U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-11-2019, 10:29 AM
 
3,211 posts, read 868,606 times
Reputation: 1835

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RageX View Post
My only disagreement is how can Israel annex a place that was originally theirs?
For obvious reasons, we tend to talk in generalities. Makes a discussion easier. What does "theirs" mean? In real life, the disputes are not necessarily the form of government or the name of the state or (for some) even voting rights. It is who owns specific plots of land. There is enormous controversy over lawful titled ownership. I'm not referring here to the Right of Return, which stemmed from Palestinians who left both Israel and the occupied territories in 1948, 1967.

Rather, disputes continue over post-1967 actions. And will only grow as Israel tries to gain more control over the West Bank properties, annexed or not. Again, when I say "Israel" that doesn't mean the country as whole. Specific governmental actions have been driven, of course, in recent years by the Likud. A more liberal Israeli Supreme Court has overridden some. Today, even right-wing Netanyahu has held back some extremism but he's now courting various ultra-right wing parties, some of whom are real nutters. Then the United States intervenes with our current ambassador saying things like Israel is “on the side of God” (May 2019).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-11-2019, 11:04 AM
 
9,692 posts, read 4,961,956 times
Reputation: 3934
Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady View Post
Not at all. It's a complex, multi-faceted problem. There's division within Israel itself. Per my last comment, the current issues stem from various political needs. The continued expansion of the settlements since 1967 create a situation that is very difficult to undo. Israel for many decades was not a wealthy nation and struggled economically to absorb incoming Jewish populations. Now that it might well be a position to promote an economically viable West Bank, Labor is out of power and the West Bank is riddled with the settlements.

There are two parts to the Kushner Peace plan - the economic proposals and the political segment. Israel's getting along pretty well these days with the surrounding nation states (with the notable exception of Iran). Some are willing to throw money at the West Bank. The Palestinians aren't fools. While politically, the leadership may not be able to say certain words "No Right of Return," the average Palestinian may well be content to live in an Israeli territory without citizenship in the next-door Israeli state. What would be preferable? Syria? Jordan doesn't want them for more Palestinians in Jordan upsets that political balance every bit as much as more non-Jews in Israel would upset its demographic balance.

BUT, a right-wing Israeli government continues to pour Jews into the West Bank. And the United States now cheers them on. Whatever the political portion of the Kushner Peace Plan may be - it's almost certainly a non-starter. With - per this thread - Netanyahu now chanting "annexation." THAT's the problem.
Maybe you could explain what would be different if Israel had not created settlements in the West Bank. Would Hamas, PLO, Fatah, Hezbollah and other liberate Palestinian groups accept Israel. How about Iran, Syria, Yemen and a host of other Middle East countries accepting Israel's existence.


I don't know whether Palestinians are fools or not. If they think they'd have an independent, self-governing nation if Israel vanished today, I go with fools.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 11:16 AM
 
Location: San Jose
2,280 posts, read 694,430 times
Reputation: 2364
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_n_Tenn View Post
The problem is hate. Always has been, always will be. It can not be defeated, or negotiated with, nor can you turn your back on hate. Hate is a powerful motivator and Golda Meir said it best... Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us.
Did the Native Americans hate the white man more then they loved their children for trying to defended their land?

If a foreign army invades America would you hate them more then love your kids for attempting to defend yourself? Sorry but Golda Meir's statement is hogwash and falls apart when examined with any degree of logic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 11:22 AM
 
13,537 posts, read 3,443,870 times
Reputation: 1690
I have followed the Israeli/Palestinian conflict for a very long time now, and I have read all these same sorts of arguments many times before. Of all the many complicated problems in the world, past and present, I'm not sure many if any qualify as the Gordian knot nasty b*tch of a problem like this one does. Of all U.S. foreign policy issues that tend to put America's good faith, integrity and world leadership into serious question, this one always continues to top the list in too many ways. Now more than ever with Trump in the mix...

"The international community considers Israeli settlements illegal under international law, with many built on land confiscated from Palestinian families. Extending Israeli sovereignty over such a large area would also be seen as putting an end to fading hopes for a Palestinian state, as there would be little unbroken land on which to create it.

Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital early in his term further damaged the two-state ideal. The Palestinians regard the occupied eastern section of Jerusalem as the capital of any future state, and cut contact with Washington after the declaration.

Earlier this year, Trump also recognised Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, a plateau Israel captured from Syria in the same 1967 conflict and annexed in 1981. The move broke from the international consensus following the second world war that forbids territorial conquest during war."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...itories-israel

In too many ways for far too long now, utterly disgraceful.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 11:29 AM
 
335 posts, read 62,653 times
Reputation: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave_n_Tenn View Post
The problem is hate. Always has been, always will be. It can not be defeated, or negotiated with, nor can you turn your back on hate. Hate is a powerful motivator and Golda Meir said it best... Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us.

This will not be solved by people.
Yeah, yeah, usual attempt to move the subject. The root of the problem is the invasion. Let me forcefully take your home from you, and then I'll moralize how bad are you for hating me for that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 11:31 AM
 
3,211 posts, read 868,606 times
Reputation: 1835
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama View Post
Maybe you could explain what would be different if Israel had not created settlements in the West Bank. Would Hamas, PLO, Fatah, Hezbollah and other liberate Palestinian groups accept Israel. How about Iran, Syria, Yemen and a host of other Middle East countries accepting Israel's existence.

I don't know whether Palestinians are fools or not. If they think they'd have an independent, self-governing nation if Israel vanished today, I go with fools.
That Hezbollah and Iran etc. exist doesn't prevent most Israeli Arabs from being good Israeli citizens. Given the demographic issues, mass citizenship is not possible for West Bank Palestinians. I accept Israel's right to exist under its current parameters (as a Jewish state).

But is it that impossible to create living standards and local governance where Palestinian West Bankers - like their Israeli citizen counterparts - also have economic stability with freedom of movement etc.? Sure, no final political settlement with all the proper words may be reached. Just like Israel cannot accept an influx of non-Jewish citizens, a Palestinian leadership cannot officially sell out those who left the occupied territories generations ago. Not going to happen.

When it comes to the settlements, they aren't an absolute. For example, some Israeli movement into territory around Jerusalem probably was inevitable. What's become problematic are the settlements that have divided Palestinian population centers turning the West Bank into swiss cheese. Israel spends a fortune trying to maintain peace among the populace with some Jewish settlers every bit as problematic as inflamed Palestinians. The geopolitical patterns make Palestinian economic development near impossible.

This ^^^ is far more of an issue to everyday Israeli (and Palestinian) life than whether some countries officially accept Israel. That's a red herring, really.

Last edited by EveryLady; 09-11-2019 at 12:14 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 11:43 AM
 
335 posts, read 62,653 times
Reputation: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by EveryLady View Post
I accept Israel's right to exist under its current parameters (as a Jewish state).
Israel "right" is only "right of might", that's it. As for moral side - no, it's absolutely and totally immoral.
And that's the only premises this question can be discussed with. Israel can annex anything they want - if they can. But to portray that as anything even remotely moral - no way, don't even suggest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 11:48 AM
 
3,211 posts, read 868,606 times
Reputation: 1835
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe View Post
I have followed the Israeli/Palestinian conflict for a very long time now, and I have read all these same sorts of arguments many times before. Of all the many complicated problems in the world, past and present, I'm not sure many if any qualify as the Gordian knot nasty b*tch of a problem like this one does. Of all U.S. foreign policy issues that tend to put America's good faith, integrity and world leadership into serious question, this one always continues to top the list in too many ways. Now more than ever with Trump in the mix...

"The international community considers Israeli settlements illegal under international law, with many built on land confiscated from Palestinian families. Extending Israeli sovereignty over such a large area would also be seen as putting an end to fading hopes for a Palestinian state, as there would be little unbroken land on which to create it.

Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital early in his term further damaged the two-state ideal. The Palestinians regard the occupied eastern section of Jerusalem as the capital of any future state, and cut contact with Washington after the declaration.

Earlier this year, Trump also recognised Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, a plateau Israel captured from Syria in the same 1967 conflict and annexed in 1981. The move broke from the international consensus following the second world war that forbids territorial conquest during war."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...itories-israel

In too many ways for far too long now, utterly disgraceful.
This is (in part) what I was referring to in the other post about the retitling of W. bank land creating tension. That Palestinians who left in 1948 and 1967 forfeited their ability to access their land (the titles still exist) is one issue. No resolution possible with an uneasy status quo existing for generations.

But the continued settlement of the West Bank with annexation creates a new variation. Here, Palestinians who are pushed off land for the settlements due to various legal stratagems (some of which the Israeli Supreme Court put a stop to) remain physically within West Bank territory, forced into ever smaller enclaves. This becomes a source for all whole new set of problematic interactions. A new generation of grievances. Annexation is the formalization of that process.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 11:56 AM
 
3,211 posts, read 868,606 times
Reputation: 1835
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanonka View Post
Israel "right" is only "right of might", that's it. As for moral side - no, it's absolutely and totally immoral.
And that's the only premises this question can be discussed with. Israel can annex anything they want - if they can. But to portray that as anything even remotely moral - no way, don't even suggest.
There's not a lot that is moral about what happens in history. To weigh historical wrongs on both sides and judge in many cases in near impossible, at least for me. Per some of the other posts, I don't view Israel as having some historical right to the land from Biblical history. Populations move on to land, populations move off. We can promote respect for the individuals who live within our control (W. Bank Palestinians) and to respect the law as it is written (their current land titles).

(That last is complex, for historically Palestinian tribes shared some lands, without formalization. Modern-day Israel did not permit them to title post-1948. That's where some of the "land-grabs" occurred. That I find "wrong." And the building of settlements dysfunctional for long-term peace.)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 12:13 PM
 
Location: USA
20,285 posts, read 14,994,687 times
Reputation: 13041
Quote:
Originally Posted by kanonka View Post
Israel "right" is only "right of might", that's it. As for moral side - no, it's absolutely and totally immoral.
And that's the only premises this question can be discussed with. Israel can annex anything they want - if they can. But to portray that as anything even remotely moral - no way, don't even suggest.
Yep, no different than any other land in that region or most of the world for that matter. The only difference is Islam has a 1400 year long never ending history of conquest and war, being occasionally stopped in Europe, India, China, Russia, and everywhere else it has attempted to conquer.

It is a Religian/Ideology that is more enduring than Western Democracy and will outlast the US, Canada, and everywhere else it expands. Where ever it exists today it forces out existing Religians and Ideologies. From Pakistan, to Lebanon, to everywhere it grows it destroys other religian and secularism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top