Israel and Palestine in Crises Mode

[thewitt]

Originally Posted by leekohler

Someone please explain to me why we bother. If the Palestinians and Jews want to kill each other, let them.

My heart will not break over any loss there.

This battle has only gotten us heartbreak and loss. It's time to let it go.

Sure, why not. Cause Israel will clearly destroy the Palestinians in that case, with clear and total military dominance.

Of course, that would likely result in the beginning of WWIII, a war between Islam and the rest of the world.

No skin off your nose though, huh.

Let "them" just go kill each other at will. The strong survive and all that, right?

[Fazzy]

Originally Posted by leekohler

Someone please explain to me why we bother. If the Palestinians and Jews want to kill each other, let them.

My heart will not break over any loss there.

This battle has only gotten us heartbreak and loss. It's time to let it go.

Because a trait of a human being is to have empathy. Thats why you should 'care' at the very least.

[stylinexpat]

Originally Posted by leekohler

Someone please explain to me why we bother. If the Palestinians and Jews want to kill each other, let them.

My heart will not break over any loss there.

This battle has only gotten us heartbreak and loss. It's time to let it go.

Half the problem rests in our Congress as AIPAC pretty much runs our Congress.


One can only wonder.. Is the world really that blind?? Peaceful settlers.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKzNrNhTu5w

[unlinked]

Originally Posted by thewitt

Sure, why not. Cause Israel will clearly destroy the Palestinians in that case, with clear and total military dominance.

Of course, that would likely result in the beginning of WWIII, a war between Islam and the rest of the world.

Israel might be more open to a solution without the US subsidising the status quo.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by thewitt

Sure, why not. Cause Israel will clearly destroy the Palestinians in that case, with clear and total military dominance.

What like Hitler did with the Jews?

----------

Originally Posted by leekohler

Someone please explain to me why we bother.

I would certainly be open to the US taking a position of non-interference, it is more likely that a solution will be reached than the current status quo.

Of course the US would have to cut all aid to Israel (as that is interfering) and stop vetoing anti Israeli resolutions at the UN (as that is also interfering).

[thewitt]

Originally Posted by unlinked

Israel might be more open to a solution without the US subsidising the status quo.

Really? You honestly think this is a US issue?

The Palestinians will accept nothing less than the total destruction of Israel.

If you were Israel, and no one was telling you "I'll give you 10 billion in aid if you stop killing Arabs," what would you do?

Go there. Spend some time among the Israelis. I have. It's a terrifying existence when your are living under the constant fear of attack both from your neighbors and from within. The hotel staff told us not to worry, the mortars and rockets never came this far. The next day we had to detour around a closed road just outside the hotel that had been damaged during the night.

They will fight for their survival, and without the US tempering their reaction to Hamas today, they would have already destroyed them, and their willing supporters within Gaza.

Israel has the fortitude to end this fight, however the US keeps them on a leash. Remove the leash and they will finish it. Though this will not end well for the region.

[unlinked]

Originally Posted by thewitt

Really? You honestly think this is a US issue?

The Palestinians will accept nothing less than the total destruction of Israel.

Each an every one of them? Must have taken you a while to do the full survey.


The US spends 4 billion a year keeping that status quo going. Seems a lot for something nobody is happy with.

[VulchR]

The US should reward peace-making and not war-mongering on either side. This would entail canceling payments to Israel for each new settlement or other incursion into the Palestinian state, and providing reconstruction funds to the Palestinians for each day there is no terrorist or rocket attack on Israel.

I also find it curious that so much discussion here is about US funding, when there has been relatively little discussion of funding and support given to the Palestinians and adjacent Arab countries. Overall I get the feeling that this conflict is simply a war by proxy between the West and those opposed to the West.

[iJohnHenry]

Originally Posted by unlinked

Each an every one of them? Must have taken you a while to do the full survey.

Don't be disingenuous.

Originally Posted by unlinked

The US spends 4 billion a year keeping that status quo going. Seems a lot for something nobody is happy with.

This has already been addressed.

Would you prefer that Israel nuke the Palestinians?

[unlinked]

Originally Posted by iJohnHenry

Would you prefer that Israel nuke the Palestinians?

Seems unlikely given how close they are and that Israel wants the land many of the Palestinians are on.


Where is the current situation going?

2 state solution
1 state solution
ethnic cleansing
genocide
continued gobbling up of the west bank and confining Palestinians to smaller and smaller areas
apartheid state


To me the first 2 seem increasingly unlikely, the last 4 are undesirable.
Which one do you pick and do you think the situation is progressing towards it or away?

[mcrain]

The easiest solution is one that Palestinians would never allow. Israel is a tiny island surrounded by massive amounts of land. All that is needed is for Isreal, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and maybe the Saudis to agree to carve out a contiguous Palestinian state from the abundance of land surrounding Israel, and then give the Palestinians the financial ability to build themselves into a viable state. The problem is the Palestinians want to control Israel, and that isn't going to happen.

(edit) By the way, during those several days of conflict, did anyone else notice that the Palestinians had all sorts of rockets that were the reason for the blockade? Perhaps Israel was and is correct in its security need to isolate the Palestinians. Sure, they need food and supplies, but they are smuggling weapons and Israel has a valid security reason to stop that behavior.

[iJohnHenry]

Originally Posted by unlinked

Seems unlikely given how close they are and that Israel wants the land many of the Palestinians are on.

Are you forgetting the neutron bomb, as a tactical weapon, in a tight theatre of operation? Like the Middle East?

[unlinked]

Originally Posted by iJohnHenry

Are you forgetting the neutron bomb, as a tactical weapon, in a tight theatre of operation? Like the Middle East?

Israel seems much too attached to the West Bank to nuke significant areas of it. Besides ethnic cleansing is much easier.

[mrkramer]

Originally Posted by iJohnHenry

Are you forgetting the neutron bomb, as a tactical weapon, in a tight theatre of operation? Like the Middle East?

That would still damage the land that the Israelis want. Plus using nuclear weapons might be enough to make the rest of the world turn against them including the US. I'm pretty sure if Israel has any long term plan, which I'm not sure they do it's to at some point have a genocide of the Palestinians and use the US to continue running interference in the Security Council so the world turns a blind eye to it.

[jeremy h]

It's interesting to note the general difference in European and American attitudes to this issue on this thread

Recently it's been headline news everywhere here about the Palestinian's recent change in status in the UN and the Israeli response in terms of now authorising 3,000 new homes in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. (And the fact that Israeli ambassadors have been summoned all across Europe for a dressing down over it all.).

I was surprised it hasn't been mentioned in this thread so I checked several US papers online and it's hardly mentioned. That was a real surprise!

It's no wonder we have differing views.

[eric/]

Originally Posted by jeremy h

It's interesting to note the general difference in European and American attitudes to this issue on this thread

Recently it's been headline news everywhere here about the Palestinian's recent change in status in the UN and the Israeli response in terms of now authorising 3,000 new homes in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. (And the fact that Israeli ambassadors have been summoned all across Europe for a dressing down over it all.).

I was surprised it hasn't been mentioned in this thread so I checked several US papers online and it's hardly mentioned. That was a real surprise!

It's no wonder we have differing views.

Well what relevance does it have is my question. It's not really that news worthy. UN votes to allow an organization considered to be a terrorist one by the US to become an observer state (that is all over the news) then Israeli reacts in a predictable manner, doing what they already do, which is build homes in "Palestine".

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by mcrain

The easiest solution is one that Palestinians would never allow. Israel is a tiny island surrounded by massive amounts of land. All that is needed is for Isreal, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and maybe the Saudis to agree to carve out a contiguous Palestinian state from the abundance of land surrounding Israel, and then give the Palestinians the financial ability to build themselves into a viable state. The problem is the Palestinians want to control Israel, and that isn't going to happen.

(edit) By the way, during those several days of conflict, did anyone else notice that the Palestinians had all sorts of rockets that were the reason for the blockade? Perhaps Israel was and is correct in its security need to isolate the Palestinians. Sure, they need food and supplies, but they are smuggling weapons and Israel has a valid security reason to stop that behavior.

If Hamas can get the missiles in anyway what is the blockade achieving? It seems a by like the war on drugs except that the knock on effects are worse.

----------

Originally Posted by eric/

Well what relevance does it have is my question. It's not really that news worthy. UN votes to allow an organization considered to be a terrorist one by the US to become an observer state (that is all over the news) then Israeli reacts in a predictable manner, doing what they already do, which is build homes in "Palestine".

Fatah is a terrorist organisation? Besides one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. 130 countries already recognise Palestine.

[stylinexpat]

Originally Posted by jeremy h

It's interesting to note the general difference in European and American attitudes to this issue on this thread

Recently it's been headline news everywhere here about the Palestinian's recent change in status in the UN and the Israeli response in terms of now authorising 3,000 new homes in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. (And the fact that Israeli ambassadors have been summoned all across Europe for a dressing down over it all.).

I was surprised it hasn't been mentioned in this thread so I checked several US papers online and it's hardly mentioned. That was a real surprise!

It's no wonder we have differing views.

Because those that control the media in the US won't approve or allow comments or articles that criticize Israel or Israeli actions. Did you not see what happened to Kim Kardeshian recently for her comments??

[eric/]

Originally Posted by Eraserhead

Fatal is a terrorist organisation?

Hamas is.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by jeremy h

It's interesting to note the general difference in European and American attitudes to this issue on this thread

Recently it's been headline news everywhere here about the Palestinian's recent change in status in the UN and the Israeli response in terms of now authorising 3,000 new homes in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. (And the fact that Israeli ambassadors have been summoned all across Europe for a dressing down over it all.).

I was surprised it hasn't been mentioned in this thread so I checked several US papers online and it's hardly mentioned. That was a real surprise!

It's no wonder we have differing views.

In which case it sounds like the US media is little better than the Chinese State Media.

[stylinexpat]

Originally Posted by eric/

Well what relevance does it have is my question. It's not really that news worthy. UN votes to allow an organization considered to be a terrorist one by the US to become an observer state (that is all over the news) then Israeli reacts in a predictable manner, doing what they already do, which is build homes in "Palestine".

Problem is that they are not building in Israel, they are stealing land, occupying land and then illegally building settlements for Israelis on Palestinian land. Theft and murder are considered illegal in most parts of the world.

[Eraserhead]

Originally Posted by eric/

Hamas is.

They weren't asking for statehood.

And besides they are no worse than the Israeli government. Can I claim Israel is a terrorist state?

[stylinexpat]

Originally Posted by eric/

Hamas is.

And the Mossad isn't??

[unlinked]

Originally Posted by eric/

Well what relevance does it have is my question. It's not really that news worthy. UN votes to allow an organization considered to be a terrorist one by the US to become an observer state (that is all over the news) then Israeli reacts in a predictable manner, doing what they already do, which is build homes in "Palestine".

I don't think Fatah or the PLO are on the FTO list.


Building in E1 is about splitting the West Bank in two and making a 2 state solution more difficult.

[takao]

Originally Posted by eric/

Well what relevance does it have is my question. It's not really that news worthy. UN votes to allow an organization considered to be a terrorist one by the US to become an observer state (that is all over the news) then Israeli reacts in a predictable manner, doing what they already do, which is build homes in "Palestine".

that on the same day Palestine get's an observer status the Israelians decide to approve 3000 additional settlers is a flat out provocation

in fact France and even the UK are threatening with ambassador withdrawals over this ... and yet it get's rather little public coverage



in the UN only 8 nations voted against Palestine as observer:
Israel, USA, UK, Czech Republic and 4 pacific island nations heavily dependent on the US
a rather predictable outcome (the Czechs were surprised themselves)