One solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict

[Sonart]

Originally posted by G.Adams+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (G.Adams)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>In the same way you have been giving land back to the various tribes of native Americans, right?[/b]

You have to understand the basis of America's relationship with Israel. It's about blood, not must politics.

When the Jews were finally able to make their exodus from Europe, it's my understanding that far more came here than to Israel. That means families and friends ended up split apart but never forgotten. It's a blood tie, German and Polish snf Russian jews and all the rest, all going either one way or the other. If perhaps not so much now due to imigration, then still in the minds of American Jews. Israel's survival is paramount.

And IF Miami Beach were in fact the ancestral Jewish holy city, I'd think the Jews would be given a better deal than the indians.

<!--QuoteBegin-G.Adamns
As idealistic a solution as the surrounding Arab states donating land to the Palestinians is, it will never happen.[/quote]
It already has. It's a done deal. The State of Israel exists on land donated, albeit not altogether voluntarily, by Palestine, which, by the way, ceased to exist after first war to destroy Israel. And with each new war against Israel, their penalty for losing was to donate more territory, albit not altogether voluntarily. Now it just gets down to negotiations of exactly HOW MUCH land has been donated.

By supporting the Palestinian cause, you cannot be anti-semitic. The Arabs are semites.

I'm sorry, were you addressing that to me? I don't believe I've typed the word 'anit-semtic' on anything I currently have posted since coming here.

[Nono]

Originally posted by Sonart Why is it that despite history of massacres agaisnt Jews, their antagonists always come back with, "Well oh yeah, well what about Deir Yassin?" Yes, we all know about Deir Yassin. Do you have anything else besides that?

Take it easy, Sonart, I'm not one of their "antagonists", OK?

If there's one thing that characterizes the Middle East, it's this blind, holier-than-thou tribalism, as exemplified (my humble opinion) by our friend shrike. I can't remember seeing him post on any other topic, and it's always shrill Black&White stuff.
To people like that, I do say "Well oh yeah, well what about Deir Yassin?"

Any solution can come about only through give and take -- the antithesis of the above-mentioned attitude.
I agree with all your other points.

[G. Adams]

Originally posted by Sonart,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Sonart,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by G.Adams@ In the same way you have been giving land back to the various tribes of native Americans, right? You have to understand the basis of America's relationship with Israel. It's about blood, not must politics. When the Jews were finally able to make their exodus from Europe, it's my understanding that far more came here than to Israel. That means families and friends ended up split apart but never forgotten. It's a blood tie, German and Polish snf Russian jews and all the rest, all going either one way or the other. If perhaps not so much now due to imigration, then still in the minds of American Jews. Israel's survival is paramount. And IF Miami Beach were in fact the ancestral Jewish holy city, I'd think the Jews would be given a better deal than the indians. <!--QuoteBegin-G.Adamns As idealistic a solution as the surrounding Arab states donating land to the Palestinians is, it will never happen.

It already has. It's a done deal. The State of Israel exists on land donated, albeit not altogether voluntarily, by Palestine, which, by the way, ceased to exist after first war to destroy Israel. And with each new war against Israel, their penalty for losing was to donate more territory, albit not altogether voluntarily. Now it just gets down to negotiations of exactly HOW MUCH land has been donated.


I'm sorry, were you addressing that to me? I don't believe I've typed the word 'anit-semtic' on anything I currently have posted since coming here.[/b][/quote]

America rarely pulls it's people out of it's new acquisitions, how many military bases are WW II leftovers that became redundant after the fall of the Soviet Union? If your that slow to get out of foreign countries I very much doubt you'd be so willing to get out of a territory that is yours.

The land was not donated, it was given by the Allies. The lands gained since were not donated. Both of which you pointed out. So were is your point here? I was arguing that a new Palestine couldn't be created peacefully from the surrounding countries.

A Palestinian state does not exist. A Palestinian nation does. If you can't make the distinction between the two I think you'd be best bowing out of the International Relations discussions.

The anti-semitic point was not directed at you, it was a general point from someone earlier who said he wasn't anti-semitic just because he sympathised with the Palestinian cause, and disliked the Israeli government.

[Nono]

Will Rogers once said that the Germans "are always perfectly willing to give somebody else's land to somebody else". Well, he died in 1935. What would he say of America's relationship with modern-day Israel?

America may be fundamentally benevolent, as Sonart says, but how unreasoning must it be not to recognize its own interest in twisting arms on both sides to bring about today what must some day constitute a settlement?
It's the only entity with the power to do so.

[Major Billy]

Originally posted by Zeebadee+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Zeebadee)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I propose that the United States break the deadlock by offering land for a sovereign Israeli state right here in America.[/b]

I doubt the Israelis want to leave their homeland any more than the Palestinians do.

Originally posted by Zeebadee+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Zeebadee)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>If you're not willing to donate your property to the Israeli's, why would you expect other people to be?[/b]

Americans have given a lot of their property, in the form of tax dollars, to Arabs and Israelis in the cause of peace. I am willing to give more if that would stop the killing.

<!--QuoteBegin-Zeebadee@
And I further propose that we start by offering your house and property, without compensation to you.[/quote]A stupid idea I would never propose.

<!--QuoteBegin-Zeebadee
If you're not willing to donate your property to the Israeli's, why would you expect other people to be?[/quote]My proposal expects nations, not people, to give up territory. If Israel can give up the entire Sinai, Egypt can give 1/3rd as much.

[Zeebadee]

Originally posted by Major Billy,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Major Billy,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Originally posted by Zeebadee@ And I further propose that we start by offering your house and property, without compensation to you. A stupid idea I would never propose. [/b]

No kidding! Then why do people expect those that were living in the land given to establish Israel to be happy about their land being given away by foreign powers that didn't own it? Suppose you woke up one morning and found that your state had been given to Israel by the UN., and you were now living under Israeli jurisdiction. Would you just accept it or would you fight ?

<!--QuoteBegin-Major Billy,


My proposal expects nations, not people, to give up territory.
[/quote]

Exactly how does a nation, but not people, give up territory?

[Sonart]

The land was not donated, it was given by the Allies

Yes, I know it was not 'literaly' donated. :rolleyes: I was going for, y'know, ironical. I meant it as a euphamism.

Originally posted by GAdams+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (GAdams)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>America rarely pulls it's people out of it's new acquisitions, how many military bases are WW II leftovers that became redundant after the fall of the Soviet Union? If your that slow to get out of foreign countries I very much doubt you'd be so willing to get out of a territory that is yours.[/b]

I'd imagine you're correct about that, John. I can't imagine an American alive that could even conceive of it. Thing is, we have that luxury - we're the richest, most powerful nation on earth, so the idea would be unthinkable. The rest of the world isn't that lucky.

Here's a map of Europe, at the beginning of the 20th century, a mere hundred years ago. Look familiar? I see no Iraq, no Syria, no Lebanon. No Palestine. That's right, isn't it? The nation of Palestine was created in 1920 by British mandate. It survived 28 years.



History happens, G. Israel has been a thriving nation for over 50 years and has pushed back every attempt to destroy it. So you either waste generations trying to stop the unstoppable, or you look to the future and start making lemonaid.

A Palestinian state does not exist. A Palestinian nation does

Yeah, so? So does a Kurdish nation. Go tell the Turks. And a Basque nation and a Lap nation and a Tamil nation an Armenian nation and how many numberless nations that were once spread across America. Even the United States created itself by force of arms, on land 'donated' by the British Empire. Heck, Iraq only came into existance via British Mandate, maybe we should give it back to Turkey. But that wouldn't work, the Ottoman Empire is long gone. Or make it three autonomous regions... Kurdish, Sunni, Shiite.

Look back at the map, G. Tell me that history doesn't march forward. Look at the collapse of former Soviet Union, an event that happened only 15 years ago, and suddenly theres a dozen brand new nations living on land 'donated' by the Soviet Union. And only ten years ago Slovenia, Croatia, Bonsia-Herzogovina all became brand new nations on land 'donated' by Yugoslavia. Palestine was a 20 year-old makeshift country that was standing in the wrong place at the wrong time.

<!--QuoteBegin-Nono
...but how unreasoning must it be not to recognize its own interest in twisting arms on both sides to bring about today what must some day constitute a settlement?[/quote]
You've got me, I don't get it either. In fact I think.......

[giuliano]

Originally posted by Major Billy,+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='0' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Major Billy,)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I doubt the Israelis want to leave their homeland any more than the Palestinians do.[/b]

in fact i'd say many of them would sacrifice their own lives to prevent it.

<!--QuoteBegin-Major Billy,
Americans have given a lot of their property, in the form of tax dollars, to Arabs and Israelis in the cause of peace. I am willing to give more if that would stop the killing.[/quote]

the US has done nothing for arabs in the name of peace. they donate a few $million here for a building, only to let it be demolished by military equipment given to israel the next day.

the only thing the US consistently gives to arabs are explosives delivered from up high.

[Major Billy]

Originally posted by giuliano the US has done nothing for arabs in the name of peace.

Nonsense.

United States President Jimmy Carter personally brokered the peace between Egypt and Israel.

Oh, and President Carter also signed the Panama Canal Treaty, which 4 years ago obliged the United States to withdraw from territory illegally taken from that country.