• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Palestinian leadership matches Israeli PM's peace deal referendum pledge [W:3]

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,310
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
The Palestinian leadership will put to a referendum any deal reached in US-brokered talks with the Israelis on settling the historic conflict – matching a pledge made by the Israeli prime minister.Amid continuing uncertainty about whether Palestinian negotiators have fully committed to beginning preliminary talks in Washington next week, the president, Mahmoud Abbas, said: "Any agreement reached with the Israelis will be brought to a referendum."
On Sunday Binyamin Netanyahu told the Israeli cabinet that any deal would be put to the public for endorsement. "I do not think that such decisions can be made, if indeed an agreement is achieved, by this or that coalition process; it must be put to the people for a decision," the Israeli prime minister said.


Opinion polls suggest a majority backing on both sides for a two-state solution to the conflict, but the details of any agreement will be crucial in determining the outcome of any plebiscites. There are also strong opponents of concessions on both sides; notably, Israelis settlers and their supporters, and Hamas in Gaza.
Abbas made his referendum pledge in an interview with a Jordanian paper, Al Rai, in which he also said: "The United States is serious in formulating a solution to the Palestinian issue, through introducing a Palestinian state within the 1967 lines with East Jerusalem as its capital."
He added: "We want to reach a two-state solution … but as of now we have not achieved anything."


More details about the release of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails – part of a pre-talks agreement – were reported in the Israeli media. Eighty-two long-term prisoners would be freed in four stages. The first releases would come after four to six weeks of talks, and the remaining prisoners would be released at similar intervals.

Read more @: Palestinian leadership matches Israeli PM's peace deal referendum pledge | World news | guardian.co.uk

Another step forward in reaching the table with these peace talks! I can back these 100% and this referendum pledge is a huge sign that something is moving forward.
 

Velvet Elvis

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2012
Messages
4,954
Reaction score
2,195
Location
Midwest
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Pardon me while I put zero faith in an Islamist Terrorist State keeping their word.

I guarantee you...they can sing Kumbaya as loud as they can....in less than a year, they'll be lobbing rockets over the border again. They're savages that are blinded by their bigoted religion of hate and intolerance.
 

Serenity

Stay Human
Moderator
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
29,473
Reaction score
26,472
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Moderator's Warning:
This thread is specific to the I/P situation so it will be moved moved to the ME Forum. Please note that the ME forum Martial Law Concordance now applies. Thank you.
 

MadLib

monstrous vermin
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 6, 2011
Messages
6,248
Reaction score
2,439
Location
Upstate New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Pardon me while I put zero faith in an Islamist Terrorist State keeping their word.

I guarantee you...they can sing Kumbaya as loud as they can....in less than a year, they'll be lobbing rockets over the border again. They're savages that are blinded by their bigoted religion of hate and intolerance.

I think you're confusing Fatah in the WB with Hamas in Gaza. While Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah is a Holocaust denying little toad, and Fatah launches the occasional Intifada, constantly firing rockets at Israel and being an Islamist state isn't really Fatah's M.O. Hamas is, so I wouldn't be surprised if an agreement that is reached would exclude Gaza from any Palestinian state that would be created.
 

justabubba

long standing member
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 22, 2005
Messages
52,300
Reaction score
33,799
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
excellent decision by both parties to any subsequent agreement
if majorities of the respective nations ratify the outcome, the results would be found just
it will be impossible to garner world support for an opposition entity's cause if it is against a just resolution


that said, subjecting a negotiated agreement to ratification imposes a much higher expectation upon the results of those who engage in the negotiations
to assure ratification, fewer options for compromise will exist than if the concluded agreement were not to be subject to ratification
and that is because it is much easier to concede something of importance to a segment of one's constituency if that constituency does not later have the opportunity to oppose and un-do said concession
a dishonest negotiator gets to use ratification to make concessions that they know will be voted down, all the while pretending they are negotiating in good faith

so, this can be the recipe for unending negotiations, where the status quo is never subjected to change
which of these two parties to the negotiations will best benefit from that (non)outcome?
 

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,858
Reaction score
10,292
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Another step forward in reaching the table with these peace talks! I can back these 100% and this referendum pledge is a huge sign that something is moving forward.

Rather than the parties articulating what would happen after an agreement is reached, I would much prefer to see negotiations aimed at making progress commence. Furthermore, while parliamentary ratification would be a good idea, I am not keen on a general referendum. Both parties will need to make some unpopular concessions if a final settlement is reached and a public referendum could blow up an agreement. Extreme elements who are not at the negotiating table would gain an opportunity to shape public opinion ahead of a referendum.

If, for example, Egypt's public voted on the peace treaty reached with Israel in 1979, the agreement very likely would never have been put in force. President Sadat was far ahead of Egypt's population when it came to making peace with Israel.
 

Sherman123

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
7,774
Reaction score
3,791
Location
Northeast US
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Read more @: Palestinian leadership matches Israeli PM's peace deal referendum pledge | World news | guardian.co.uk

Another step forward in reaching the table with these peace talks! I can back these 100% and this referendum pledge is a huge sign that something is moving forward.

I'm hopeful of anything that gets the ball rolling again. However I'm uncertain how I feel about a referendum. It may give both sides cover to be more bold with a potential agreement, but it may also act as a screen for creating an agreement that both sides know will not pass muster among their one or both of their respective constituencies. Would the majority of Egyptians or Jordanians have voted to accept their respective peace deals? Would the majority of Israeli's accept a deal with major territorial concessions (greater than currently hypothesized) or would they have endorsed a withdrawal from Gaza? I'm not so sure. Popular consent for treaties and agreements is risky business. Hell would Oslo have even gotten off the ground if it relied on that? I'm skeptical of this, it's part of the reason we have republican governments instead of direct democracies---to circumvent the will of the crowd on an issue by issue basis and make government more effective.
 

quantumechanic

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
754
Reaction score
362
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Rather than the parties articulating what would happen after an agreement is reached, I would much prefer to see negotiations aimed at making progress commence. Furthermore, while parliamentary ratification would be a good idea, I am not keen on a general referendum. Both parties will need to make some unpopular concessions if a final settlement is reached and a public referendum could blow up an agreement. Extreme elements who are not at the negotiating table would gain an opportunity to shape public opinion ahead of a referendum.

If, for example, Egypt's public voted on the peace treaty reached with Israel in 1979, the agreement very likely would never have been put in force. President Sadat was far ahead of Egypt's population when it came to making peace with Israel.
I completely agree. As Both Bibi and Abbas know full well that any concession required to bring the conflict closer to an end will never pass a referendum with the Israeli or Palestinian public, they're basically saying they're not ready for serious talks yet and are probably just succumbing to US pressure.
 

Captain America

Jedi Master
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
22,768
Reaction score
13,067
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Pardon me while I put zero faith in an Islamist Terrorist State keeping their word.

I guarantee you...they can sing Kumbaya as loud as they can....in less than a year, they'll be lobbing rockets over the border again. They're savages that are blinded by their bigoted religion of hate and intolerance.

Ditto that. Neither can we depend on Israel to keep their's.

They deserve each other. I wish they would just duke it out, once and for all, and let the last sand dweller there turns the light out when it's over.
 

quantumechanic

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 7, 2011
Messages
754
Reaction score
362
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Ditto that. Neither can we depend on Israel to keep their's.

They deserve each other. I wish they would just duke it out, once and for all, and let the last sand dweller there turns the light out when it's over.
Wow, what an ignorant and racist response.
I can almost imagine you sitting on your porch with your pipe, slapping your hip while saying: "let them tharr middle easterners types' stew in therr own darn porridge!" (hyuk hyuk) after which you whip out the banjo and start playing "cotton-eyed joe" with the occasional well-timed "yeehaw" to boot.



 

GI Joe

Active member
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
269
Reaction score
161
Location
Cleveland Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Pardon me while I put zero faith in an Islamist Terrorist State keeping their word.

I guarantee you...they can sing Kumbaya as loud as they can....in less than a year, they'll be lobbing rockets over the border again. They're savages that are blinded by their bigoted religion of hate and intolerance.



I posted this short summary on the history and prospects for peace in the Mid East previously. Since it was written in 2003 it has unfortunately pretty much proved accurate.




Peace in the Middle East

Written in 2003


Had I not had to travel to Israel for work, I would most likely not know any more about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict then I did this time two years ago, which is pretty much saying I only know they really like ****ing killing each other. But when your boss says you're going to Israel for a week, you sure can turn your attention to world affairs in a ****ing hurry. Keep in mind all this violence started on the very day my first trip there ended back in September 2000. I mean we took off and things were great, and when we landed back in New Jersey all the headlines featured the riots breaking out. It was that fast.


Anyway I digress, the purpose of me writing this jazzy little article is to explain to those of you who don't know (or really give a ****) what all this Middle East **** is about and where it's most likely going. And I’m going to do so without wasting too much time on the trivial details or political backspins.


To understand current events, let’s take a fast look into the past to see if we can’t see a cycle of events here.

So let us first turn back the hands of time, to when life first formed here on Earth. Deep in the muck and protoplasmic slime, we see two groups of single celled organisms. Those from Group-A begin throwing microscopic flecks of stardust at Group-B, who in return fire back with microscopic rubber bullets. Then a cell from Group-A absorbs a bit of methane gas, migrates over to Group-B and promptly explodes, killing not only himself but mortally wounding several Group-B cells in the process. The remaining Group-A cells rejoice, as Group-B cells plan a counterattack after some of their cells learn they can become airborne.

These puddles of muck and slime will, after continental shift, become the lands we know as Israel and the West Bank, and yes I suspect the violence has been going on that long.


Okay now let’s spin our clocks ahead to like the 0 A.D. timeframe. In thirty words or less, Jews were enslaved by various civilizations most of which were settled in the Middle East and whose roots can be traced as the ancestors of the many Arabic countries we know today.


(You read as: Arabs enslaved the Jews since the word "go").


This you-enslave-me-but-you’ll-never-win-our-hearts-and-minds relationship went on for a bazillion ****ing generations until eventually the Jews fled their “Promised Land” and found new places to live where they weren't persecuted, and the Arabs absorbed the vacated areas.


Now spin the time dial forward to the late 1930's. The Jews have settled more or less all over Eastern Europe. Enter a short little man with a mustache and a big gas bill, and with the conclusion of WWII we also see the conclusion of some 6,000,000 more Jews. Well, at the end of WWII, the powers that be (the US along with Britain, the Soviet Union, and France -- hahaha just kidding about France) held the Jews up and said, "Holy **** you poor people, you've had the living **** kicked out of you for some few thousand years or so. Tell us where would like to live in complete sanctuary for the rest of your days?"






Presto-whiz-bango, the State of Israel was officially born. Queue bands, music, banners, food, etc, etc, etc.


Now the Israelis -- as they were now officially called -- said to themselves, "Okay we've been the party bitches for everyone pretty much since the beginning of recorded time, especially with this Holocaust thing, so we have to make sure this will never happen again." And so it was decreed that every Israeli citizen, both male and female, would spend time in the military so everyone knew how to defend their civilization. So they trained and trained and prepared and prepared, all to insure the persecution of their kind would never happen on such a monumental scale again.


Now spin the clock forward to 1967, and we find Israeli surrounded like they are today - pretty much by angry Arabs -- Syria to the North, Jordan to the East, and Egypt to the South. Israel is bordered by the Mediterranean Sea on the West for those of you geographically challenged. Well the president of Egypt at the time decided that he didn't want Israel to exist any more, so he picked up his Bat-phone and dialed all those Arab states surrounding Israel, and called upon them to wage one of their Holy Wars to, “rid the world of the Zionists pigs." (“Zionist” being a cool catch phrase for a Jew).


Israel, being prepared this time and determined not to be beaten like a rented mule, deciding they would be having none of this and popped the top on the “Extra Strength Can of Whoop Ass”. Thus commenced the "Six Day War".


Why’d they call it the Six Day War, you ask? Because that's how long it took Israel to beat the ****ing snot out of all three of their attackers. Six ****ing days. You think we whipped Iraq or Afghanistan's ass quick? Hell no. June 5th, 1967 Israel beat the **** out of Egypt, the Jordanians on the 7th, and finally the Syrians on the 9th.


So by the time the 11th rolled around, the Israeli soldiers were back in streets of Tel Aviv doing the, "We Kicked Your ****ing Arab Ass Dance", having captured lands known as the West Bank (where the Palestinians are living), the Gaza Strip (from the Egyptians), and the Golan Heights (from the Syrians). Thus the establishment of the Israelis as people not to be ****ed with and their, "If you ain't Jewish, you ain't ****," attitude.


It's important to note here that in the West Bank are Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and a snot load of other very religious places that hold high regard in both Judaism and Islam. And there’s no separation between them either, both Jewish and Islamic holy places all mixed in together to a “Berlin Wall” type solution just wouldn’t work.


These spankings kept things quiet save for a few skirmishes in the 1970's, until 1982 when Israel decided to lay the pimp-smack down on Lebanon(due to constant PLO attacks). The key thing to remember here is one of the commanders in the Israeli forces at the time was a General Ariel Sharon (name ring a bell?), who not only orchestrated many of the attacks on the Lebanese army, but also is accused by many Arab nations of ordering the slaughter of a **** load of Lebanese civilians.


Now, whether or not this slaughter actually happened -- both sides claim opposite stories and I don't ****ing know who to believe to be honest -- doesn't really make a ****ing difference. The point is the Arabs believe he did and nobody, but nobody, is going to change their minds. In their eyes he's a butcher who kills women and children, period, end of discussion.


Again there were a few little skirmishes in the 1990’s, but again nothing too major and all is quiet for a while until the year 2000 (see a twenty’ish year cycle here?). The existing cease fire between the Arabs and the Israelis was threadbare after all this time, and it's now that the retired Ariel Sharon makes the dumbass decision to visit one of the Jew’s most religious places (good) but does so on one of the most holy days in the Islamic faith (bad). The Arabs go ****ing nuts withthe return of "the butcher", riots start, bullets fly, and the rest we can get off CNN.


So for eighteen months now, it's been Arabs throw rocks, Israelis shoot bullets. Arabs shoot bullets, Israelis use tanks. Arabs make suicide bombs, Israelis launch planes. Then things cool down for a few days, maybe a week, and we start all over again with Arabs throwing rocks, Israelis shooting, and we're ****ing back to square one.


In the past few weeks we've seen a few dashes of hope that this whole Middle East violence thing might be wrapping up. The Saudi peace plan looked most promising in my opinion, but even that's doomed to fail. Why? Well, the deal is Israel gives back the land they occupied back from the Six Day War -- a big bone of contention for many Arab countries -- and in return Israel will “officially be recognized” by those same Arab nations.


Riiiiiight. So that “recognition” will last about three to four weeks, and then one of the Arabic nations will snub their nose at either Israel or Ariel Sharon or both, and the rest will inevitably follow suit. Israel will then cry foul, the US will agree, and thus we’ll be secured for another twenty years in the eyes of Arab nations everywhere as, “the American capitalist dog, masters of the puppet Sharon and his Zionist regime.”


Then one of the militant Palestinian groups - not happy with getting their land back but will instead want to push the issue to a boiling point, will throw a rock at Israeli border guards. This will of course lead to the Israelis shooting back with rubber bullets (sound familiar?), which will lead to more rocks being thrown until an Israeli soldier gets seriously wounded, then the real bullets come in and, well, I guess I don’t have to tell you the rest. You already know it, now don’t you?


Look I’d love to hold your hand and sing “Kum’bi’yah” with the rest of your friends -- I’d like to see peace in the Middle East as much as anyone else, I’d get to travel again, gas prices would go down, and these people would be off my ****ing news -- but the simple fact is it’s never, ever, ever, ever going to happen. Never. Ever. Period. The best anyone is ever going to do is orchestrate a ceasefire which will be doomed to fail before it even begins. The fires of hatred glow brighter here than in any other place on earth, and there’s no politician or peacemaker with gloves thick enough to handle it for more than a few seconds at a time.
Sad but true.
 
Last edited:

calm

Banned
Joined
Jul 2, 2013
Messages
631
Reaction score
123
Location
Toronto, Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Socialist
I thought that this was a pretty good read.

Never Has The Palestinian Cause Been So Badly Betrayed
By Abdel Bari Atwan
August 02, 2013
Never Has The Palestinian Cause Been So Badly Betrayed

SNIP:

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has become the prisoner of American financial aid. He cannot reject any ‎proposals or orders because he realises that delaying the salaries of 160,000 Palestinians PA employees ‎for more than two months would mean an intifada (uprising), not only against Israel and its occupation, but also against his ‎authority because, for reasons of personal interest, he would stand against it.

Abbas has repeated several times that he would not allow such an uprising, which explains the fierce and harsh response of his security ‎forces to dozens of protesters who demonstrated in Ramallah against ‎resuming the negotiations, mostly from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. He was behaving exactly as Arab dictators have done, and still do, because peaceful freedom of expression doesn’t ‎exist in his dictionary.‎
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Can some on help me out here I don't understand the Palestrina claim to the West Bank. I have become even more confused as through some cursurary research I have seen that there has never been a palestian state in the region only a scattered bands of nomads with some shared culture. So where does the bascis for their claim come?
 

GI Joe

Active member
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
269
Reaction score
161
Location
Cleveland Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Read more @: Palestinian leadership matches Israeli PM's peace deal referendum pledge | World news | guardian.co.uk

Another step forward in reaching the table with these peace talks! I can back these 100% and this referendum pledge is a huge sign that something is moving forward.

You can talk untill everyone is blue in the face but unless the parties in such agreements both have strong internal control and can live up to its obligations then any agreement is moot. No country is going to make a peace deal with a country whos government does not have the power to enforce it on itself, especially when its security is weekend making them more vulnerable to attack by those in the other country against a peace deal and want its destruction.

Israel has a strong stable government with respect for the rule of law. The bezerkerers Israel does have are few in number especially as a percentage of its popupation and garner little sympathy among its population. Israels bezerkers have little power with no ability to pursue independent policy and many of their groups have been banned. Israels bzerkers have no military and most of its terroristic actions are confined to vandalism not murder. Israel controls its bezerkers and when they step over the line they are cracked down on.

In Contrast.
The PA is weak, has only limited overall controll, with rampant corruption eerywhere and little respect for the rule of law. The Palestinians bezerkers are large in number as well as a percentage of the population and garner a lot of sympathy among the Pal population enabling them to be elected. The Pal bezerkers have a great amount of power and control that equals or comes close to the PA's and can pursue its own independent policy. The Pal bezerkers have their own military that engages in its own policy of terror directed to the murder of Israeli civillians and its ultimate goal of the destruction of Israel. The PA has no control over its bezerkers partially in large part due to Arafats not cracking down on them from the begining and using all the groups to play off each other, as well as lack of will by him and others to crack down all of which allowed them to grow and take root. Because of how entrenched they are now and the large amount of sympathy for their policies of terror with the ultimate goal of the destruction of Israel, the gaining of such control by the PA while remaining moderate at least in the near term is not realistic unless some fundemental changes occur.

Any peace deal currently makes all of Israels population centers vulnerable to attack by groups like Hamas and IJ that are sworn to Israels destruction and who are far from being under the control of the PA. In addition Israels strategic depth and security from conventional attack by surrounding countries they have faught numerous wars with(and most are still in a state of war with) is also greatly reduced. While Israel may have peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt given the animosity in those countries (and in all of the Arab world for that matter) at Israel and the real possibility that a hostile regime takes power, Israel needs be cautious a hostile regime is not set up on their doorstep.




Here is a post I made in another thread that goes into more depth

http://www.debatepolitics.com/middl...e-peace-negotiations-isra.html#post1061443289

There is no need to force Israel to take the peace process seriously, they always have. They have wanted to make peace since their independence but the Arabs/Pals outright refused to even negotiate for the longest time. When Egypt decided to persue a peace deal with Israel, Israel saw they were serious and jumped on the chance for peace by making huge concessions . Israel dismantled the Sinai settlements and left the Sinai giving up a territory larger than it was , of huge strategic value as well as full of oil and other natural resources in order to make peace with Egypt. Israel was willing to take the risks in its its security that were needed to make peace with Egypt because Egypt was serious and werent talking peace while preparing to make war. Peace with Egypt may be a cold peace but it was a peace none the less and Israel did not need to be forced to make it. The same with Jordan.

The Pals on the other hand never showed they were serious about making a real peace. They talked peace to Israel and the West with one face but talked war to their own people with another face. They refused or ignored every peace proposal increasing terror attacks as a negotiating tactic. They never stopped engaging in terror even during peace negotiations. Even the so called moderates Fatah had its own terror factions it controlled and used to launch many attacks on Israel. Even if there was a significant portion of the Pals who sincerely want peace there is also a huge portion who dont. If the portion who does want peace cant control those who do not want peace then any deal with Israel is really a non starter until they have such control. Wanting peace and committing suicide are two different things. Israel may want peace but they are not going to committ suicide and or open themselves up to be attacked easier just for the sake of making a peace deal, nobody would.





The Pals need to capitulate


Generally Israel nor any other country in the world is going to do something against their self interest and security if they dont have to, especially when it involves current hostilities . All countries will use the power they have to minimize threats against them. Until there is some sort of paradigm shift that makes doing something in their interest and security it will not happen because they have the power to whats best for themselves .

The history of Arab/Pal rhetoric, wars, agression and terror against Israel that continues to this day makes the status quo a better safer more secure option than giving into what the Pals want which would make attacks against Israel easier and put all its major population centers at much greater threat. The reality is the status quo while far from perfect gives Israel more security and minimizes threats better than a peace deal under current conditions. Israels borders are not surounded by countries like Canada or like Western European borders, it is surrounded by despotic even genocidal regimes as well attacked from terrorist infested/controlled areas and whom all share a hatred for Israel . Even the countries who have a cold peace with Israel are just a coup away from a regime that wants to destroy Israel. No country in Israels situation would risk their security as Israel is expected to do as if its like N America or W Europe. Most countries in fact would react far more forcefully than Israel has.

The Pals have done this to themselves with the years of rhetoric,attacks, inaction stopping attacks and sqaundering every confidence building opportunity like the Gaza pullout. The second intifada was a complete disaster that the Pals brought onto themselves. In 2000, peace was on the horizon, Israeli confidence was high that it could be achieved and they were willing to take a chance on it despite the security threats. The paradigm shifted over the years making it more attractive to take that chance. There was a level of guarded trust that had been built up. There was cooperation on various matters especially in the growing economic and business ties. Almost overnight the violence of the second intifada wiped out everything and shifted the paradigm radically away from a peace deal. The Gaza pullout was a chance for the Pals to reverse some of the damage and build Israeli confidence as well as their own prosperity but they used the opportunity to launch more attacks. After Gaza no country would take any more chances let alone put all their major population centers in range unless there was a major shift in the Palestinian attitudes and actions.

Since Israel is more powerfull and can continue the status quo a lot longer than the Pals and under much less misery, the harsh reality is the Pals will need to capatulate. It is up to them to stop the rhetoric and attacks and try to build Israeli confidence. The Pals need to take the steps to shift the current paradigm. The longer the Pals wait the more they will suffer and the worse deal they will get. They can capitulate and realize they are not going to get everything they want or they can continue to fight, live in misery and lose. Right or wrong its the reality of how the world works and has always worked.


A note on economic and business ties. These are some of the best ways to shift such a paradigm to make it in a countries interest to take a greater risk on a peace deal. Because businesses want stability and cooperation not chaos and conflict, economic ties can be very strong and motivational factors since business leaders/groups have power and access to influence govs. One of the sad casualties of the intifada was the destruction of these ties. Once the pals stop the incitement and attacks they should promote business ties as a quick way to build more confidence, promote stability and cooperation and eventually shift the paradigm to make conflict unwanted, unthinkable and against everyones interests. Hopefully to the point of no return. Its a fact that countries with large economic ties and shared interests do not fight each other and will cooperate more effectively even when something might not be in ones interest but will help each other out for the long range greater interest. If the Pals want any deal they need to capitulate and if they want a better deal then this is the kind of thing they need to do. Otherwise they can continue to fight, live in misery and lose
 

GI Joe

Active member
Joined
Mar 20, 2006
Messages
269
Reaction score
161
Location
Cleveland Ohio
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I would also like to add that in the short term under the current conditions while I dont see any working deal come out of the negotiations, I think it can still be positive and lay the groundwork for a deal in the future. I also think even if their is the slightest chance for peace in the short term its better than no chance which is what there would be with no talks.




Here are some quotes

"Instead, the elite Westerner talks about “occupied lands” from which Israel has been attacked four times in the last 60 years — in a manner that Germans do not talk about an occupied West they coughed up to France or an occupied East annexed by Poland. Russia lectures about Jenin, but rarely its grab of Japanese islands. Turkey is worried about the West Bank, but not its swallowing much of Cyprus. China weighs in about Palestinian sovereignty but not the entire culture of Tibet; some British aristocrats bemoan Sharon’s supposed land grab, but not Gibraltar. All these foreign territories that were acquired through blood and iron and held on to by reasons of “national security” are somehow different matters when Jews are not involved." -- Victor Davis Hanson


"I wish I could attribute the absence of any conventional Arab offensive in the last 20 years to a change of political climate or a willingness to abide by past accords. But unfortunately it is more likely that the Egyptians or Syrians concluded that the next time their tanks headed to Tel Aviv, there was nothing stopping the counterassaults from ending up in downtown Cairo or Damascus." -- Victor Davis Hanson


"The problem with deterrence — apparently sometimes forgotten by our former presidents — is that it is not static, but a creature of the moment, captive to impression, and nursed on action, not talk. It must be maintained hourly and can erode or be lost with a single act of failed nerve, despite all the braggadocio of threatened measures. And, once gone, the remedies needed for its restoration are always more expensive, deadly — and controversial — than would have been its simple maintenance." -- Victor Davis Hanson

"The Palestinians will, in fact, get their de facto state, though one that may be now cut off entirely from Israeli commerce and cultural intercourse. This is an apparently terrifying thought: Palestinian men can no longer blow up Jews on Monday, seek dialysis from them on Tuesday, get an Israeli paycheck on Wednesday, demonstrate to CNN cameras about the injustice of it all on Thursday — and then go back to tunneling under Gaza and three-hour, all-male, conspiracy-mongering sessions in coffee-houses on Friday. Beware of getting what you bomb for." -- Victor Davis Hanson

"Despite the current vogue of questionable and therapeutic ideas like "zero tolerance" and "moral equivalence" that punish all who use force — whether in kindergarten or in the Middle East — striking first is a morally neutral concept. It takes on its ethical character from the landscape in which it takes place — the Israelis bombing the Iraqi reactor to avoid being blackmailed by a soon-to-be nuclear Saddam Hussein, or the French going into the Ivory Coast last year, despite the fact that that chaotic country posed no immediate danger to Paris. The thing to keep in mind is that the real aggressor, by his past acts, has already invited war and will do so again — should he be allowed to choose his own time and place of assault." -- Victor Davis Hanson


“Appeasement of (Islamic) fundamentalists is not appreciated as magnanimity, but ridiculed as weakness � and, in fact, encourages further killing.”
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,099
Reaction score
12,353
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Can some on help me out here I don't understand the Palestrina claim to the West Bank. I have become even more confused as through some cursurary research I have seen that there has never been a palestian state in the region only a scattered bands of nomads with some shared culture. So where does the bascis for their claim come?

You are this close to breaking one of the ME ML rules with this post. That rule is:
ML Prohibited Terms/Expressions
R) The Palestinians do not exist, are not a "true" people or variations thereof

I'm just letting you know to be careful where you're thinking of taking that line of debate.
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You are this close to breaking one of the ME ML rules with this post. That rule is:


I'm just letting you know to be careful where you're thinking of taking that line of debate.

I'm not trying to troll I'm just trying to understand Shurley we can have that discussion with out breaking the rules.
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,099
Reaction score
12,353
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I'm not trying to troll I'm just trying to understand Shurley we can have that discussion with out breaking the rules.

Hey, I'm not a mod, I'm just letting you know that ML here does restrict debate topics and you should be aware of it. If you want clarification of what is and is not acceptable, I'd PM a mod and ask.

It sounded to me as if you were saying that the Palestinians are not a real people and that's on the list.
 

YoungConserv

DP Veteran
Joined
May 13, 2012
Messages
3,083
Reaction score
601
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Hey, I'm not a mod, I'm just letting you know that ML here does restrict debate topics and you should be aware of it. If you want clarification of what is and is not acceptable, I'd PM a mod and ask.

It sounded to me as if you were saying that the Palestinians are not a real people and that's on the list.

No they are definetly a people group I'm just curious as in my research all I've seen is that Palestinians have been a nomadic people group I've never seen record of a actual state of Palestine. So hence the question where does the claim of ownership stem from.
 
Top Bottom