The Palestine thread

[seafoid]

Child who could not stop crying until he was taken to his dead mother

https://twitter.com/abdellahiAM/status/493924264601329664

Would remind you of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7d0GTQ2ovE

[seafoid]

Home
Opinion


   





 
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.608118   

   

It's all Hamas' fault, right Israel?

More than 1,200 Gazans have been killed, about 80 percent of them civilians. But Israelis' hands are clean and their consciences are quiet - so quiet you could cry.

By Gideon Levy    |  Jul. 31, 2014 | 5:28 AM |  6


It's so easy to be an Israeli; your tender conscience is pure as the driven snow: Everything is Hamas' fault. The rockets are the fault of Hamas; that can be taken for granted. Hamas started the war, for no reason; that, too, "goes without saying." Hamas is a vicious terrorist organization, beasts in human form, born to kill, fundamentalists – and apart from that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

Some 400,000 Palestinians have been displaced. More than 1,200 have been killed, about 80 percent of them civilians, half of these women and children. Around 50 families have been obliterated, their homes bombed with them inside. It has reached the dimensions of a real massacre. But Israelis' hands are clean and their consciences are quiet – so quiet you could cry. It's Hamas' fault.

We'll leave the root causes of this cursed repression and denial to the psychologists. Since the days when Israel accused the Palestinians of killing their own children by means of the Israel Defense Forces, we haven't seen such denial. After incubating for years, the disease is now a raging epidemic whose carriers are now symptomatic. The national conscience hasn't moved a muscle in response to this atrocity, and there are forces working to keep it that way.

But even through the malignant cloud of denial, even understanding how easy it is to blame everything on Hamas — Israel has never had such a convenient enemy, which can be framed for all its sins – we must ask whether everything really is the fault of Hamas. Is Israel genuinely completely innocent? In the face of bleeding, ruined Gaza, the work of Israeli hands, such denial is incomprehensible.

Hamas is a vicious terror organization? How has it been more vicious than the IDF in this war? In that it doesn't "knock on the roof" 80 seconds before bombing a home? That it aims its rockets at civilian populations, just as the IDF does, but less effectively? That it wants to destroy Israel? How many Israelis want to destroy Gaza? Meanwhile, everyone knows who is destroying whom.

Israel's sanctimoniousness reaches a peak in its concern for Gaza's residents: Look at how Hamas oppresses them, cry the Israeli democrats, so solicitous of Palestinian rights. Hamas is tyrannical, but its tyranny is nothing compared to that of Israel, which has subjected the Gaza Strip to a seven-year siege and a 47-year occupation.

What has destroyed Gaza's society and economy is above all the siege, and thanks to those who seek its welfare, who imposed it. Thanks also to those who are worried about its lack of democracy, who are shocked by the corruption, who denounce its leaders for staying in luxury hotels or hiding in bunkers, who are troubled by the enormous sums used for tunnels and rockets instead of playgrounds and after-school activities. Truly, thanks.

What about Israel? Do its leaders live in tents? Aren't enormous sums spent on superfluous submarines and secret explosives, instead of on health, education and welfare? Hamas is fundamentalist? Israel is on the way. Hamas oppresses women? That's bad, but Israel has that too, at least in one large community.

Why did Gazans elect Hamas, instead of a moderate leadership? Because the moderates have been trying for years to achieve something, anything, and all they have received is humiliation and Israeli rejectionism. Has Israel given the Palestinians a reason to choose the Palestine Liberation Organization's route of diplomacy over Hamas' violent resistance? Has the PLO brought them an inch closer to statehood or freedom?

Hamas at least won the release of 1,000 prisoners and also preserved a measure of self-respect, even at the terrible price that the desperate Gazans are now willing to pay. What has Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas brought his people? Nothing. A photo op with Barack Obama.

I'm no fan of Hamas, quite the contrary. But Israel's attempt to put all the blame on Hamas is outrageous. The international community will soon judge this war's atrocities. Hamas may be reprimanded, deservedly, but Israel will be condemned and ostracized far more. And then Israelis will say, 'It's Hamas' fault. And the world will laugh.

[johnneycool]

Empathy

This seems to be the latest attempt at winning the media battle, Mark Regev was at it last night with the line that the IDF were more or less helping the Palestinians by smashing the stranglehold Hamas had over them, forcing them to act as human shields and all that.

They've a funny way of going about it, if anything Hamas will emerge stronger out of this.

[seafoid]

Empathy

This seems to be the latest attempt at winning the media battle, Mark Regev was at it last night with the line that the IDF were more or less helping the Palestinians by smashing the stranglehold Hamas had over them, forcing them to act as human shields and all that.

They've a funny way of going about it, if anything Hamas will emerge stronger out of this.

Yeah, slaughtering their kids is really above love and respect.
Destroying the water system is about how much Israel cares.
Bombing homes is selfless.
Deliberately targeting UN schools is above all fluffy.
If Israel didn't love the people of Gaza so much it wouldn't control how many calories get into the Strip.
Israel is straight out of 1984.

und Arbeit macht Frei

[Sidney]

Mike
Could you explain at what point in the last 70 years would the Palestinians ever have felt they had the ability to peacefully self determine their future?

The answer is there has been no point. Likewise, there has been no point in the last 70 years that the Israelies have not been under attack in some form.

This is why I think the only solution is an armed, international  intervention to ensure both sides get what the claim they are looking for. I don't think either state will exist by the time sanctions have the required effect. They will obliterate each other.

One problem is that many people don't believe in the two state solution but wont actually state their position. I have only seen a couple of responses to AZoffaly's post. I think its impossible for the international community to help solve this issue if there is no clarity on what the path forward is and people refuse to take a responsible stance. This intellectual dishonesty is reflected on this board.

I would be quite up front in that I don't believe in a two state solution, either for reasons of justice or practicality.

As I've said before, that the creation of an imperialistic, religious fundamentalist state by stealing other people's land was allowed to happen was a disastrous historical mistake.

I don't believe in the notion of a Jewish state for a Jewish people no more than I believe in the notion of a Muslim state for a Muslim people, a Catholic state for a Catholic people or a Protestant state for a Protestant people.

The Palestinians cannot destroy the Jewish population that is there now, the Israelis cannot wipe out the Palestinian population (although they're giving it a good shot).

Israeli colonisation of and control of the West Bank now runs so deep that they have made a two state solution unviable. But a two state solution was never their aim, and Benjamin Netanyahu is quite clear on this: "I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-finally-speaks-his-mind/#ixzz392DqMJCW

That's categorical. According to Netanyahu, there will never be a Palestinian state.


In a sane world, a one-state solution, Israel/Palestine, with equal rights for both sides is what should happen, and what I want to see happen.

What are the chances of that? Slim to none. I absolutely believe the vast majority of Palestinians would be very happy to accept that but there's no chance Israel ever will.

A one-state solution would be completely impractical, say its critics. Maybe it might be, maybe not.

But as opposed to the practicality of what's happening now, or the practicality what can only be assumed is Israel's real long-term goal, to ultimately drive the Palestinians out of both the West Bank and Gaza?

This is the situation that Israel has created. A situation where there are seemingly no solutions.

[LeoMc]

1 - Israel is guilty of war crimes, and the atrocities currently ongoing are more of the same.
2 - Israel is illegally settling Gaza and the West Bank, and should be forced to revert to the 1967 UN Boundary.
3 - Israel, within those boundaries has a right to exist.
4 - Palestine, within those boundaries has a right to exist.
5 - An external force, probably the UN, will be required to keep each side from attacking the other.
6 - Hamas has fired rockets into Israel, and this is again criminal behaviour, but it does not excuse the Israeli response.

Those points are all reasonable but they are not a reflection of reality. Israel will never tolerate a Palestinian state in the Holy Land.That is the starting point. And there is no point in thinking that Israel is a normal country that just needs a bit of George Mitchell to bring things back to equilibrium.
   

..and Hamas will not tolerate anything other than a muslim state ...stop picking and choosing the realities you acknowledge. You have to deal with both realities yet you make no serious attempt to do so.

Hamas wants the siege lifted. They are willing to accept 2 states. But Israel wants all the land and the siege straight after any ceasefire.
Israel is turning  fascist.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.607924
I suppose it had to happen. 

And I don't have to accept the argument that Israel has no choice other than fascism.

Israel has bombed 6 UN schools. Is that acceptable ?

No. It is not acceptable. It is a war crime.

What about 95% of Israeli Jews approving the carnage ?

That's the difference between you and me Seafoid. I can make an unequivocal, unqualified condemnation of a war crime. Apparently this is not enough for you. You seem to want me to hate jews as well.

The twitter link you posted had a headline "95% of Israelies support the massacre in Gaza". If you actually read what the survey question was it was whether "Operation protective edge is justified". If you ask someone "do you support the massacre in Gaza" that is different to asking them "Do you think operation protective edge is justified"

We have already been through this with GHD's "subhuman" comments. If you ask people questions in wartime and you extrapolate conclusions as to their "humanity" etc then you are going to get a skewed information.

It is irresponsible and it wont help stop the carnage or further Palestinian self-determinism so I'd advise you to stop this line of attack because you are merely proving to everybody what I have said about you all along i.e that it is their Jewishness, above all else, that troubles you.

International force yada yada Help stop the carnage dhera dhera

All the American Senators believe in Israel.
Sure you would too with that sort of money

The problem with Zionism is that it takes up too many evenings.

Is this your way of saying Mikes proposal will not work?
Do you have an alternative proposal?
If we are too far down the line for the 2 state solution of 1995 is a 1 state solution the answer?

[seafoid]

@ Sheehy

"Likewise, there has been no point in the last 70 years that the Israelies have not been under attack in some form. "

That sentence is complete horseshit.
That's why I say you are on the side of hasbara
And is Israel worth the trashing of international law, the Geneva conventions and the law of war ?

[seafoid]

1 - Israel is guilty of war crimes, and the atrocities currently ongoing are more of the same.
2 - Israel is illegally settling Gaza and the West Bank, and should be forced to revert to the 1967 UN Boundary.
3 - Israel, within those boundaries has a right to exist.
4 - Palestine, within those boundaries has a right to exist.
5 - An external force, probably the UN, will be required to keep each side from attacking the other.
6 - Hamas has fired rockets into Israel, and this is again criminal behaviour, but it does not excuse the Israeli response.

Those points are all reasonable but they are not a reflection of reality. Israel will never tolerate a Palestinian state in the Holy Land.That is the starting point. And there is no point in thinking that Israel is a normal country that just needs a bit of George Mitchell to bring things back to equilibrium.
   

..and Hamas will not tolerate anything other than a muslim state ...stop picking and choosing the realities you acknowledge. You have to deal with both realities yet you make no serious attempt to do so.

Hamas wants the siege lifted. They are willing to accept 2 states. But Israel wants all the land and the siege straight after any ceasefire.
Israel is turning  fascist.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.607924
I suppose it had to happen. 

And I don't have to accept the argument that Israel has no choice other than fascism.

Israel has bombed 6 UN schools. Is that acceptable ?

No. It is not acceptable. It is a war crime.

What about 95% of Israeli Jews approving the carnage ?

That's the difference between you and me Seafoid. I can make an unequivocal, unqualified condemnation of a war crime. Apparently this is not enough for you. You seem to want me to hate jews as well.

The twitter link you posted had a headline "95% of Israelies support the massacre in Gaza". If you actually read what the survey question was it was whether "Operation protective edge is justified". If you ask someone "do you support the massacre in Gaza" that is different to asking them "Do you think operation protective edge is justified"

We have already been through this with GHD's "subhuman" comments. If you ask people questions in wartime and you extrapolate conclusions as to their "humanity" etc then you are going to get a skewed information.

It is irresponsible and it wont help stop the carnage or further Palestinian self-determinism so I'd advise you to stop this line of attack because you are merely proving to everybody what I have said about you all along i.e that it is their Jewishness, above all else, that troubles you.

International force yada yada Help stop the carnage dhera dhera

All the American Senators believe in Israel.
Sure you would too with that sort of money

The problem with Zionism is that it takes up too many evenings.

Is this your way of saying Mikes proposal will not work?
Do you have an alternative proposal?
If we are too far down the line for the 2 state solution of 1995 is a 1 state solution the answer?

The only way to stop it is to take AIPAC out of American politics.
AIPAC wants apartheid.
Do you think anyone else can do anything ? Answers on a postcard.

[Mike Sheehy]

Mike
Could you explain at what point in the last 70 years would the Palestinians ever have felt they had the ability to peacefully self determine their future?

The answer is there has been no point. Likewise, there has been no point in the last 70 years that the Israelies have not been under attack in some form.

This is why I think the only solution is an armed, international  intervention to ensure both sides get what the claim they are looking for. I don't think either state will exist by the time sanctions have the required effect. They will obliterate each other.

One problem is that many people don't believe in the two state solution but wont actually state their position. I have only seen a couple of responses to AZoffaly's post. I think its impossible for the international community to help solve this issue if there is no clarity on what the path forward is and people refuse to take a responsible stance. This intellectual dishonesty is reflected on this board.

I would be quite up front in that I don't believe in a two state solution, either for reasons of justice or practicality.

As I've said before, that the creation of an imperialistic, religious fundamentalist state by stealing other people's land was allowed to happen was a disastrous historical mistake.

I don't believe in the notion of a Jewish state for a Jewish people no more than I believe in the notion of a Muslim state for a Muslim people, a Catholic state for a Catholic people or a Protestant state for a Protestant people.

The Palestinians cannot destroy the Jewish population that is there now, the Israelis cannot wipe out the Palestinian population (although they're giving it a good shot).

Israeli colonisation of and control of the West Bank now runs so deep that they have made a two state solution unviable. But a two state solution was never their aim, and Benjamin Netanyahu is quite clear on this: "I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-finally-speaks-his-mind/#ixzz392DqMJCW

That's categorical. According to Netanyahu, there will never be a Palestinian state.


In a sane world, a one-state solution, Israel/Palestine, with equal rights for both sides is what should happen, and what I want to see happen.

What are the chances of that? Slim to none. I absolutely believe the vast majority of Palestinians would be very happy to accept that but there's no chance Israel ever will.

A one-state solution would be completely impractical, say its critics. Maybe it might be, maybe not.

But as opposed to the practicality of what's happening now, or the practicality what can only be assumed is Israel's real long-term goal, to ultimately drive the Palestinians out of both the West Bank and Gaza?

This is the situation that Israel has created. A situation where there are seemingly no solutions.

That is a good response and, unlike Seafoid, I believe you want a one state solution for the right reasons.  However, I have to disagree with you. it is not just impractical.It is close to impossible. I have seen no evidence that Hamas or any of the other Jihadis in the region will ever allow a jewish minority to exist in peace in the caliphate that is their ultimate aim. They will make all the right noises now that they have the eyes of the world on them but they are lying. You only have to look at what is happening with ISIS to see what they will do if they ever get the upper hand.

Also, we all know that Israelies play the same game which is why I am saying that they must be compelled, by force to obey the UN mandate. But it has to be a controlled force not a force bent on their destruction.

I believe the two state solution is is the only solution. If the situation can be normalized between the two states then, possibly, and this would be a long time off, you could revisit the idea of a single state.

[Mike Sheehy]

1 - Israel is guilty of war crimes, and the atrocities currently ongoing are more of the same.
2 - Israel is illegally settling Gaza and the West Bank, and should be forced to revert to the 1967 UN Boundary.
3 - Israel, within those boundaries has a right to exist.
4 - Palestine, within those boundaries has a right to exist.
5 - An external force, probably the UN, will be required to keep each side from attacking the other.
6 - Hamas has fired rockets into Israel, and this is again criminal behaviour, but it does not excuse the Israeli response.

Those points are all reasonable but they are not a reflection of reality. Israel will never tolerate a Palestinian state in the Holy Land.That is the starting point. And there is no point in thinking that Israel is a normal country that just needs a bit of George Mitchell to bring things back to equilibrium.
   

..and Hamas will not tolerate anything other than a muslim state ...stop picking and choosing the realities you acknowledge. You have to deal with both realities yet you make no serious attempt to do so.

Hamas wants the siege lifted. They are willing to accept 2 states. But Israel wants all the land and the siege straight after any ceasefire.
Israel is turning  fascist.
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.607924
I suppose it had to happen. 

And I don't have to accept the argument that Israel has no choice other than fascism.

Israel has bombed 6 UN schools. Is that acceptable ?

No. It is not acceptable. It is a war crime.

What about 95% of Israeli Jews approving the carnage ?

That's the difference between you and me Seafoid. I can make an unequivocal, unqualified condemnation of a war crime. Apparently this is not enough for you. You seem to want me to hate jews as well.

The twitter link you posted had a headline "95% of Israelies support the massacre in Gaza". If you actually read what the survey question was it was whether "Operation protective edge is justified". If you ask someone "do you support the massacre in Gaza" that is different to asking them "Do you think operation protective edge is justified"

We have already been through this with GHD's "subhuman" comments. If you ask people questions in wartime and you extrapolate conclusions as to their "humanity" etc then you are going to get a skewed information.

It is irresponsible and it wont help stop the carnage or further Palestinian self-determinism so I'd advise you to stop this line of attack because you are merely proving to everybody what I have said about you all along i.e that it is their Jewishness, above all else, that troubles you.

International force yada yada Help stop the carnage dhera dhera

All the American Senators believe in Israel.
Sure you would too with that sort of money

The problem with Zionism is that it takes up too many evenings.

Is this your way of saying Mikes proposal will not work?
Do you have an alternative proposal?
If we are too far down the line for the 2 state solution of 1995 is a 1 state solution the answer?

Seafoid is not interested in a lasting solution. This what anti-semites are all about.

Zionist this, hasbara that blah, blah...

In the end Its all about  jew hating with him and the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is just a vehicle for that.

[seafoid]

Mike
Could you explain at what point in the last 70 years would the Palestinians ever have felt they had the ability to peacefully self determine their future?

The answer is there has been no point. Likewise, there has been no point in the last 70 years that the Israelies have not been under attack in some form.

This is why I think the only solution is an armed, international  intervention to ensure both sides get what the claim they are looking for. I don't think either state will exist by the time sanctions have the required effect. They will obliterate each other.

One problem is that many people don't believe in the two state solution but wont actually state their position. I have only seen a couple of responses to AZoffaly's post. I think its impossible for the international community to help solve this issue if there is no clarity on what the path forward is and people refuse to take a responsible stance. This intellectual dishonesty is reflected on this board.

I would be quite up front in that I don't believe in a two state solution, either for reasons of justice or practicality.

As I've said before, that the creation of an imperialistic, religious fundamentalist state by stealing other people's land was allowed to happen was a disastrous historical mistake.

I don't believe in the notion of a Jewish state for a Jewish people no more than I believe in the notion of a Muslim state for a Muslim people, a Catholic state for a Catholic people or a Protestant state for a Protestant people.

The Palestinians cannot destroy the Jewish population that is there now, the Israelis cannot wipe out the Palestinian population (although they're giving it a good shot).

Israeli colonisation of and control of the West Bank now runs so deep that they have made a two state solution unviable. But a two state solution was never their aim, and Benjamin Netanyahu is quite clear on this: "I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-finally-speaks-his-mind/#ixzz392DqMJCW

That's categorical. According to Netanyahu, there will never be a Palestinian state.


In a sane world, a one-state solution, Israel/Palestine, with equal rights for both sides is what should happen, and what I want to see happen.

What are the chances of that? Slim to none. I absolutely believe the vast majority of Palestinians would be very happy to accept that but there's no chance Israel ever will.

A one-state solution would be completely impractical, say its critics. Maybe it might be, maybe not.

But as opposed to the practicality of what's happening now, or the practicality what can only be assumed is Israel's real long-term goal, to ultimately drive the Palestinians out of both the West Bank and Gaza?

This is the situation that Israel has created. A situation where there are seemingly no solutions.

That is a good response and, unlike Seafoid, I believe you want a one state solution for the right reasons.  However, I have to disagree with you. it is not just impractical.It is close to impossible. I have seen no evidence that Hamas or any of the other Jihadis in the region will ever allow a jewish minority to exist in peace in the caliphate that is their ultimate aim. They will make all the right noises now that they have the eyes of the world on them but they are lying. You only have to look at what is happening with ISIS to see what they will do if they ever get the upper hand.

Also, we all know that Israelies play the same game which is why I am saying that they must be compelled, by force to obey the UN mandate. But it has to be a controlled force not a force bent on their destruction.

I believe the two state solution is is the only solution. If the situation can be normalized between the two states then, possibly, and this would be a long time off, you could revisit the idea of a single state.

How are you going to deal with AIPAC in your master plan ?  100/100 US senators bought. Dying to hear.

[Sidney]

Mike
Could you explain at what point in the last 70 years would the Palestinians ever have felt they had the ability to peacefully self determine their future?

The answer is there has been no point. Likewise, there has been no point in the last 70 years that the Israelies have not been under attack in some form.

This is why I think the only solution is an armed, international  intervention to ensure both sides get what the claim they are looking for. I don't think either state will exist by the time sanctions have the required effect. They will obliterate each other.

One problem is that many people don't believe in the two state solution but wont actually state their position. I have only seen a couple of responses to AZoffaly's post. I think its impossible for the international community to help solve this issue if there is no clarity on what the path forward is and people refuse to take a responsible stance. This intellectual dishonesty is reflected on this board.

I would be quite up front in that I don't believe in a two state solution, either for reasons of justice or practicality.

As I've said before, that the creation of an imperialistic, religious fundamentalist state by stealing other people's land was allowed to happen was a disastrous historical mistake.

I don't believe in the notion of a Jewish state for a Jewish people no more than I believe in the notion of a Muslim state for a Muslim people, a Catholic state for a Catholic people or a Protestant state for a Protestant people.

The Palestinians cannot destroy the Jewish population that is there now, the Israelis cannot wipe out the Palestinian population (although they're giving it a good shot).

Israeli colonisation of and control of the West Bank now runs so deep that they have made a two state solution unviable. But a two state solution was never their aim, and Benjamin Netanyahu is quite clear on this: "I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-finally-speaks-his-mind/#ixzz392DqMJCW

That's categorical. According to Netanyahu, there will never be a Palestinian state.


In a sane world, a one-state solution, Israel/Palestine, with equal rights for both sides is what should happen, and what I want to see happen.

What are the chances of that? Slim to none. I absolutely believe the vast majority of Palestinians would be very happy to accept that but there's no chance Israel ever will.

A one-state solution would be completely impractical, say its critics. Maybe it might be, maybe not.

But as opposed to the practicality of what's happening now, or the practicality what can only be assumed is Israel's real long-term goal, to ultimately drive the Palestinians out of both the West Bank and Gaza?

This is the situation that Israel has created. A situation where there are seemingly no solutions.

That is a good response and, unlike Seafoid, I believe you want a one state solution for the right reasons.  However, I have to disagree with you. it is not just impractical.It is close to impossible. I have seen no evidence that Hamas or any of the other Jihadis in the region will ever allow a jewish minority to exist in peace in the caliphate that is their ultimate aim. They will make all the right noises now that they have the eyes of the world on them but they are lying. You only have to look at what is happening with ISIS to see what they will do if they ever get the upper hand.

Also, we all know that Israelies play the same game which is why I am saying that they must be compelled, by force to obey the UN mandate. But it has to be a controlled force not a force bent on their destruction.

I believe the two state solution is is the only solution. If the situation can be normalized between the two states then, possibly, and this would be a long time off, you could revisit the idea of a single state.

There is no possibility of a two state solution at this stage, in my view. There is no evidence that Israel has ever genuinely wanted this. Even under Rabin during the Oslo process, their negotiations were disingenuous. Oslo was merely a bridge for more colonisation.

The Palestinians under Arafat agreed to a deal that gave Israel far, far more than it did themselves. Around this time, Israel was funding Hamas in an attempt to destabilise Arafat's PLO.

That Israel would agree to a genuine two state solution (not the absolute piss take they "offered" in 2000) now, under the psychotic Netanyahu or the other psychopaths who will no doubt replace him in future years, is utter fantasy.

[Mike Sheehy]

Mike
Could you explain at what point in the last 70 years would the Palestinians ever have felt they had the ability to peacefully self determine their future?

The answer is there has been no point. Likewise, there has been no point in the last 70 years that the Israelies have not been under attack in some form.

This is why I think the only solution is an armed, international  intervention to ensure both sides get what the claim they are looking for. I don't think either state will exist by the time sanctions have the required effect. They will obliterate each other.

One problem is that many people don't believe in the two state solution but wont actually state their position. I have only seen a couple of responses to AZoffaly's post. I think its impossible for the international community to help solve this issue if there is no clarity on what the path forward is and people refuse to take a responsible stance. This intellectual dishonesty is reflected on this board.

I would be quite up front in that I don't believe in a two state solution, either for reasons of justice or practicality.

As I've said before, that the creation of an imperialistic, religious fundamentalist state by stealing other people's land was allowed to happen was a disastrous historical mistake.

I don't believe in the notion of a Jewish state for a Jewish people no more than I believe in the notion of a Muslim state for a Muslim people, a Catholic state for a Catholic people or a Protestant state for a Protestant people.

The Palestinians cannot destroy the Jewish population that is there now, the Israelis cannot wipe out the Palestinian population (although they're giving it a good shot).

Israeli colonisation of and control of the West Bank now runs so deep that they have made a two state solution unviable. But a two state solution was never their aim, and Benjamin Netanyahu is quite clear on this: "I think the Israeli people understand now what I always say: that there cannot be a situation, under any agreement, in which we relinquish security control of the territory west of the River Jordan."
http://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-finally-speaks-his-mind/#ixzz392DqMJCW

That's categorical. According to Netanyahu, there will never be a Palestinian state.


In a sane world, a one-state solution, Israel/Palestine, with equal rights for both sides is what should happen, and what I want to see happen.

What are the chances of that? Slim to none. I absolutely believe the vast majority of Palestinians would be very happy to accept that but there's no chance Israel ever will.

A one-state solution would be completely impractical, say its critics. Maybe it might be, maybe not.

But as opposed to the practicality of what's happening now, or the practicality what can only be assumed is Israel's real long-term goal, to ultimately drive the Palestinians out of both the West Bank and Gaza?

This is the situation that Israel has created. A situation where there are seemingly no solutions.

That is a good response and, unlike Seafoid, I believe you want a one state solution for the right reasons.  However, I have to disagree with you. it is not just impractical.It is close to impossible. I have seen no evidence that Hamas or any of the other Jihadis in the region will ever allow a jewish minority to exist in peace in the caliphate that is their ultimate aim. They will make all the right noises now that they have the eyes of the world on them but they are lying. You only have to look at what is happening with ISIS to see what they will do if they ever get the upper hand.

Also, we all know that Israelies play the same game which is why I am saying that they must be compelled, by force to obey the UN mandate. But it has to be a controlled force not a force bent on their destruction.

I believe the two state solution is is the only solution. If the situation can be normalized between the two states then, possibly, and this would be a long time off, you could revisit the idea of a single state.

There is no possibility of a two state solution at this stage, in my view. There is no evidence that Israel has ever genuinely wanted this. Even under Rabin during the Oslo process, their negotiations were disingenuous. Oslo was merely a bridge for more colonisation.

The Palestinians under Arafat agreed to a deal that gave Israel far, far more than it did themselves. Around this time, Israel was funding Hamas in an attempt to destabilise Arafat's PLO.

That Israel would agree to a genuine two state solution (not the absolute piss take they "offered" in 2000) now, under the psychotic Netanyahu or the other psychopaths who will no doubt replace him in future years, is utter fantasy.

Agreed. That's why it must not be a "choice" for them anymore. It should be "take the two state solution or else"
As long as it is not Hamas that are implementing the "or else" part I am fine with whatever proportional steps that are taken to compel them. Your job then is to , somehow, make that argument.

Keep Seafoid and GHD away from it though. You will never convince anyone , especially in the US, if you have people like that on your side. People just instinctively know what they are about even if they manage to avoid outbursts like GHD is prone to make.

[seafoid]

AIPAC

What about AIPAC, Sheehy ?

2 state solutions are as likely as Kerry winning the 5 in a row in 1982 sometime in the future.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wxgju-2xbfQ

[Sidney]

Agreed. That's why it must not be a "choice" for them anymore. It should be "take the two state solution or else"
As long as it is not Hamas that are implementing the "or else" part I am fine with whatever proportional steps that are taken to compel them. Your job then is to , somehow, make that argument.

Israel has made its choice and has been very clear in making that choice. Now is the time for international action. And given the obvious lack of action and will to take any action from the US and EU, a boycott campaign amongst citizens against Israel is entirely justified, and entirely necessary.