Thread: Fifth Annual Israeli Apartheid Week, March 1-7, 2009

Originally Posted by Chimensch

If this problem can't be solved, sooner or later we're all going to pay the price.

Agreed. Now, the issue comes up with what some factions (in positions of considerable power in the region, I might add) believe the final solution to the Jewish and Israeli "problem" is. What of those who DO NOT WANT PEACE with Israel, or do you believe that is simply untrue?

Originally Posted by smokelaw1

Agreed. Now, the issue comes up with what some factions (in positions of considerable power in the region, I might add) believe the final solution to the Jewish and Israeli "problem" is. What of those who DO NOT WANT PEACE with Israel, or do you believe that is simply untrue?

Egypt made peace with Israel. Jordan has good relations with Israel and so does Saudi Arabia. I think that the Palestinians would also make peace with Israel if it was fair. In fact, Hamas has said as much and I think that they ought to be given a chance to demonstrate it. Now, before you start talking about the rockets, remember that two years ago, as soon as Hamas was elected, Israel put an embargo on Gaza. In effect, Israel never gave Hamas a chance.

Also consider that Israel has never stopped building illegal settlements on Palestinian land. In fact, it is generally agreed that the so-called "facts on the ground" make a two-state solution impossible. Now, in regard to building settlements, Hamas didn't do it, Israel did.

If you look at the situation in the occupied territories for the last 40 years and look only at what Israel does (and ignoring what it says), it becomes very clear that Israel has avoided every opportunity to make peace. In fact, it is very clear to me that Israel doesn't want peace, it wants the land, and thinks that it can "tough it out" until the Palestinians give up.

Well, the end result is that Israel has painted itself into a corner. It has built so many settlements and infrastructure in the West Bank that a two-state solution is impossible. So, what's the alternative? A single state with equal rights for all its citizens? No, that's impossible, too, because if there isn't a Palestinian majority today, there will be in 20 years because the Palestinian birth rate is higher and Israelis are actually emigrating. So, Israel only has two possible ways out, both bad. One is to take over the West Bank and Gaza and impose an Apartheid regime (which is already in place in Israel for its Arab citizens) or genocide all the Palestinians, like we did to the Native Americans in the US. Neither solution can last very long. My personal opinion (and I take no pleasure in saying this) is that Israel is toast and it will just take some time before it collapses. Why? Well, for one thing, the United States is quickly coming to a point where it can't afford to pour billions of dollars a year into Israel. When that happens, Israel will be on its own and will have to deal with internal pressure from the Palestinians and external pressure from the Arab countries. Then what's it going to do? Drop an atom bomb and start World War III?

So there is no peaceful solution? Israel's choices are now exterminate the palestinians or walk quietly into that good night? I don't believe I can accept that, either.

And by the way, I don't believe "before you start talking about the rockets" really makes sense. When a sworn enemy comes to power, and a state enforces an embargo to protect itself, I can not, and will not accept that that is "not giving them a chance to show that they want peace." It is limiting the damage a proven dangerous violent enemy can do.

Let's talk about going forward. I am all for a change in tone of this conversation, you?
Don't talk about past agreements from either side. Let's talk about what BOTH sides could do, TODAY to start making a peaceful solution possible.

Originally Posted by smokelaw1

So there is no peaceful solution? Israel's choices are now exterminate the palestinians or walk quietly into that good night? I don't believe I can accept that, either.

And by the way, I don't believe "before you start talking about the rockets" really makes sense. When a sworn enemy comes to power, and a state enforces an embargo to protect itself, I can not, and will not accept that that is "not giving them a chance to show that they want peace." It is limiting the damage a proven dangerous violent enemy can do.

Let's talk about going forward. I am all for a change in tone of this conversation, you?
Don't talk about past agreements from either side. Let's talk about what BOTH sides could do, TODAY to start making a peaceful solution possible.

Like acknowledging each other's right to exist... That might be a place to start.

Jordan

Originally Posted by smokelaw1

Don't talk about past agreements from either side. Let's talk about what BOTH sides could do, TODAY to start making a peaceful solution possible.

leave the gaza strip uninhabited. neither the palestinians nor the israelies get to live there. too much blood has been spilled on both sides for there to ever be compromise. both sides want revenge for dead fathers, brothers, sons. both sides hate eachother with a passion that overrides logic. both sides want the land all out of proportion to what it's worth.

mine the whole thing and make it a no-mans-land. the only way to win is to not play.

Originally Posted by smokelaw1

Let's talk about going forward. I am all for a change in tone of this conversation, you?
Don't talk about past agreements from either side. Let's talk about what BOTH sides could do, TODAY to start making a peaceful solution possible.

Well, it's a fair question. I think that, first of all, we need to acknowledge that there is a tremendous imbalance of power between the two sides, stones and homemade rockets on one side, F16's, tanks and atom bombs on the other. Given that Israel is a rather wealthy country and that the Palestinians are living in misery, who do you think can better afford to be generous? You can't expect either side to give up something for nothing. So, given that Gaza is starving and Israel controls the border crossings, it seems to me that Israel ought to make the first move, lifting the embargo on the condition that there are no more rockets.

That's where I would start, assuming that there is a committment on both sides to negotiate. Now, as I said before, I don't expect Israel to ever be generous and take even a small risk for peace. Why? Because I believe that Israel doesn't want peace. So, what I ask you to do is to continue to watch what is happening there, asking yourself as events unfold, "Does Israel really need to be so tough? Why is it being so tough?"

The reason I think the situation is bleak is because, while Israel has the power, the Palestinians have justice and right on their side. They are not going to settle for anything less than an Israel that goes back to its 1967 borders. Israel won't do that. Therefore, there's no solution. But, if there's no solution then natural processes will take over.

Originally Posted by jockeys

leave the gaza strip uninhabited. neither the palestinians nor the israelies get to live there. too much blood has been spilled on both sides for there to ever be compromise. both sides want revenge for dead fathers, brothers, sons. both sides hate eachother with a passion that overrides logic. both sides want the land all out of proportion to what it's worth.

mine the whole thing and make it a no-mans-land. the only way to win is to not play.

And the 2 million people in Gaza go where? To live in Israel? Your house? Or do "we kill them all" as you said in another thread?

OK, just as a thought exercise. Israel goes back to the 67 borders. Completely opens everything.
Then there are rocket attacks from people who beleive ANY israel has no right to exist.
There are suicide bombers. Israel is still rich. Israel is still stronger. Then what? Israel is STILL an unnatural, unjust construct according to what many say. Should they give away more? Should there be a forced emigration? THEN would Israel be allowed to protect itself?

You believe Israel does not want peace. I believe that even if they gave up land back to 67 borders, Iran would want it destroyed, Hamas and IJ would want it destroyed. They would rejoice in the streets when they "retreated" and "surrendered" back to 67 borders. They would claim vicotry over the evil zionist enemy. Then they would continue to work towards its destruction. those launching rockets and building suicide vests would continue to hide among civilians. THEN would Israel be allowed to respond? if they kill civilians being used as human shields, THEN would it be justified, or should they just take it, becasue they have tanks? This is what I believe. This is what I have witnessed and those scholars that I believe have led me to.
Lets assume that the scenario I have stated happens. Then what? Can they take that land to protect themselves? No? They can not? Then can they "bomb it inot the stone age?" No? Hmmm...I guess they just don't have the right to exist, then...

Originally Posted by Chimensch

And the 2 million people in Gaza go where? To live in Israel? Your house? Or do "we kill them all" as you said in another thread?

I would say give them a few years to relocate themselves. I never advocated killing anyone, you are quoting me way out of context.

Sometimes when two children fight over a toy long enough, you take the toy away and break it so that neither one can play with it anymore. That's really the only equitable thing to do at this point. As I've said, both sides will never give in due to their emotional investment.

Treating either side with anything other than contempt at this point is unfair because both parties are at fault. As I mentioned before, the IDF and Hamas are both douchebags on a pretty epic scale.

Mines? Far too lenient. Let's just nuke the whole place & be done with it.