the US really want to go that route again? Suppress democracy for the sake of supporting friendly autocrats? I can imagine that will be a tough call, and it's only a matter of time before someone tests that regime. I mention this, because you're completely right that the other ME states don't behave saint-like. Israel just gets singled out because its citizens - oops - occupants of occupied territories... are so much more upset about their maltreatment. The present situation is becoming more and more frightening. The bombs keep going off, and Sharon still thinks a military solution is possible. And it isn't, short of killing every Palestinian out there. When people feel they have nothing left to lose... killing indiscrimately doesn't do too much good.
RR: America is the easiest country in the world to gain citizenship in. And it is far too easy, if you ask me. Not everyone coming here actually wants to become an American, and not everyone who becomes a citizen actually likes America. That could be our downfall 40 years from now... But that's another topic. Thousands of Arabs have Israeli citizenship already, because in the past their families have shown that they do not desire the destruction of Israel. Perhaps if the Palestinians and other Arabs had not been so gleeful about such a prospect, they might have been afforded the same right? Are you saying that the Israelis should just bend over and die? Do you really expect them to make to choose death over existence? Just out of curiosity, do you hate this country, too?
haven: Odd. You criticize the Israelis for their military action - which has been forced due to the suicide attacks and Arafat's refusal to do anything about it - and say that no military solution is possible. Yet in the next sentence you make excuses for the very suicide actions that prompted that military action in the first place, curiously claiming that "killing indiscrimately doesn't do too much good"... I don't get the logic here, unless the logic demands a double standard. Nice slip about the Palestinians not being citizens, too. So, I guess you support right of return, as well? This would fit in with your overall anti-Israel bias nicely... Just a thought: if they were actually serious about peaceful coexistence with Israel, then they could restart negotiations at any time and eventually become citizens of a Palestinian state. Re: Saudi - the Royal family will be overthrown before this is all over. And it will be a good thing.
Weren't you leaving? Your obsession is tiresome and your logic insipid. I'll try to explain this simply, so you'll be sure to understand. Coercive force is effective when the cost of the sustenance of the status quo becomes greater than the aggregate benefit of it. Unless Sharon wants to insist on truly draconian measures that would turn the entire world against him, he can't inflict a sufficient penalty for terrorist/guerilla tactics that would make it interolable in comparison to the Palestinian status quo. The Palestinians are already in a terrible situation. The Israelis, conversely, are relatively content with the status quo, insofar as they have control. Yet at what point does relinquishing territory at the Palestinian's price become less painful than having attacks leveled against them? It's all about the threshold for pain at work here. Incidentally, arguments like the one above are why I no longer regard you as a worthy opponent. THe cost-benefit analysis I speak of is simple and almost universally accepted (form wise, not necessarily content). Yet you make a form-argument regarding the situation, without even understanding my premise, since your critique was irrelevant to the underlying logic of my argument. You also create a fatal error of judgement, in this situation, by assuming a moral evaluation of form, rather than content. Content can be critiqued morally; form can only be critiqued ethically, and even that is often dubious. I speak of efficacy. Spare me your evaluations of my logic. I'd love to see you attempt to write a semi-coherent, logical essay. This is irrelevant. I'm ambivalent concerning the right of return. I refer to the current state of affairs, in which Palestinians are citizens neither of Israel, nor an autonomous Palestinian state. Alas, Israel only became serious about correcting the situation after the violence became particularly painful. Look at the catch-22 situation regarding the truces: they're definitely good in-and-of themselves, yet they, at least temporarily, bring everything Israel wants. Peace, without the relinquishing of territory. Meanwhile, the Palestinians, during the truces have neither what they want, nor coercive threat. I'm not certain if the US will protect them, or not. Probably not if the war on terrorism is easily resolved... but if they're viewed as essential strategic partners, and the replacement regime would not be... we might have problems.
I think DaDakota brings a valid point and one that I have noted many times. I believe that the Israeli's are wrong in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict because of their occupation, yet the Arab countries are no better than Israel in my ways. They seem to relish in having Israel as a rallying call in their countries so the people are united against this outside evil and forget to notice the inefficient, corrupt governments in which they preside. A huge differential between the rich and poor with little to no trickle down effect into society. You have Arab "royals" more enamored with giving gifts to western models and playboy bunnies rather than trying to run their countries properly. The Arab countries are wrong, as is Israel. But as an American, I realize that we financially prop up Israel, so its actions are more relevant to us. With the most foreign aid going to this country the size of Rhode Island with a Population the size of Houston, I think we should be responsible for where our American tax money is going.
