They would have to. They won't want to, too bad, they knew they were stealing Palestinian land when they moved there. I'd like to see the houses left intact and used as a bargaining chip in negotiations over the refugees.
Maybe some of the settlements can stay, but as part of Palestine under Palestinian control, let the settlers who want to stay, pay their taxes to Palestine. Plenty of arabs live in Israel.
My point exactly...Originally posted by Billy_Dean@12 September 2003 - 16:02
They would have to. They won't want to, too bad, they knew they were stealing Palestinian land when they moved there. I'd like to see the houses left intact and used as a bargaining chip in negotiations over the refugees.
Maybe some of the settlements can stay, but as part of Palestine under Palestinian control, let the settlers who want to stay, pay their taxes to Palestine. Plenty of arabs live in Israel.
The only thing I believe that could solve this one is give the soil back to the Palestinians.
>H
Why would they have to give up the land? International pressure? IMO if they tone down their response to suicide bombings, froze settlement expansion and appeared to make steps towards liberalising access to Jerusalem then they would only have to deal with a small amount of international pressure.They could dither about making a Palestinian state for years and years. If your thinking they would ever be forced militarily then i just don't believe that.
Allowing the Israeli settlements to stay in Palestinian owned territory would throw up more problems, not only would the original inhabitants be claiming their land back (and any Palestinian government would be under considerable pressure from its people to listen to them), but also i see the settlements being isolated Israeli statelets, slightly removed from Palestinian control and undoubtedly focal points for the tensions.
Perhaps i'm being overly pessimistic and these matters are only minor hiccoughs on the road to peace, but at the moment with the suggestions so far all i see in the creation of a Palestinian state is a temporary lull followed by a rapid escalation in the conflict.
I don't know if you are being OVERLY pessimistic, but you are looking on the dark side. As I've said before, whatever the solution, it's gonna take a lot of courage, and, unfortunately, I don't see much of that.
The Israeli army have already knocked some settlements down, they CAN do it. If the government were really serious, they could get them out. One of the reasons they are still there, is as a bargaining chip. They would be sacrificed if that was what were needed.
When I said maybe some could stay, i didn't mean as isolated jewish settlements, I meant as part of Palestine. They would have to be open to all, including the sale of houses to palestinians. The people would be able to replant their olive groves, and build onto these settlements.
BTW> I have never claimed it would be easy.
.
I could see the removal of Israeli settlements from Palestinian land as a distinct possibility if there was the political will. It is not as if this sort of situation is original. If you compare the whole area with South Africa during apartheit, you can see some very similar traits.
South Africa was forced to change due to international pressure, I see no reason why the same thing could not take place over Israel/Palestine. But it needs the people to stand up and tell their governments (and I don't just mean the US) to stop backing the violence - on both sides.
.Political correctness is based on the principle that it's possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.
The Almighty
The main problem is: Yasser Arafat.
why?: in 1999 (if i remember correctly), Bill Clinton and Ehud Barak (Israeli PM at the time) went to Camp David to try sign a treaty.
Barak offered 97% (!!!!!!!!of the west bank. the remaining 3% were big cites that are on the outskirtes of the west bank such as Ariel (some 30,000 people).
This seems to be very fair. but arafat said no, we want it all, no compromisation. all or nothing.
and thats where it blew up and the current intifada (holy war in arabic) started.
me, as an israeli, knows how it feels when a suicider comes and kills 15-25 people on a bus on their way home or to work. or last week even, in a hitchhiking area, a suicider blew himself up in a soldier hitchhiking area.
tralalala
.
You can have 97% of the land, most of which is useless, we'll keep the other 3% which represents 60% of the value of the land.
How very generous.
.Political correctness is based on the principle that it's possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.
Error xɐʇuʎs
BT Rep: +1
I don't want to aggravate anything, but I believe that some of the land the Palestinians now want back was nothing before the Israeli started cultivating it, it seems unfair that they should give back ground that was only really nothing more than desert of no interest to anyone when they got there, having said that, I'm sure this is hardly the case with more than a few places, as far as I know.
It's possible that the Israeli ought to do more on their part to ensure peace, I'm not the right person to say, I've known people from both nations and I have to say that they all seemed pretty sane and normal and I feel for them all, so it's sad that this has to continue.
97% is 97%. The 100% in this instance is 100% of around 30%, of the original Palestine, pre 1948-9. (guess, sorry, can't find accurate figures, can you?) 3% is hugely symbolic, especially when the UN resolutions say they should withdraw to 1967 borders. How many wars have been fought by the west on the pretext of non compliance of UN resolutions? How fair do you think this looks to them? Can you see where they get their feeling of bias against them?
Tralala wrote:
And I sympathize with you also in that matter but I don't fail to sympathize with the Palestinians also who are fighting for their land. THEIR land.me, as an israeli, knows how it feels when a suicider comes and kills 15-25 people on a bus on their way home or to work. or last week even, in a hitchhiking area, a suicider blew himself up in a soldier hitchhiking area.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
of the west bank. the remaining 3% were big cites that are on the outskirtes of the west bank such as Ariel (some 30,000 people).
Bookmarks