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.
We are talking about the 2000 Camp David Summit with Ehud Barak, and the second intifada, not the first intifada.
That is where the Palestinians were offered all their land demands, including East Jerusalem as their capital. The only thing they were denied was the "right of return", which is code for "the end of Israel". That offer was met with the 2nd intifada.
When that happened, Israelis lost all hope of any peace agreement, and the country took a hard turn to the right.
There’s no transcript or written record that that specific, clean, non conditional offer was on the table. There is actual scholarly research trying to recount what was discussed, which claims each side had fundamental limits or misconceptions, e.g. reportedly Israel attempted to retain the ability to deploy security forces as needed, their proposal created discontinuous blocks of land, and they wanted to retain control the airspace in the offered territory, and the Palestinians quibbled over the value of the swapped land and tried to claim the right of return (presumably with citizenship) into Israel itself.
It is somewhat telling that an offer which, on the face of it seemed very similar to the reported unwritten Canp David offer, made publicly in 2002, has been argued about-because some specifics were unclear, potentially disastrous, and each side is justifiably concerned the other is going to push for the maximum possible interpretation.
It really doesn’t seem either side seriously will accept a fully unconditional offer.
There is NO legitimacy of Israel to stay beyond the pre-1967 borders. It could make the move unilaterally, after all, it didn't ask any indigenous Palestinians if they wanted to be dominated and repressed by Israel, did they?
The fact is the Palestinians always were there, Jewish settlers that came after 1948 were not. The Palestinians ancestors were Canaanites, just like the Jews were. In fact Palestinians WERE Jewish, before they converted to Islam.
Why are you so against them getting back the land stolen from them?
I don't care if Israel returns to pre-67 armistice lines. Nor do I care if Jordan annexed the West Bank as it did in 1949. btw, where was an independent P state between 1949-1967 ? You can argue with others who the land really, really belongs to; DNA ancestry; apartheid, ethnic cleansing, and extermination; right and wrong. Support BDS, oppose U.S. support of Israel, wish there was no Jewish state there.
Palestinians could have had their state 72 years ago and multiple times after that. Now, there is a Jewish state and as long as you and the P's won't give an inch, death and in your view oppression, cleansing, and sufferng will continue.
Last edited by jazzarama; 06-07-2021 at 05:06 AM..
There’s no transcript or written record that that specific, clean, non conditional offer was on the table. There is actual scholarly research trying to recount what was discussed, which claims each side had fundamental limits or misconceptions, e.g. reportedly Israel attempted to retain the ability to deploy security forces as needed, their proposal created discontinuous blocks of land, and they wanted to retain control the airspace in the offered territory, and the Palestinians quibbled over the value of the swapped land and tried to claim the right of return (presumably with citizenship) into Israel itself.
It is somewhat telling that an offer which, on the face of it seemed very similar to the reported unwritten Canp David offer, made publicly in 2002, has been argued about-because some specifics were unclear, potentially disastrous, and each side is justifiably concerned the other is going to push for the maximum possible interpretation.
It really doesn’t seem either side seriously will accept a fully unconditional offer.
Based on their history of giving land in exchange for peace alone, you would have to willingly defy the logical part of your brain to think that Israel would not willingly give up The West Bank in exchange for peace with the Palestinians, and an end to the conflict.
They already gave the entire West Bank away once, in exchange for peace with Jordan.
The people who say Israel doesn't want a 2 state solution, are completely ignoring a history that screams otherwise.
P.S. As someone already pointed out, Jordan had a long time to turn it into a Palestinian State while it was under their control. Why didn't they?
There is NO legitimacy of Israel to stay beyond the pre-1967 borders. It could make the move unilaterally, after all, it didn't ask any indigenous Palestinians if they wanted to be dominated and repressed by Israel, did they?
Israel was attacked by several Arab states in 1948 and then there was a planned Arab attack against Israel in 1967. Israel won land in a defensive war. So Israel definitely has a legitimate claim to control such land.
Remember all Arabs that were in Israel after the 1948 have Israeli citizenship with full rights (as there are not only Israeli Arabs who serve in the IDF but all Israeli Arabs in the Israeli Parliament).
The Palestinian Arabs were in the West Bank and Gaza between 1948-1967 should have been given citizenship of the Arab countries that were controling those areas. No reason for Israel to have granted their stated enemies citizenship.
Also there has been a population exchange as the majority of the Jews that lived in Middle East & North African (Arab) countries were forced to flee without any compensation for property left behind to Israel. All these people were integrated into Israeli society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJ Brazen_3133
The Palestinians are indigenous to all of what is Israel now. Their homeland is not just a small slither of beach front, and a kidney landlocked area. If they want, they can demand it all back.
So why haven't the Palestinian Arabs in Jordan not demanded independence from the Saudi Arabian origin royal family that is ruling them? Jordan is in Eastern Palestine!
Based on their history of giving land in exchange for peace alone, you would have to willingly defy the logical part of your brain to think that Israel would not willingly give up The West Bank in exchange for peace with the Palestinians, and an end to the conflict.
They already gave the entire West Bank away once, in exchange for peace with Jordan.
The people who say Israel doesn't want a 2 state solution, are completely ignoring a history that screams otherwise.
P.S. As someone already pointed out, Jordan had a long time to turn it into a Palestinian State while it was under their control. Why didn't they?
When did Israel relinquish the West Bank to Jordan for peace? I believe that’s inaccurate. In 1948 Jordan occupied it during the initial conflict (at that time Jordan’s army was quite effective compared to most in the Middle East and Israel was still forming), and in 1967 Israel captured it.
When did Israel relinquish the West Bank to Jordan for peace? I believe that’s inaccurate. In 1948 Jordan occupied it during the initial conflict (at that time Jordan’s army was quite effective compared to most in the Middle East and Israel was still forming), and in 1967 Israel captured it.
I was speaking of the Peres–Hussein London Agreement of 1987. Israel was willing to relinquish the entire West Bank to Jordan as a way to end the Palestinian conflict. Jordan pulled out of the deal a year later, and never took control, but it was on the table.
But why didn't Jordan create a state for the Palestinians during the nearly 2 decades that they controlled it?
I was speaking of the Peres–Hussein London Agreement of 1987. Israel was willing to relinquish the entire West Bank to Jordan as a way to end the Palestinian conflict. Jordan pulled out of the deal a year later, and never took control, but it was on the table.
But why didn't Jordan create a state for the Palestinians during the nearly 2 decades that they controlled it?
Status:
"Let this year be over..."
(set 21 days ago)
Location: Where my bills arrive
19,219 posts, read 17,088,442 times
Reputation: 15538
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnesthesiaMD
I was speaking of the Peres–Hussein London Agreement of 1987. Israel was willing to relinquish the entire West Bank to Jordan as a way to end the Palestinian conflict. Jordan pulled out of the deal a year later, and never took control, but it was on the table.
But why didn't Jordan create a state for the Palestinians during the nearly 2 decades that they controlled it?
Jordan as we know it today was created post WWI and fell under British authority unil 1946 similar to Israel, maybe as a relatively new nation they didn't have the ability/stability to create another country. Maybe they simply viewed the West Bank people as part of their country after they obtained control of it in the 1948 war. They were under a lot of presseure from the Arab League and were walking a tight rope with their own allies, so who knows.
I was speaking of the Peres–Hussein London Agreement of 1987. Israel was willing to relinquish the entire West Bank to Jordan as a way to end the Palestinian conflict. Jordan pulled out of the deal a year later, and never took control, but it was on the table.
But why didn't Jordan create a state for the Palestinians during the nearly 2 decades that they controlled it?
Oh-so the OFFER is what you are talking about. The one the Israeli Prime Minister reportedly rejected?
You forgot The Palestinians wanted a contiguous land bridge to Gaza, control of seaports and airports and UN peace keepers. They thought these were reasonable
Basically that's splitting Israel in half, making it non-contiguous. As far as seaports and airports, the Gaza Strip has plenty of land for that.
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.
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.
