• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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!

The nonviable notion of a Palestinian state

CJ 2.0

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
5,418
Reaction score
1,903
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The nonviable notion of a Palestinian state

I don't love the message, but I am having real trouble dsiputing any of the content of this article.

While this guy clearly has an interest in perpetuating Israeli control over the west bank, putting that interest aside, I don't see where he is wrong.

Is everybody pushing to develop a terrorist state in the west bank, or does anyone genuinely believe there is any other potential outcome?

Like I've said before, my view is that there is pretty much zero chance this process will result in an agreement and that agreement will be implemented, largely (ok, entirely) because the Palestinian leadership has not actually made that leap where it is prepared to end the conflict or stop pursuing Israel's destruction, and in any event tey have not, over the past 20 years, taken any steps to deradicalize the population and ready them to accept compromise (in fact they have consistantly done precisely the opposite).

But this is different - this is saying that pretty much no matter what, no matter who is in charge in the PA and what they genuinely want to achieve, there STILL could not be peace because it necessarily will be a short time between any pull-out and the time when radical rejectionists seize power.

Which seems to make sense.
 
The nonviable notion of a Palestinian state

I don't love the message, but I am having real trouble dsiputing any of the content of this article.

While this guy clearly has an interest in perpetuating Israeli control over the west bank, putting that interest aside, I don't see where he is wrong.

Is everybody pushing to develop a terrorist state in the west bank, or does anyone genuinely believe there is any other potential outcome?

Like I've said before, my view is that there is pretty much zero chance this process will result in an agreement and that agreement will be implemented, largely (ok, entirely) because the Palestinian leadership has not actually made that leap where it is prepared to end the conflict or stop pursuing Israel's destruction, and in any event tey have not, over the past 20 years, taken any steps to deradicalize the population and ready them to accept compromise (in fact they have consistantly done precisely the opposite).

But this is different - this is saying that pretty much no matter what, no matter who is in charge in the PA and what they genuinely want to achieve, there STILL could not be peace because it necessarily will be a short time between any pull-out and the time when radical rejectionists seize power.

Which seems to make sense.

We have a saying in the UK, "You've made your bed, now lie in it".
 
We have a saying in the UK, "You've made your bed, now lie in it".

I know that expression, just not how it applies.

Have the israelis made their bed by coming this far down the road?

Have the Palestinians made their bed through their general intrnsigence and douchebaggery?

etc.

As far as I can see, a whiole bunch of beds have been made here, so which one are we going to lie in and why?
 
I know that expression, just not how it applies.

Have the israelis made their bed by coming this far down the road?

Have the Palestinians made their bed through their general intrnsigence and douchebaggery?

etc.

As far as I can see, a whiole bunch of beds have been made here, so which one are we going to lie in and why?

I interpreted it as Jews making their bed by not seeking to expand their numbers through proselytization and conquest, by being successful as a people, and by engendering the wrath of the large majority with a chip on their shoulder who persecute them because of their success, while taking advantage of an enormous advantage in numbers and resources to hoodwink the ignorant into joining them in such persecution.

Of course, that is just one interpretation. Those actively engaged in the process are free to come up with another.
 
I view it as

Maintaining an occupation for 40 years, colonizing parts of the territory while having no realistic plan on ending the occupation leading to the eventual annexation of the entire west bank. Causing a massive demographic shift in the Israeli population. Overall at some point in the near future Israel will no longer be a jewish majority nation.

Or Israeli ultranationalists will engage in massive ethnic cleansing of the west bank forcing the Palestinians out, leading to Israel to be a pariah state. At which point moderate Israeli's ( many of Israel's best and brightest) move to the US or Europe to seek a better future.


Either way without the creation of a viable self sustainable Palestinian state, within about 10 years or so (time frame due to expansion of settlements and creation of new ones in the west bank), Israel will not exist as a jewish majority nation in 30 years. It will either have a Palestinian majority population, or collapse due to extremists driving away moderate domestic and international support
 
When I saw the title of the thread I thought the article would point out the host of problems with the two-state solution, but it really just made the irrational claim that Hamas will take over and Hamas is completely evil therefore there cannot be peace.
 
Back
Top Bottom