what are the implications of a solution to palestine

#21
welldone:

LIAR!

no self respecting Engineer [ Royal or otherwise ] would admit to washing..

and admitting to cold baked beans just proves the lie..Engineers have spent weeks coming up with complicated Rube Goldberg devices for heating beans or anything else.. once saw a group duct tape foil wrapped potatoes to the tailpipes of trucks when moving from one bivouac to another so they could have them steaming with sour cream and chives at lunch..
 
#22
yes we are /were a particularly resourceful bunch when it comes to scran, once convinced a new troopy that the chips that we were frying on the avre dozer blade had come from the yellow potato plants scattered around the prairie which had been left by dutch settlers from a bygone age ...silly c@nt was diggin up said plants for a bout a week lookin alll confused.
but i digress, who's fault is palestine?
 
#23
welldonethengas said:
yes we are /were a particularly resourceful bunch when it comes to scran, once convinced a new troopy that the chips that we were frying on the avre dozer blade had come from the yellow potato plants scattered around the prairie which had been left by dutch settlers from a bygone age ...silly c@nt was diggin up said plants for a bout a week lookin alll confused.
but i digress, who's fault is palestine?
I think that the various posts above have given some opinions on this question.
 
#25
Mr. Deputy:

If the Palestinians displaced back in the formation days of the State of Israel had been offered their own' land' [ even an island in the Pacific ] they could have called' Palestine' and moved en masse there to begin anew, so to speak, things might have been different..though I doubt it- a], the Palestinians weren't/aren't ' unified' but disparate groups [ i.e. Hamas, etc. ] who still haven't figured out just what they really really want anyway.. and b] just like everyone else they wouldn't have 'accepted' second best without a lot of pressure as they can't ' forget' centuries of history/ownership to their piece of the desert

sadly, everywhere in the world people are still nursing grudges over things that happened to their ancestors [ real or imagined] since just after climbing down from the trees.

If we would only admit that we're a bunch of nasty, petty, violence-prone selfish, grasping people who have to be the alpha dog, then we'd have a better time of it.. free of that burden we could feel guilt free when sticking it to the other guy in our climb to the top.
 
#26
welldonethengas said:
top marks for observation big eye you chose your moniker well .
Ta.

I was going to paraphrase what had been said before but I got distracted by the sexiest News reader in the world:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUtBXu25kDo

I'm working at TF1's ***** Bureau this afternoon, but sadly she's in Paris.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#27
Perhaps you could find a solution then we will find out!
 
#28
ugly i'd love to mate but im babysitting this afternoon so thats fecked that,speaking of which the little mite is choking right now so i suppose i should go and attend to her.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#30
welldonethengas said:
ugly i'd love to mate but im babysitting this afternoon so thats fecked that,speaking of which the little mite is choking right now so i suppose i should go and attend to her.
Are we in the naafi? Never mind! If you do sort the palestinians out, dont forget to let princess tony take the credit!
 
#31
I imagine that the largest implication of a 'solution to Palestine' would be the unwelcome light such an event would focus on the wider Arab world; I say this because the Arab world has been using the Palestine question as an emotional whip to keep the West in general - and Western European intellectuals in particular - 'on side', and also to deflect attention away from their own considerable difficulties.

Any solution might also cause the European and Western intellectual elites to search around for another reason not to engage with a serious debate on the War on Terror.

It's entirely possible that ordinary Arabs may start asking some uncomfortable questions of their leadership if and when a solution to Palestine came about.

On the issue of geographical Palestine - I understand that a sizable chunk of Mandated Palestine was transformed into Transjordan, now the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

I don't think anyone is intellectually dishonest enough to imagine that the Palestinians themselves - or the wider Arab world - would be prepared to settle for a solution that didn't envisage the eventual elimination of Israel. It's hardly outlandish to suggest that to most Arabs, a Palestinian state does not include a co-existent Israel.
 
#32
Gallowglass:

one could turn all cynical and suggest that it would be in the best interests of Arab/Muslims and the anti-Semite world movement to have all the Jews ' contained' in one small geographical location and therefore " Israel " is a ' good thing' [ once the holy shrines ' are removed from their control , etc. etc. ]..
 
#33
bigeye said:
Did you mean Palestinian or Jewish refugees?

The point I was going to make regarding the geography is that at the time of the intervention of the Arab league, Palestine comprised a much larger area than it does now. The troubles of the two regions, Gaza and the West Bank, that are currently deemed to be 'Palestine' cannot be really be directly blamed on the fuss that was going on in the 1920s.

We now have a separate set of protagonists.


What did you mean by the following statement?

'Anyways even under the Ottomans the term 'Arz i Filistin' was in use to describe the sanjaks of Damascus and Jersualem'
Trans Jordan though a part of the mandate of Palestine was in actual fact from its inception a separate entity - the British made clear that from the beginning that the promises made under the Balfour declaration were not to apply - east of the river Jordan. In addition Trans-Jordans mandate ended in 1946, 2 years before the American forced UN partition. So in fact the 'Palestine' of the 1920s is pretty much the Palestine of 1947.

Oh by my statement Arz i Filistin - land of the Palestinians was a response to those who argue that any notion of the term Palestine came with the Mandate. The term Arz i Filistin was used by Ottomans in official papers.

Secondly in terms of the Arab League the protocol concerns 1948 Palestinians who were exclusively Arab as those Jewish refugees who were displaced in Palestine were internal.

Now the plight of Jewish Arabs is a separate question.
 
#34
welldonethengas said:
what geopolitcal reasons for prolonging the conflictin palestine are there? who benefits from the conflict ? which nations? which industries ? which "movements" ? who stands to lose out if peace breaks out ?
Nobody stands to lose if peace breaks out - they just stop getting killed - forget geopolitics, if you've ever bothered to learn it.
 
#35
Nasser was the first major exponent of what became Baathism. His dream was of a pan arab union covering the whole of the Middle East and he engineered a union with Syria. He attempted to get other Arab states involved and actively sponsored groups in Aden, the Yemen and the Trucial states dedicated to the overthrow of those countries Govenments.

He formulated the plan to keep palestinians poor and with many grievances in order to further his political aims.

The two nations that gave the Palestinians the best treatment in all the Arab world, Jordan and Lebanon were the two to suffer most. Lebanon became a byword for pointless suffering and Jordan was only saved from the same when the Bedou came in from the desert and saved Hussain from being deposed by a palestinian takeover. They were not subject to our ROE and no one in the Arab world objected.

I am neither pro nor anti Israeli or Palestinian, I wish there would be a serious outbreak of peace in the area, but both parties are being used by other people for their own reasons.

Incidentally I do have a suspicion that one of Bush's reasons for invading Iraq was that Sadam was stumping up $25000 for each suicide bomber. The well known lobby in the USA would have a lot to say about that.
 
#37
I found this on freemuslims.org, its pretty idealistic (unrealistic?), but it raises an interesting idea:

Solving the Palestinian/Israeli Conflict

No issue has the same global impact as the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. During the cold war, the United States and the Soviet Union twice raised their security alerts and aggressively challenged each other over this conflict. The oil embargo of the 1970s was inspired by the Palestinian/Israeli conflict. Numerous militants, terrorist groups and governments around the world which seek legitimacy place the Palestinian/Israeli conflict at the forefront of their agenda. And while the Palestinian/Israeli conflict is not the cause of terrorism, solving this conflict may transform the political landscape of the entire Middle East and expose the various agendas of numerous violent groups who leach on this conflict to win the hearts and minds of emotional and unsuspecting people.

Because of the global impact of this conflict, the entire world must do all it can to bring peace between the Palestinians and Israelis. Towards that end the Free Muslims propose the following:

Today there are three solutions to this conflict. The Israelis and Palestinians can kill each other; they can separate by creating two separate nations; or they can create one nation made up of two people. Presently, the only solution being discussed is a two state solution. This solution is based on separating both people into two separate and sovereign nations. While the Free Muslims support any solution that brings final peace to both Israelis and Palestinians, we believe there are serious problems with the two state solution that may not bring long term peace to both people.

During the Clinton administration, the Palestinians and Israelis spent nearly ten years trying to hammer out a deal based on the two state solution. That peace process ended in total failure. Immediately after the failure of that peace process, Israelis and Palestinians blamed each other for the failure; and the rest of the world took side with either the Palestinians or the Israelis.

However, neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis are to blame for the failure of the Clinton era peace talks which were based on the "Oslo agreement." What caused the failure of the peace talks maybe the solution it self rather than the parties. The consequences of creating two separate nations by dividing Israel and Palestine were and still are difficult pills to swallow for both Israelis and Palestinians. It is a fact that both Israelis and Palestinians have religious, historical and emotional attachments to every square inch of the land that includes Israel and Palestine. The sooner the Palestinians and Israelis understand this reality the sooner they can solve their conflict.

From the point of view of many Israelis, the two state solution is difficult because they would have to give up their religious and historical attachments to the West Bank and Gaza which they call Judea and Samaria. Many Israelis simply cannot fathom giving up the West Bank and Gaza and maybe they should not have to. From the point of view of the Palestinians, the two states solution is difficult because they have historical, religious and emotional attachments not only to the West Bank and Gaza but also to Israel which they call the lands of 1948 after the year they lost it to present day Israel. These are the facts and realities that the Palestinians and Israelis have to deal with to solve their conflict.

In light of these facts some may think that a solution to this conflict is impossible. Not true. The Palestinian/Israeli conflict can be solved like any other conflict as long as the parties think outside the box and as long as no one uses violence or terrorism to effect political change.

In light of the attachments that both parties have for the same territory, the solution is not in separating but in coming closer together. Many Israelis and Palestinians seem to agree that the land they call Israel/Palestine is indivisible. Thus, the solution lies in keeping the land that Israelis and Palestinians call home as one nation while at the same time providing each side with the security and the individuality the parties would have if they had their own separate nations.

What is being proposed here is a Two State-One Nation solution based on equality, freedom and civil rights for both Israelis and Palestinians. The idea behind this solution is that there will be two sovereign states similar to New York and New Jersey that together make one nation similar to the United States of America. However, rather than being a federation it would be a confederation. The main difference between a federation and a confederation is that the states in a confederacy have much more sovereignty than in a federation.

What is being proposed here is not entirely new. What is new about the two state-one nation solution is that it achieves the benefits of being one united nation while reserving for both Israelis and Palestinians the security and independence of being two separate nations.

To illustrate this point further, note that after occupying the West Bank and Gaza in 1967, Israel could have annexed and integrated those territories into Israel by providing the Palestinians with Israeli citizenship. However, Israel did not do this and instead chose to treat the West Bank and Gaza as if they were part of Israel physically without providing the Palestinians in those territories with citizenship, political rights or civilian rule. Among the reasons Israel did not integrate the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza into Israel is because Israelis were afraid of a demographic problem. The Israelis feared that if they gave the Palestinians equality, political and civil rights that the Palestinians may one day out number the Israelis and vote Israel out of existence. While we understand this concern by Israelis, those Israelis who fear giving the Palestinians equality and civil rights assume that they cannot give the Palestinians equality and at the same time have a Jewish state. This is a false assumption. The territory that includes Israel and Palestine can be one nation where the Palestinians have equality, political and civil rights and at the same time be a safe heaven for Jews from all over the world.

This can be done by creating a confederation of two states united by a federal type government with limited powers. The country can be called the United States of Israel and Palestine. While both states should have the right to limit immigration and migration within their borders, the principles of the nation should be based on the free movement of labor and people. To the extent that Israelis move to Palestine and Palestinians to Israel, we can avoid the demographic consequences of the migration by having their votes count in their respective state regardless of where they live. This approach will totally avoid the demographic fear that Israelis have by making certain that migration of people does not dilute the political power of Jews or Palestinians in their local and state politics.

As to the national government, Israel and Palestine shall each contribute 50% to the national parliament regardless of their populations. With this solution, the Israelis do not have to fear political dilution from potential demographic changes and the Palestinians do not have to fear political dilution from the Israelis.

As to the President or Prime Minister of the national government of the United States of Israel and Palestine, they should be elected by the national parliament. Being that the parliament is divided 50/50 no Palestinian or Israeli can win without support from parliamentarians of the other side. This will guarantee that no Palestinian or Israeli extremist can become president of the United States of Israel and Palestine.

Initially, the national government should have limited powers similar to the United States government in the early days of the Union. As time progresses and both Israelis and Palestinians feel more comfortable with each other, they may chose to give the confederation more authority. In essence the early days of the national government of the United States of Israel and Palestine should resemble an entity more like the European Union than the U.S. federal government.

On economic matters, Israel and Palestine shall act as one nation with no exception. They shall have the same currency, no tariffs and complete free trade. The early days of the national government or confederation shall be to bring jobs and economic prosperity to both Israelis and Palestinians. This should be an easy task. A peaceful Israel and Palestine acting as one nation would be a gold mine the likes of which the world has never seen. A nation that is the birth place of western civilization and immensely revered by Jews, Christians and Muslims, religious tourism alone will guarantee a healthy economy in perpetuity.

However, the economy will have more than tourism to secure its prosperity. A nation of Palestinians and Israelis at peace with their neighbors shall have unlimited opportunities. The technical know-how of Israel, the available capital in the Arab world and a geography that is at the intersection of three continents can produce an economic power house that is second to none on a per capita basis. Moreover, a peaceful nation made up of Palestine and Israel at peace with their neighbors will not only bring economic prosperity to that nation but also to the entire Middle East.

This solution may not be perfect. However, this proposed solution may be the only solution that will give the Palestinians and Israelis most of what they want while at the same time allows both people to keep their individual identity and live as one nation. Moreover, with this solution, Jerusalem becomes a non-issue and borders become less relevant. This solution will basically take Israelis and Palestinians back to the time before the first intifada (uprising) began in 1987 with the only difference being that the Palestinians will have rights and equality that they never had under the occupation. As proof that this solution can work is the fact that Israel has one million Palestinians with Israeli citizenship and they are not demonstrating, throwing rocks or blowing themselves up. Why is this? The only difference between Palestinians who are citizens of Israel and Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza is that one group has freedom, political and civil rights while the other has nothing. Israel did not recognize the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza as citizens. They were put under military rule, and they were segregated in everyway.

To summarize, the Free Muslims are asking the Palestinians to reach out to their Israeli and Jewish partners and say the following:

"We understand why the state of Israel is important to you. We are fully aware of the persecution that Jews suffered throughout history and the necessity of having a safe heaven for Jews. We also understand that Jews have historical and religious ties to Israel/Palestine. We believe that every Jew shall have the right to move to Israel and become a citizen immediately. We also welcome Jews to visit and to reside in the West Bank and Gaza. We want the Palestinians and Israelis to live together as neighbors, friends and countrymen. In return, what we want is freedom, liberty and equality for the Palestinians. Will you meet us half way?"

The Free Muslims are also asking Israelis and Jews to reach out to their Palestinians Partners and say the following:

"We understand why Palestine is important to you. We are fully aware of the suffering the Palestinians have experience over the last 100 years and the necessity of having a safe heaven for Palestinians. We also understand that Palestinians have historical and religious ties to Israel/Palestine. We believe that every Palestinian shall have the right to move to Palestine and become a citizen immediately. We also welcome the Palestinians to visit and to reside in Israel. We want the Palestinians and Israelis to live together as neighbors, friends and countrymen. In return, what we want is permanent security, liberty, equality and the total freedom to be Jews. Will you meet us half way?"
http://www.freemuslims.org/issues/israel-palestine.php
 
#38
Wouldn't it put that "all round good guy" Mr Anthony Bliar out of a job again
 
#39
Wouldn't it put that "all round good guy" Mr Anthony Bliar out of a job again
Given that his popularity rating in the Middle East is a gazillion times worse that it is on here, he mightn't have it to long anyway.
 
#40
Setanta, a very interesting idea.

Probably unworkable as the conditions for this to exist would require a reasonable, rational approach by both parties prepared to put their recent history behind them.

I have just finished reading a book called ' The Great War for Civilisation' by Robert Fisk given to me by a Lebanese friend of mine. In it Mr Fisk presents a tragic history of the troubles in the Middle East covering virtually all the conflicts that have afflicted this part of the world.

Whether you agree with his conclusions or not the book seems very well researched, thorough in its approach and written by a journalist who has experienced at first hand the many conflicts that he makes comment on and who doesn't pull any punches.

He returns again and again to the treaties and arrangements made by the Great Powers at the close of the 1st World War and tracks how many of the conflicts now arising in the ME stemmed from the decisions made then.

An interesting and illuminating read.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top