Bahu Virupaksha Bahu Virupaksha

The Israeli-Palestine Question

▼

The Israeli-Palestine Question

Is a one state solution possible

from JoeUser Forums

The peace in the middle east seems to be extremely difficult because both Israel and Palestine are locked in a state of mutual recrimination: peace with justice means that the existing paradigm for ordering the relations between the two societies has to be reconsidered. The Ashkenazi elite from eastern Europe and Poland that is essentially the ruling aristocracy of Israel has dominated the politics of Israel since 1949 and given its long association with Zionism is unlikely to support the obvious soulution to the problem: A single Palestinian and Israeli state. A decade back even the so called liberals in the State of Israel would have been aghast at this solution but now civil society groups in Israel have begun debating the single state solution. The great Israeli historian, Ilan Pappe the author of The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine has been a long time advocate of this new shift in Israeli perception toward Palestenians.

The central feature of this new solution is the recognition that land for peace has not provided either security to the State of Israel or peace to the Palestinians. It is necessary for those affected by the placement of Israel in the erstwhile land of Palestine to have a chance to lead a life of hope and a normal life as any signatory to the UN Charter of Human Rights will testify. An ethnically pure State of Israel has been of great moment only to the Ashkenazi and the Mizrahim sections of Israeli society with roots in North Africa, Asia and the Ottoman Empire have now willing to consider the possiblity of the joint Israeli-Palestine state. This solution trecogises the historical injustice of evicting the Palestenians from the land and at the same time recognises that a jewish homeland, as promised in the Balfour Declaration is a reality. The fact that 4.5 million Palestenians are living in conditions of extreme deprivation is the real cause for terrorism in the region and if USA is sincere about a viable peace in the region it must address this issue.

For more than 2 decades the official US position as reflected in the Camp David accord and later the Oslo Agreement is the 2 state solution. While Israel is in favor of this policy it does everything to undermine the peace accords by making the living and working conditions of Palestenians in Gaza and the West Bank extremely difficult. These territories are so closely guarded by Israel for fear of suicide attack that both territories have become huge camps where life, to put it mildly, is horrible.

It is time for USA the major backer of Israel to put its weight behind a solution as promised by all American administrations since Richard Nixon.

6,773 views 51 replies
Reply #26 from Stardock Forums Top

The lame excuse that "they are fellow muslims" are belied by the fact that "fellow muslims" are committing genocide, because some genuflect from the left and the others genuflect from the right
End of quote

Islam sits uneasily in a world divided into nation states. Yje possibility of an Arab state was undermined after the defeat of the Ottomans in World War I, especially after OIL was discovered. The West, for its own purposes, advanced the claims of camel keepers like the House of SAAUD and backed despotic kingdoms and emirates in the Arab world. The Arabs did not have leaders who could speak for them and in that confusion in 1948 Israel was established. I have stated several times in my previous posts that the Palestenians were betrayed by their fellow arabs.

Reply #27 from JoeUser Forums Top

Islam sits uneasily in a world divided into nation states.
End of quote


That is a problem which has nothing to do with the problems caused by SECULAR groups like the PLO and SECULAR leaders like Nasser and Saddam Hussein.



The possibility of an Arab state was undermined after the defeat of the Ottomans in World War I, especially after OIL was discovered.
End of quote


Emir Faisal dreamt of an Arab Empire living in peace next to a Zionist state. But secular Arab nationalists (and Syrian nationalists) undermined his efforts.



The West, for its own purposes, advanced the claims of camel keepers like the House of SAAUD and backed despotic kingdoms and emirates in the Arab world.
End of quote


The Saud issue is true, but the Hashemites were just as backed by Europeans as the Saudis. However, because of problems in Europe and America, especially since the 30s, neither side had much backing from anybody.



The Arabs did not have leaders who could speak for them and in that confusion in 1948 Israel was established.
End of quote


The Arabs had lots of leaders: Nasser, al-Husayni, Aflaq, the list goes on and on. Those leaders were very vocal.

The problem was that the Arabs listed to those leaders.



I have stated several times in my previous posts that the Palestenians were betrayed by their fellow arabs.
End of quote


Well, they should have listened to the Jews then, shouldn't they have?

It worked out well enough for them though. The very real betrayal you speak of is now called "ethnic cleansing" and it's the Jews' fault, obviously; and the "refugees" got more money from the UN than any other group in the world, while the Jewish refugees from Arab countries, who outnumber the "Palestinian" "refugees" got NOTHING.

Elemental: Reforged
Reply #28 from JoeUser Forums Top
Islam sits uneasily in a world divided into nation states.
End of quote


There animosity and hatred transcends nation states and borders. It matters not how they were, would be, or will be divided.
Reply #29 from JoeUser Forums Top
It should be noted that "Islam" doesn't "sit uneasily" or do anything. Islam is people.

What they do is up to them.

Islam may guide them, but if its guidance makes them uneasy, perhaps they need to look forguidance elsewhere.

Reply #30 from Stardock Forums Top

Nation states are the real problem. There was a large meause of intra communam and inter communal harmony in the days before the rise of Arab states in the region. Now that spirit of friendship and harmony has evaporated leaving hatred and bitterness behind. Now the real challenge is to find peace and I feel that a single state solution may be a step forward. The Quartet is still debating and probably will not advocate a solution because as long as there is Arab-Israeli conflict the West has political and military influence in the region.

Reply #31 from JoeUser Forums Top

Nation states are the real problem.
End of quote


I don't see how.

In the middle east minorities have either their own state or die.

I cannot see how nation states are the problem in that situation.

Unless you mean the one big Arab nation state Nasse was going for when he attacked Israel...
Reply #32 from JoeUser Forums Top

Actually, the revisionism is your denial of Arab attempts to exterminate Jews.
End of quote

We should not allow ourselves to be carried away because what is happening in that region is tragic and of monumental propotions.If you do not believe me let surely you will believe David Ben-Gurion, the first Prime Minister of the State of Israel. In a conversation with Nahum Goldmann:

"I do not understand your optimism...Why should the Arabs make peace? If I was an Arab leader I would never make terms with Israel. That is natural. We have taken their country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them? Ourt god is not theirs. We come from Israel. It's true, but two thousand years ago, and what it that to them? There has been anti-Semitism,the Nazis,Hitler, Aushwitz, but was that their fault? They see only one thing. We have come here and stolen their country. Why should they accept that?

These are the words of the great stateman Ben-Gurion as quoted by the American historian,Dr Benny Morris in 1948:The First Arab-Israeli War, Yale Unioversity Press, 2006,pg.393.

I think Ben Gurion made the point I was at pains to belabour.

Reply #33 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ben Gurion had the ability to empathise, see a situation from the point of view of someone else. He was also a leader of the group YOU claim committed (and had planned) ethnic cleansing.

I am aware of what Ben Gurion said and I admire the man. My battle is not with the Zionists, but with you.

Ben Gurion did NOT make the point you belabour. He does not claim or confirm that his plan was ethnic cleansing, his words prove the opposite is true; plus he thought that Arab leaders will never make peace because they lost their power because of Israel. (And that is a good thing because the Arab leader, as I demonstrated before, were in league with the Nazis.)

Ben Gurion also accuses the Arabs of not believing in the same god as the Jews. Since the Muslims do believe in the same god (and the story that that god gave the land to the Jews), he was obviously referring to secular Arab nationalists and fundamentalists like al-Husayni. They won't make peace. They lost their land. And they have a different god.

YOU accused Israel of ethnic cleansing, you better find some proof for the accusation.

I stand by my words (and al-Husayni's).

And if you ever fly to Jordan you might even notice that "Mein Kampf" is sold even at the airport. Yes, they despise Hitler, the Arabs do. No love there.
Reply #34 from JoeUser Forums Top
"We shall not enter Palestine with its soil covered in sand, we shall enter it with its soil saturated in blood" - President of Egypt, Gamal Abdel Nasser

“Those who survive will remain in Palestine. I estimate that none of them will survive.” - Ahmed Shukairy, chairman of PLO in Jordanian Jerusalem

Reply #35 from Stardock Forums Top

Leauki
End of quote

Why are you wasting your time with Bahu? he has already made it abundantly clear he is a fervent Anti-Semite, and the only solution he wants concerning the Jews, is Hitler's "final solution"

Reply #36 from JoeUser Forums Top

Why are you wasting your time with Bahu? he has already made it abundantly clear he is a fervent Anti-Semite, and the only solution he wants concerning the Jews, is Hitler's "final solution"
End of quote


Other people might be reading this.

But otherwise I agree with you.

Bahu never even addressed the quotes I gave him.

Reply #37 from JoeUser Forums Top
Why are you wasting your time with Bahu? he has already made it abundantly clear he is a fervent Anti-Semite, and the only solution he wants concerning the Jews, is Hitler's "final solution"Other people might be reading this.But otherwise I agree with you.Bahu never even addressed the quotes I gave him.
End of quote


I do not agree. I think he is a misguided liberal and is looking for easy answers to complex questions, but I dont think he is anti-semitic. Just misguided.
Reply #38 from JoeUser Forums Top

I do not agree. I think he is a misguided liberal and is looking for easy answers to complex questions, but I dont think he is anti-semitic. Just misguided.
End of quote


I think there are several types of anti-Semite.

Type 1: plain fascist; an honest anti-Semite

Type 2: acquired; was a liberal, started blaming Israel

Gestational: side-effect of coming up with an unrelated idea

I think Bahu is a "gestational anti-Semite".

Reply #39 from Stardock Forums Top

I mwant to clear up a misconception. I am trying to be fair and I am not anti semetic in fact I have always said the the right of Israel,s existence is not negotiable. I am at the same time interested in seeing whteher there is a solution.n fact mauch of what I have said has been stated by Jimmy Carter in his book Peace not Apartheid. It is irrlelevant to the arugment but of all the people I admire most a fair number of them happen to be Jews.

Dr Guy says I am misguided. I am trying my best to understand a complex issue without taking sides. Only by keeping an open mind can a solution be found and that is in the interest of all.

Reply #40 from Stardock Forums Top

And if you ever fly to Jordan you might even notice that "Mein Kampf" is sold even at the airport. Yes, they despise Hitler, the Arabs do. No love there.
End of quote

The Arabs may be anti Israel because of the politics of the region. But equating the Arabs with German anti semitism, is I think extremely wrong as German inspitred Holocaust was entirely the responsibility of the Germans and their allies. You are trying to dilute the horrific and unique nature of the Solah by blaming the Arabs. The Arabs are anti Israel as a political entity, but they cannot be made responsible for anti-semitism. Do not make such charges lightly as it undermines the absolute evil of what happened.

Reply #41 from JoeUser Forums Top

Dr Guy says I am misguided. I am trying my best to understand a complex issue without taking sides.
End of quote


That is why you are misguided.

When it comes to attempted genocides, you SHOULD take sides. Or just stay out of it.


The Arabs may be anti Israel because of the politics of the region. But equating the Arabs with German anti semitism, is I think extremely wrong as German inspired Holocaust was entirely the responsibility of the Germans and their allies.
End of quote


...except their Arab allies, obviously. Or is that not your point?

You have totally ignored the quotes I posted about Arab leaders calling for genocide before Israel even existed.

The fact is that the PLO grew out of a Syrian nationalist movement that WAS an ally of Germany's. If you think that Germany and her allies are to blame, then please do not exclude some of the allies!

Germans today are not anti-Semitic and have NOTHING to do with the genocide committed in their name by other people (who are no longer alive for the most part) 60 years ago.

But the Arabs who still regard Nazi Germany's Arab allies as brilliant leaders and who still scream for genocide, they are certainly not without blame.

The Holocaust wasn't "German" it was genocidal.

And while German television today doesn't call for the slaughter of Jews (or anybody), the same cannot be said about Arab television.

It's time to take sides, Bahu.

Are you FOR or AGAINST Nazi Germany and their allies, INCLUDING their Arab allies?

Reply #42 from JoeUser Forums Top
Dr Guy says I am misguided.
End of quote


Only on this Matter. I do not doubt your intentions. But intentions only go so far. Reality has to take you the rest of the way.
Reply #43 from JoeUser Forums Top

But intentions only go so far. Reality has to take you the rest of the way.
End of quote


What are his intentions if he refuses to acknowledge al-Husayni and the PLO's connection to the Nazis?
Reply #44 from JoeUser Forums Top
What are his intentions if he refuses to acknowledge al-Husayni and the PLO's connection to the Nazis?
End of quote


His intentions are a peaceful solution. The results however (as with so many liberals and their policies) are immaterial. So they ignore that which does not conform to their intentions.
Reply #45 from JoeUser Forums Top

His intentions are a peaceful solution.
End of quote


So were Nasser's.

The problem I have is that their peaceful solutions never include any live Jews.

And I don't see why he could not promote a peaceful solution (of any type) WITHOUT accusing the Jews of ethnic cleansing or refusing to recognise the Arabs' ties to the Nazis.
Reply #46 from JoeUser Forums Top
From the Israeli declaration of independence, May 14 1948:


WE APPEAL - in the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months - to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions.

WE EXTEND our hand to all neighbouring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighbourliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The State of Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.
End of quote


The appeal didn't work.

Israel begged the Arabs to stay and help defend the country but they left (and left the Jews to die).

Hence Israel is now being accused, by well-meaning anti-semites, of "ethnic cleansing".

Language changes when it is about Jews or Israel.

Begging someone to stay becomes "ethnic cleansing".

And being attacked becomes "expansionism".

No wonder Israel is blamed for the deaths of the suicide bombers. If Israel asks an Arab to stay, Israel gets accused of ethnic cleansing; so it's only logical that if Israel asks an Arab not to blow himself up, Israel will get accused of murder.

Perhaps, and I am being serious, Israel should apply at the UN for being allowed, without penalty, to do what the world accuses Israel of.

I for one would not be against granting the Arabs the right to murder Jews whenever they want.

The first would change the world, because if Israel did what she has been accused of all the time, there would be no Palestinian Arabs left after a few weeks.

The second wouldn't have any impact whatsoever. The world already recognises the Arabs' right to murder Jews without penalty. (Or did Syria ever have to pay reparations for invading Israel several times?)


Reply #47 from JoeUser Forums Top

Unfortunately we have evidence in History only of human actions. Even if the intentions of Arabs were evil, and Leauki seems convinced of Arab genocidal intentions, the dfact remains that they were never implemented. Only the Germans went ahead and created Dachau, Auschwits, Triblinka and a host of other extermination death camps. I cannot understand how a merely political difference between Arbs from the displaced territory of Palestins can be equated with the German inspired Holocaust.

Reply #48 from JoeUser Forums Top

Unfortunately we have evidence in History only of human actions. Even if the intentions of Arabs were evil, and Leauki seems convinced of Arab genocidal intentions, the fact remains that they were never implemented.
End of quote


We have evidence of the Arabs' words (and I assume them to be honest enough so that I can claim that their intentions were what they said they were).

We have evidence of them trying to invade and destroy Israel several times.

They were never implemented. Exactly. That's what Israel has managed to avoid.

And that's exactly why I am afraid of your solution, which would open the door and the Arabs can try again.

Reply #49 from JoeUser Forums Top

Unfortunately we have evidence in History only of human actions.
End of quote


That doesn't seem to stop you from accusing the Jews of ethnic cleansing.

We have seen the Arabs leave Israel in 1948. We have seen Arab leaders calling on them to leave. And we have seen Israel calling on them to stay.

And from that you "deduce" that Israel committed ethnic cleansing.

Fine. It's not a new idea.

But we have seen Arab leaders calling for genocide. And we have seen Arabs trying to destroy Israel.

And about that you claim that it doesn't prove their intentions.

During the six-day war Arab radio stations announced that the Jews are all dying. Doesn't prove a thing...

Can you tell me how you can deduce the Jews' evil intentions from what they don't do while you seem to be completely unable to deduce anything but the most best intentions when the Arabs announce a genocide and then attack?

Does it not occur to you that perhaps a person who looks at a call for genocide and a subsequent attack as nothing to worry about is NOT the right person to come up with a peace plan?

Reply #50 from JoeUser Forums Top
We have evidence of them trying to invade and destroy Israel several times.

They were never implemented.
End of quote


If they had been, then this whole discussion would be moot.