|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
 Posted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 11:20 pm Post subject: A last chance for peace in Israel? |
 |
|
A last chance for peace in Israel?
Same old same old.
But I thought I'd highlight this part for those of you so rigidly adamant that the Palestinians gave up an amazing offer in the Oslo talks:
| Quote: |
| But Oslo was rigged in Israel's favour: while it lasted, the number of Jewish fundamentalist settlers on Palestinian land nearly doubled, and Palestinian movement was harshly curtailed. It is a myth that the Palestinians were offered a real two-state solution and rejected it. Even Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israel's Foreign Minister at the time, says: "If I were a Palestinian, I would have rejected Camp David as well." |
Did you get that big Joo?  Here it is again: Even Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israel's Foreign Minister at the time, says: "If I were a Palestinian, I would have rejected Camp David as well."
But this is the main thrust of the article:
| Quote: |
Unless there is a swift shift, the two-state vision will be supplanted � by a vision of a "binational" one-state solution.
Several leading Palestinians � including the late Edward Said, the former Prime Minister Ahmed Queri, and Sari Nusseibeh � have begun to outline this idea. In one of those strange whirls on the roundabout of history, they are actually reviving an old idea pioneered by Zionist left-wingers. Back in the 1920s, a small number of Jewish socialists and liberals like Martin Buber tried to negotiate one big shared state with the Palestinians. Although they found some Palestinian interlocutors, these early binationalists were slapped down by both communities. Today their idea is being dug out of its ditch of despair.
The Palestinians would stop asking for a free enclave of their own, and start demanding full legal equality in one state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. Equipped with this demand, they would no longer appear to the world as a fragmented minority, but � all added together � as a majority in Israel/Palestine ruled over by a racially-defined minority. It would look even more like South Africa Redux. Israel would then be incapable of marshalling international coalitions against possible threats from Iran or elsewhere: it would be alone, and anathemised.
The Middle East conflict would shift from being a tricky-but-soluble crisis to an insoluble civil war. Michael Neumann � the author of The Case Against Israel � warns: "One-staters apparently believe that Israel will give up the reason for its existence and at the same time expose itself not to the risk but to the certainty of being 'swamped by Arabs'. This in turn would indicate a willingness to accede to anything an 'Arab' majority might enact. Can anyone seriously imagine this? Will millions of Jews just leave if the majority says it should? Will they agree to crushing compensation payments?" No. They will fight � and this time, there will be no space for compromise between the competing visions.
The window of opportunity for a two-state peace is closing. Before it jams shut, the Israelis need to hear the plea coming through the checkpoints. Divide the land. Divide it now. Divide it properly. Or we will all end up battling forever � over nothing but soil soaked in blood and cordite. |
I've often wondered how those Israelis pushing for the land grab expect to be able to maintain a two-state solution. It's always seemed self defeating to me that they didn't try to agree on a fair settlement and get it all over with. Unless they can kill or successfully banish most of the Arabs (which is what the hardliners are presumably counting on), they really will have to settle for a proper deal, sooner rather than later - or face living in a nation where Jews are the minority. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:16 am Post subject: Re: A last chance for peace in Israel? |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
A last chance for peace in Israel?
Same old same old.
But I thought I'd highlight this part for those of you so rigidly adamant that the Palestinians gave up an amazing offer in the Oslo talks:
| Quote: |
| But Oslo was rigged in Israel's favour: while it lasted, the number of Jewish fundamentalist settlers on Palestinian land nearly doubled, and Palestinian movement was harshly curtailed. It is a myth that the Palestinians were offered a real two-state solution and rejected it. Even Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israel's Foreign Minister at the time, says: "If I were a Palestinian, I would have rejected Camp David as well." |
Did you get that big Joo? Here it is again: Even Shlomo Ben-Ami, Israel's Foreign Minister at the time, says: "If I were a Palestinian, I would have rejected Camp David as well."
But this is the main thrust of the article:
| Quote: |
Unless there is a swift shift, the two-state vision will be supplanted � by a vision of a "binational" one-state solution.
Several leading Palestinians � including the late Edward Said, the former Prime Minister Ahmed Queri, and Sari Nusseibeh � have begun to outline this idea. In one of those strange whirls on the roundabout of history, they are actually reviving an old idea pioneered by Zionist left-wingers. Back in the 1920s, a small number of Jewish socialists and liberals like Martin Buber tried to negotiate one big shared state with the Palestinians. Although they found some Palestinian interlocutors, these early binationalists were slapped down by both communities. Today their idea is being dug out of its ditch of despair.
The Palestinians would stop asking for a free enclave of their own, and start demanding full legal equality in one state between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River. Equipped with this demand, they would no longer appear to the world as a fragmented minority, but � all added together � as a majority in Israel/Palestine ruled over by a racially-defined minority. It would look even more like South Africa Redux. Israel would then be incapable of marshalling international coalitions against possible threats from Iran or elsewhere: it would be alone, and anathemised.
The Middle East conflict would shift from being a tricky-but-soluble crisis to an insoluble civil war. Michael Neumann � the author of The Case Against Israel � warns: "One-staters apparently believe that Israel will give up the reason for its existence and at the same time expose itself not to the risk but to the certainty of being 'swamped by Arabs'. This in turn would indicate a willingness to accede to anything an 'Arab' majority might enact. Can anyone seriously imagine this? Will millions of Jews just leave if the majority says it should? Will they agree to crushing compensation payments?" No. They will fight � and this time, there will be no space for compromise between the competing visions.
The window of opportunity for a two-state peace is closing. Before it jams shut, the Israelis need to hear the plea coming through the checkpoints. Divide the land. Divide it now. Divide it properly. Or we will all end up battling forever � over nothing but soil soaked in blood and cordite. |
I've often wondered how those Israelis pushing for the land grab expect to be able to maintain a two-state solution. It's always seemed self defeating to me that they didn't try to agree on a fair settlement and get it all over with. Unless they can kill or successfully banish most of the Arabs (which is what the hardliners are presumably counting on), they really will have to settle for a proper deal, sooner rather than later - or face living in a nation where Jews are the minority. |
Substituting A for B
Bill Clinton's offer six months later was much better and Arafat turned that down too. Bill Clinton's offer in December of 2000 was different than Camp David in the summer of 2000. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
postfundie
Joined: 28 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Wasn't the camp david 2000 sticking point the return of the refugee's? The Palestinians have blown several chances at statehood. Even Rashid Khalidi stated this in an interview with Charlie Rose. (The Jewish fundamentalists are a big problem though) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ddeubel
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
2nd last chance.
I don't really see any "betterment" in the near future (though I will also try in my own way to see something does happen). Pitiful if you look at the situation in a "human" way.
I don't see any "peace" until the last wave of new Israeli immigrants are grown up and gone. It is this demographic ideological fuel which is keeping Israel on the path of "hit" and off the path of "help". Identity drives politics and policy and until the new immigrants have a long stake in Israel and not the fanciful and naturally "conservative" identity driven one -- I don't see peace happening.
Maybe I'm sloppily describing what is driving the 'Non peace" . My apologizes. But from Israeli friends and colleagues and my own readings, I really truly agree with Oz on this one....no peace for atleat another generation (15-20 years).
DD
http://eflclassroom.ning.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
BB wrote
| Quote: |
| I've often wondered how those (Palestinians) pushing for the land grab expect to be able to maintain a (one)-state solution. It's always seemed self defeating to me that they didn't try to agree on a fair settlement and get it all over with. Unless they can kill or successfully banish most of the (Jews) (which is what the hardliners are presumably counting on), they really will have to settle for a proper deal, sooner rather than later - or face living in a nation where (Palestinians) are the minority. |
I made a few changes to the above.
Does it sound any better? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 4:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Summer Wine wrote: |
BB wrote
| Quote: |
| I've often wondered how those (Palestinians) pushing for the land grab expect to be able to maintain a (one)-state solution. It's always seemed self defeating to me that they didn't try to agree on a fair settlement and get it all over with. Unless they can kill or successfully banish most of the (Jews) (which is what the hardliners are presumably counting on), they really will have to settle for a proper deal, sooner rather than later - or face living in a nation where (Palestinians) are the minority. |
I made a few changes to the above.
Does it sound any better? |
You surely don't mean to tell me that Palestinians are regularly bulldozing homes in Tel Aviv and erecting new settlements for themselves there?
No, it doesn't make any sense. Not unless you are some hardcore lunatic Christian fanatic who really does believe that the Old Testament is a legally binding land deed.
A guess you're one of these crazies waiting for the rapture, huh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ddeubel wrote: |
2nd last chance.
I don't really see any "betterment" in the near future (though I will also try in my own way to see something does happen). Pitiful if you look at the situation in a "human" way.
I don't see any "peace" until the last wave of new Israeli immigrants are grown up and gone. It is this demographic ideological fuel which is keeping Israel on the path of "hit" and off the path of "help". Identity drives politics and policy and until the new immigrants have a long stake in Israel and not the fanciful and naturally "conservative" identity driven one -- I don't see peace happening.
Maybe I'm sloppily describing what is driving the 'Non peace" . My apologizes. But from Israeli friends and colleagues and my own readings, I really truly agree with Oz on this one....no peace for atleat another generation (15-20 years).
DD
http://eflclassroom.ning.com |
I agree with you DD. I think it is at least a generation away. Unless of course financial/military ruin befell their ally America (and no guys, I am not hoping for that) they're not going to be working on a solution any time soon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My point is that the Palestinians dont seem to be in any more of a hurry to create a functioning state as the settlers seem to be.
That by changing a few words you pretty much describe the attitude of many palestinians.
I honestly don't care any more if the palestinians get a state or not, I would just be happy if they didn't continue supporting terrorism.
Though I would really like to see if it is feasible to have a two state system and whether one could exist if they didn't have an economic relationship with all their neighbors.
Though I guess if you can make a state called Israel and a state called Palestine in 1949, then I guess you could make one today. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 5:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Summer Wine wrote: |
My point is that the Palestinians dont seem to be in any more of a hurry to create a functioning state as the settlers seem to be.
That by changing a few words you pretty much describe the attitude of many palestinians.
I honestly don't care any more if the palestinians get a state or not, I would just be happy if they didn't continue supporting terrorism.
Though I would really like to see if it is feasible to have a two state system and whether one could exist if they didn't have an economic relationship with all their neighbors.
Though I guess if you can make a state called Israel and a state called Palestine in 1949, then I guess you could make one today. |
I get bored of listening to people who seem oblivious to the fact it is the Palestinians who are living under a horrible military occupation, and seem to talk as if they should behave to an even higher standard than their own occupiers! It's quite bizzare really - perhaps this is why the conflict always rather fascinated me. But when I listen to people like you, I can't help going  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| it is the Palestinians who are living under a horrible military occupation, and seem to talk as if they should behave to an even higher standard than their own occupiers! |
How about we hold them to the same standard? Oh. A great deal of the Palestinian leadership has still been involved in terrorism. Right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| it is the Palestinians who are living under a horrible military occupation, and seem to talk as if they should behave to an even higher standard than their own occupiers! |
How about we hold them to the same standard? Oh. A great deal of the Palestinian leadership has still been involved in terrorism. Right. |
As has so much of Israeli leadership. The new leader is in fact the daughter of two terrorists, and she is very proud of her parents terrorism prior to the creation of Israel. Sharon was a notorious war criminal of international renown - responsible for some truly horrible atrocities, some of which he personally presided over (Quibya comes to mind). Other Prime Ministers, such as Begin, and many senior Knesset ministers, also began their political careers as terrorists. Netanyahu (former Prime Minister) still holds celebrations for the horrible terrorist attack on the King David Hotel. Hamas (of whom I suppose you were alluding to) tried to eschew terrorism in favour of diplomacy. The put in place a long cease-fire, which only collapsed after Israelis had killed hundreds of Palestinian civillians.
Yes, most here do try to hold the Palestinians to a far higher standard than their occupiers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
And just for Joo and Kuros, here is a link mentioning that Israeli terrorists, who committed terrorist attacks against America, were being officially honoured in Israel, just 3 years ago. Haha. The irony just cracks me up!
Israel Honoured Israeli Terrorists Who Attacked America
You can read the page for yourself - I'm just quoting a few juicy bits:
| Quote: |
| n March 2005, Israel publicly honored the surviving operatives, and President Moshe Katsav presented each with a certificate of appreciation for their efforts on behalf of the state, ending decades of official denial by Israel. |
| Quote: |
The goal of the Operation was to carry out bombings and other acts of sabotage in Egypt with the aim of creating an atmosphere in which the British and American opponents of British withdrawal from Egypt would be able to gain the upper hand and block the withdrawal. |
| Quote: |
they firebombed a post office in Alexandria, and on July 14, they bombed the U.S. Information Agency libraries in Alexandria and Cairo and a British-owned theater. The homemade bombs, consisting of bags containing acid placed over nitroglycerine, were inserted into books, and placed on the shelves of the libraries just before closing time. Several hours later, as the acid ate through the bags, the bombs would explode.
|
Sure, the Lavon Affair was decades ago, but why was it still being officially 'appreciated?' hahaha
And don't get me started on the USS Liberty...which makes the American Hostage taking in Tehran look like a little picnic party. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ernie
Joined: 05 Aug 2006
Location: asdfghjk
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"the palestinians have blown several chances at statehood"
ummm... they HAD a state before the zionists decided to invade. while i agree that the extremist palestinians are in the wrong, they at least have a valid claim to the land. israel is a 'state' created out of land seized by settlers whose 'claim' to the land comes from a (fictional) narrative, ie the bible. the israelis need to start working with the palestinians, not the other way around! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 7:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
Sure, the Lavon Affair was decades ago, but why was it still being officially 'appreciated?' hahaha
And don't get me started on the USS Liberty...which makes the American Hostage taking in Tehran look like a little picnic party. |
The USS Liberty looks callous, but I've never seen demonstrable evidence of knowing intent. Just IGTG's rants on the subject.
Big Bird, I honestly don't know why you think I side with Israel on this, although I certainly don't side with the Pals and certainly not Hezbollah on this.
The fact is, there are interests on both sides of this conflict that would like to see the other exterminated. As an American, I enjoy the fruits of Israeli society, but not necessarily their methods of agriculture, so to speak. Hopefully Israel can come to its senses and stop backing the settlers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Wed Sep 24, 2008 7:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
Sure, the Lavon Affair was decades ago, but why was it still being officially 'appreciated?' hahaha
And don't get me started on the USS Liberty...which makes the American Hostage taking in Tehran look like a little picnic party. |
The USS Liberty looks callous, but I've never seen demonstrable evidence of knowing intent. |
Shortly before the attack, witnesses on the ship said Israeli aircraft flew in very close, close enough for them to see each others' faces and wave at each other. They would surely have seen the American flag flying at that point. The attack wasn't just one hit - it continued and continued and continued. They knew full well they were hitting an American ship. I've read some interesting accounts of it - by calmer saner people than IGTG.
| Quote: |
| Big Bird, I honestly don't know why you think I side with Israel on this, although I certainly don't side with the Pals and certainly not Hezbollah on this. |
It's the double standard you seem to hold. Forgive me if I'm wrong Kuros, I'm not deliberately antagonising you. You always point to something the Palestinians have done as proof that their behaviour is somehow worse, when there are Israeli equivalents or similar Israeli acts that are of far greater magnitude. I was also surprised that you felt the horrific bombardment of Lebanese civilians was somehow justified by what was a comparatively small border skirmish. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
