Israel has already rejected that. Israel has already rejected that too. Palestine recognizing Israel's right to exist means only that the moderates are the one's talking that day, probably to English-language media, the next day they would likely call for the destruction of Israel in Arabic. Under no circumstances should the US or anyone else send money to Hamas. This is preposterous. The Israelis are not going to build a giant bridge over the middle of thier country, and they certainly aren't going to foot the bill. A more likely scenario would be for Israel to annex all the territory inside the security fence, deport any Palestinians on the wrong side, and call it a day. A better soulution would be for Jordan to take back the West Bank and give citizenship to the people living there, for Egypt to take Gaza and give citizenship to the people living there, and for both countries to keep their new people in check. They are already both on reasonably good terms with Israel, at least as far as the governments are concerned, and you get rid of the made up Palestinian state that has caused so many problems since it's inception, the majority of the people go back to being Jordanians, as was intended.
Israel can be pressured to accept it if the whole world applies pressure - including the U.S. It can be done. The world must accept that groups like Hamas, Hezbelloh, and every country in the middle east must be a neogiating partner. Everyone must agree - not just the moderates. Frankly, the claims of them being terrorists have been shaken by recent actions of Israel. Before the actions Israel took in Lebannon, I was far more sympathetic to their cause. I've lost a lot of that and now see the IDF as the other side of the coin to Hezbelloh and Hamas. That's what Israel gets for disrespecting the world community and waging war and killing many civilians for nothing. And yes, Israel should either build a bridge or a tunnel. The U.N. can foot the bill, but Israel should build it. Unless Israel takes steps to show the world it is a civilized nation that will actually care for it's neighbor's and their prosperity instead of just completing destroying the economies of terrority around it, there will be no peace.
Why if it will bring them peace? That's their problem, the international community won't accept anything less. They either accept the '67 borders or the Palestinians will just 'wait 'em out', reject a two-state solution, and eventually force a one-state solution over the next few decades. Time is not on Israel's side. Not granting the Palestinians their statehood will ensure their eventual demise as a Jewish state. Last I checked the Israelis are yet to recognize the right of a Palestinian state to exist and are yet to enforce relevant UN resolutions (or the so-called "roadmap to peace" plan, which call for a freeze on settlement growth). On the other hand, every single Arab nation offered Israel a blanket security guarantee and full diplomatic relations in exchange for returning to the pre-67 borders. Yes, you're right, the Arabs want to wipe Israel off the map... Yes, that will work Wow! Thanks for showing your true colors, I can see how concerned you're about the Palestinian people, it's truly touching! Now flip this around and insert "Israel" and let me know how it sounds: "and you get rid of the made up Israeli state that has caused so many problems since it's inception." You would be called an anti-Semite on the spot (and rightly so) if you had said the above. But I guess you can get away with saying it about the Palestinians...
I don't believe every conflict can be successfully negotiatied peacefully but at the sametime not every conflict can be solved militarily. Israel's incursion into Lebanon and the invasion of Iraq should show us that.
Israel can't be pressured because they're hysterically and historically kept in the mentality for survival. There's several reasons for this, historical persecution, surrounded by hundreds of millions of hostile people, an understanding of the fickle nature of American politics, and global isolation from their responses to terrorism and war. In one op/ed, someone considered Israel as being kept on American life support. How do think Israeli leadership has considered that? You can make them bend, but they won't concede to non-binding terror agreements. Their extreme sense for security is inherently cultural for them. Why do you think they have nukes?
Thats a great point. terror will not break the isrealies will. infact it will rally the moderate like Shimon press behind the likes of olmert and Benjiman netinyaho( not sure how it's spellt).
If Hamas and Hezbelloh sign on board, and the U.N. can place an international force along the borders - then yes, I think Israel can be pressured to accept it. Clinton was able to almost do it....and a strong leader who can play fairly and has the support of the American population will be able to crack that. Israel can be made to accept a peace agreement. Eventually every nation will have nukes...it's in their best interest to make peace sooner then later.
Because they don't believe it will bring them peace. They think the terrorists will not be stopped by the peacekeepers, and the only real effect they will have is to stand in the way of an Israeli response. The fact that the UN is basically hostile to Israel doesn't make swallowing this pill any easier for them. There is no "wait 'em out" option. The Palestinians can wait as long as they want. Until there is something out there forcing Israel to accept a one-state, majority Palestinian solution, they can wait forever. The status quo is a lot more appealing for Israel than for the Palestinians. In fact, formalizing the status quo would be more than acceptable from an Israeli perspective. Waiting it out is the tactic Israel has been employing for a long time, it is the Palestinians that are constantly trying to negotiate themselves a better deal. Hamas's charter calls for the destruction of Israel, the PLA map of Palestine includes Israel, Hizballah calls Israel an illegal state, and Iran openly calls for Israel to be eliminated. On the other hand, Israel has not called for the elimination of any state, only for the disarming of terrorist organizations. yeah we can both post emoticons, great argument. There are no Palestinian people, or rather those who are the Palestinian people somehow became so a few decades ago and are indistinguishable from Jordanians. There used to be two states from the British mandate, one was Israel and the other was Transjordan. Arafat and his crew started trouble in Transjordan and got slaughtered by the tens of thousands. Then they started trouble with Israel, who has had a much more controlled response. Israel has offered a peaceful settlement, one that was rejected by the "Palestinians". More recently, the "Palestinians" elected a terrorist organization to be the ruling party in the territories, one that was founded based on the idea of the destruction of Israel. So no, I am not terribly concerned with the political wishes of the "Palestinian" people. On the other hand, were they to become Jordanians and Egyptians, they would be a lot better off in the long run. For example, the GDP per capita in Egypt and Jordan is about 4 times that in the West Bank and about 7 times that in Gaza. They would have normalized relations with Israel, they would be on reasonably good terms with their Arab neighbors, and they would be on good terms with the United States. All of that, and they would keep most of the land they are fighting over anyway. Getting rid of Israel would solve a lot of problems, but the doing would be much more difficult. There are no neighboring countries that could absorb Israel where the Israelis would fit in with the established population. In fact, there are no majority Jewish countries in the world outside of Israel. The UAE is nearby and would give the Israelis a boost to their economy like the Palestinians would get in my scenario, but they are politically and culturally quite a bit different than Israel. Where there a bunch of surrounding Jewish nations with superior living conditions to Israel and no Arab Muslim nations, and Israel was a non-contiguous nation in an inferior position to Palestine, then it would make more sense to have Israel absorbed into her neighbors, but that isn't the case.
Technically there are no "Israeli" people either since Israel didn't exists as a country until 1948. There is an ancient Israelite tribe but the land of Modern Israel was occupied by several other different tribes and since the demise of ancient Judea by several other peoples. Further modern Israel was founded as a secular state and not as a religious kingdom that was Biblical envisioned. At the time of the founding of Israel many orthodox Jews opposed the idea of Israel as heresy and unJewish since they believed a Jewish homeland would only be formed when the Messiah came. If there are no Palestinians then there are no Israelis either only a mixture of immigrants from Europe and North Africa who have settled in the region. Whether they were called Palestinians or not people were living in the region prior to 1948 and those people call themselves Palestinians.
Israel was mandated by the British, thus creating the Israelis. Those who are citizens of Israel are the Israelis. They have existed since 1948. You are right that there were no Israelis before 1948. The Palestinians were Jordanians after the British created Israel and Transjordan. The Arab League made the terrorist organization called the PLO, which called for the destruction of Israel and replacing it with Palestine, in 1964. At that time there was still no state called Palestine, and there were still no Palestinians. There were Jordanians and egyptians that thought it would be a good idea to get rid of Israel and replace it with a new state called Palestine that would be run by the PLO. The earliest declaration of a Palestinian state was in 1988, to no real effect and from Algiers. The first time the state of Palestine could reasonably be said to exist would be in 1994 when the Palestinian Authority was created. I suppose anyone born in the West Bank or Gaza, or anyone who became a naturalized citizen thereof after 1994 would legitimately be able to claim they are a Palestinian. Everyone else is from another country, and they want to get together to form there own, many of them in the place where Israel is now.
In essence the british dupped the palestinians. they got them to kickout the ottomon empier, but then pretty much abandoned them when the going got tough...
Who were the people who lived in what is now called Israel prior to 1948? You seem to be hung up on terms but if they choose to call themselve "Rocketonians" that wouldn't change that the people called "Palestinians" are the descendents of people who lived in that land prior to the creation of Israel whereas most Israelis are descendents of people who came from Europe and North Africa in 1948. For instance if I officially change my name to "Yao Ming Kicks Ass" does that invalidate my US citizenship or my deed to my house allowing someone else to move in?
They were members of whatever state they happened to be born into, largely depending upon the date. For a while they would be Ottoman's, for a brief period both Arab and Jew would have been called Palestinians, then the Arabs would be called Jordanians and the Jews Israelis. You are a little confused in your description though, because neither group is largely decended from people living there for a long time. Most of the inhabitants from both sides started moving into the area as a result of the Zionists changing the landscape from a malarial swamp to a liveable area. It was the fact that it was basically unoccupied and not a nation-state that made the area such an attractive one for the British Mandate. No one was being displaced (maybe a few scattered nomads, but not a significant population), there was just empty land. So, it isn't so much about the changing of names, it is about the fact that all of the people were recent immigrants, there was a large area that was split up, with the Arabs getting Jordan and the Jews getting Israel, and there was no seperate Palestine. The "Palestinians" (the Arabs living in the British Mandate) were given Jordan. The "Israelis" (the Jews living in the British Mandate) were given Israel. Nothing was taken from anyone involved in this conflict. Historical claims made by either side are meaningless.
Isreal is much stronger than the rest of middle east at the moment. However, it will not always be in that position. What happens say in 100 years when some Arab nation is the dominant force in that region? Will Isreal be wiped off the map just like 2000 years ago? When will the conflict end? Food for thought.
And what about Arabs born into what we call "Israel." Who are they a citizen of? Jordan only extends so far. There were Arabs living in the nation known as "israel" These names are simply semantics and an utopian and arbitrary distinction between two people. The fact is that people overlap the borders and there never was nor is there a stable way to create any stable national identity for Palestinians. Ok now you're just talking. There were always people in Israel proper. Yes it wasn't as heavily concentrated as it is now, but don't claim that there were no people there. Most arabs were shooed out during the 1947 war. If Israel looks devoid of Arabs its only because most Arabs were evicted from their homes during the first war. That's why the right of return is such a big issue for Palestinians becuase there were so many Palestinians that live in modern Israel that were kicked out. Nice try but your history is wrong. The British Mandate of Palestine was split in 3 not 2. TransJordan was in east of the Jordan River and Israel was in the west. HOWEVER, the British and the UN voted to partition Israel into two seperate states. They voted to partition BECAUSE there were Arabs in Israel and BECAUSE the Israelis were not creating a state in the spirit of the Balfour Declaration that was to recognize the full rights of the local Arab population. This wasn't some clean split of land. There were people in Israel who's rights were utterly ignored and systematically left out of the negotiating process until Rabin started to negotiate with Fatah. Your revisionist history leaves out a lot of important details.
From Thomas Freidman, author of the book, The World is flat: The best way to fight terrorism is to research for alternate source of energy and stop buying oil from the middle east, venezuela to cut down fund sources of these terrorist groups. Makes sense.
Damn You geeimsobored you did it to me again. You've taken posted pretty much what I was going to say to SM and did a better job than I could! All I got left now for this thread is to change my name to Yao Ming Kicks Ass so I can get some mad props.
