37 Palestinians and counting dead, 1600 injured bc of Israel

[PolishHeadlock]

I don't know how a 2 state solution is going to happen, there are half a million Israeli settlers in the West Bank that have built cities and then another quarter of a million that have bought property and live in East Jerusalem. How are they going to remove these people? It's going to have to be one state with 2 peoples.

I'm not going to pretend that I know the answers but we can't even have the conversation until the idea of a 2 state solution is agreed upon by all parties.

The international community overwhelmingly wants it and with that backing I think there is enough power and money to force it ro happen.

Eminent domain can be used to compensate people and enforce the issue

 

[JbModest]

Israelis don't seem to want to allow a two state solution either, the status quo allows them to slowly swallow more and more land via the settlements which will soon become non-negotiable "realities on the ground"

At this point the two state solution is dead, there's going to have to be some kind fo one state solution whether the Israelis and Palestinians want it or not.

The two sides are diametrically opposed to each other. You couldn't force a one state solution on either of them. Israel needs to withdraw from the West Bank. I don't see that happening though.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Israelis don't seem to want to allow a two state solution either, the status quo allows them to slowly swallow more and more land via the settlements which will soon become non-negotiable "realities on the ground"

At this point the two state solution is dead, there's going to have to be some kind fo one state solution whether the Israelis and Palestinians want it or not.

While I'm aware that some Israeli factions are against a 2 state solution my research on the subject points to Palestinian leadership being the party that has set the terms that a 2 state solution was a Non starting point for them for the most part.

 

[Islam Imamate]

I'm not going to pretend that I know the answers but we can't even have the conversation until the idea of a 2 state solution is agreed upon by all parties.

The international community overwhelmingly wants it and with that backing I think there is enough power and money to force it ro happen.

Eminent domain can be used to compensate people and enforce the issue

The international community also supported the Mandatory system in the region and that was a disaster.

The two sides are diametrically opposed to each other. You couldn't force a one state solution on either of them. Israel needs to withdraw from the West Bank. I don't see that happening though.

What remains of Palestine is hardly viable and that only gets worse by the day. At this point a Palestinian state would be a shell of what it could've been.

While I'm aware that some Israeli factions are against a 2 state solution my research on the subject points to Palestinian leadership being the party that has set the terms that a 2 state solution was a Non starting point for them for the most part.

Of course, because the offers they get are never full statehood with sovereignty. The Israelis don't trust the Palestinians with that.

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

I'm not going to pretend that I know the answers but we can't even have the conversation until the idea of a 2 state solution is agreed upon by all parties.

The international community overwhelmingly wants it and with that backing I think there is enough power and money to force it ro happen.

Eminent domain can be used to compensate people and enforce the issue

Force half a million armed settlers back? There will be a coup d'etat lead by Likud and the Israeli military will chose sides.I want to be an optimist but there is no solution to this and there will be war either way.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

The international community also supported the Mandatory system in the region and that was a disaster.
What remains of Palestine is hardly viable and that only gets worse by the day. At this point a Palestinian state would be a shell of what it could've been.

Of course, because the offers they get are never full statehood with sovereignty. The Israelis don't trust the Palestinians with that.

Aren't those offers contingent? Basically if the Palestinians don't show aggression for X amount time they get full autonomy?

As is they would be treated similarly like Taiwan?

 

[JbModest]

The international community also supported the Mandatory system in the region and that was a disaster.
What remains of Palestine is hardly viable and that only gets worse by the day. At this point a Palestinian state would be a shell of what it could've been.

Of course, because the offers they get are never full statehood with sovereignty. The Israelis don't trust the Palestinians with that.

Viability would be achieved by withdrawing from part, if not all of the West Bank.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Aren't those offers contingent? Basically if the Palestinians don't show aggression for X amount time they get full autonomy?

As is they would be treated similarly like Taiwan?

Something like that, I just know its almost always short of full statehood and sovereignty which is a deal breaker for the Palestinian leadership.

Viability would be achieved by withdrawing from part, if not all of the West Bank.

Seems like a hard sell. Israel's government seems to be moving towards the right, not really the direction that would signal peace in the near future.

 

[abiG]

2 state solution

You have mentioned this as your solution many times, and yet refuse to even speak on how this is possible. You make it seem even more like an idiotic talking point by this refusal.

Again, for reference:
--The West Bank is carved and today looks more like a piece of swiss cheese.
--Gaza is a freakin cage and is disconnected by miles now.
--Jerusalem has been almost completely taken over by the zionists and has never even been part of Israel.

Now, look at a map of Israel/Palestine today and tell us all, oh wise one, where the hell are you putting a contiguous Palestinian state?

-----

Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't the Palestinians turn down the 2 state solution in the Partition Plan (2nd picture) and attack the Israelis?

Sure. NO! Not even close.

The European invaders attacked the native population behind French and British tanks and war planes.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Force half a million armed settlers back? There will be a coup d'etat lead by Likud and the Israeli military will chose sides.I want to be an optimist but there is no solution to this and there will be war either way.

Would they actually fight against the US and the EU?

They would lose all international support at that point. Sanctions and a blockade would ruin them.

 

[PolishHeadlock]

You have mentioned this as your solution many times, and yet refuse to even speak on how this is possible. You make it seem even more like an idiotic talking point by this refusal.

Again, for reference:
--The West Bank is carved and today looks more like a piece of swiss cheese.
--Gaza is a freakin cage and is disconnected by miles now.
--Jerusalem has been almost completely taken over by the zionists and has never even been part of Israel.

Now, look at a map of Israel/Palestine today and tell us all, oh wise one, where the hell are you putting a contiguous Palestinian state?

-----


Sure. NO! Not even close.

The European invaders attacked the native population behind French and British tanks and war planes.

I'm not responding to you until you define what the illegal occupation is in your mind.

 

[JbModest]

Would they actually fight against the US and the EU?

They would lose all international support at that point. Sanctions and a blockade would ruin them.

Neither would invade or even attack Israel. It's just not worth it to either of them. Not to mention that Israel would be able to defend against most attacks.

 

[abiG]

I'm not responding to you until you define what the illegal occupation is in your mind.

I am growing tired of playing kindergarten teacher, but you can start here:

• Security Council

7853rd Meeting (PM)

Israel’s Settlements Have No Legal Validity, Constitute Flagrant Violation of International Law, Security Council Reaffirms

14 Delegations in Favour of Resolution 2334 (2016) as United States Abstains

The Security Council reaffirmed this afternoon that Israel’s establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders.

Adopting resolution 2334 (2016) by 14 votes, with the United States abstaining, the Council reiterated its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. It underlined that it would not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines...
https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm

 

[PolishHeadlock]

Something like that, I just know its almost always short of full statehood and sovereignty which is a deal breaker for the Palestinian leadership.

Seems like a hard sell. Israel's government seems to be moving towards the right, not really the direction that would signal peace in the near future.

But the Palestinians refuse to accept the right of Israel to exist and a 2 state solution since the UN proposed it in 1979.

Which is a Non starter for Israel.

They backed themselves into this corner over the past century. Even as many Arab countries have accepted this to be the starting point.

How can you begin to negotiate with a state if you don't think it should exist?

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Sure. NO! Not even close.

The European invaders attacked the native population behind French and British tanks and war planes.

Even Al Jazeera disagrees with you? Note, it was an Arab force that attacked, not just Palestinians

https://www.aljazeera.com/focus/arabunity/2008/02/200852518398869597.html

On the same day, David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, announced the independence of the state of Israel, established on the land granted to the Jews by the Partition Plan.

Mobilised for defeat

Within a day, forces from the armies of several Arab countries, including Egypt and Transjordan, attacked the new state of Israel.

Underestimating the power of the fledgling state, Arab rulers thought they were heading towards an easy victory that would quiet post-World War II domestic unrest and - perhaps - gain them more territory.

 

[ShadowRun]

MSM has a lot of you guys brainwashed .. those peaceful protests oh no !!

 

[PolishHeadlock]

I am growing tired of playing kindergarten teacher, but you can start here:

• Security Council

7853rd Meeting (PM)

Israel’s Settlements Have No Legal Validity, Constitute Flagrant Violation of International Law, Security Council Reaffirms

14 Delegations in Favour of Resolution 2334 (2016) as United States Abstains

The Security Council reaffirmed this afternoon that Israel’s establishment of settlements in Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, had no legal validity, constituting a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the vision of two States living side-by-side in peace and security, within internationally recognized borders.

Adopting resolution 2334 (2016) by 14 votes, with the United States abstaining, the Council reiterated its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem. It underlined that it would not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines...
https://www.un.org/press/en/2016/sc12657.doc.htm

So are these the territories Israel won after the Arabs tried to take over Israel?

It seems like that's something that they took because of Arab aggression.

If we start with a with a 2 state solution and their right to exist perhaps it could be put on the bargaining table.

If your start with the idea they should give that land up as an act of good faith lol

 

[oleDirtyBast4rd]

No, before the two state solution. Who was displacing who under Mandatory Palestine? So much so the British made it illegal and yet they continued? Hint it wasn't the Palestinians.

It sounds like they must have really needed a 2 state solution to stop a people from being displaced according to you...

 

[Voodoo_Child906]

Would they actually fight against the US and the EU?

They would lose all international support at that point. Sanctions and a blockade would ruin them.

Almost zero chance we (America) will support a removal of all settlers from the West Bank, it could have happened in the 70's or 80's but it's too late now. Maybe I'm just a pessimist but you kind of have to be with this region now.

 

[abiG]

So are these the territories Israel won after the Arabs tried to take over Israel?

It seems like that's something that they took because of Arab aggression.

Crazy talk.

If we start with a with a 2 state solution and their right to exist perhaps it could be put on the bargaining table.

If your start with the idea they should give that land up as an act of good faith lol

Yes, you claimed you would answer after I explained to you what an occupation is.

So:
You have mentioned this as your solution many times, and yet refuse to even speak on how this is possible. You make it seem even more like an idiotic talking point by this refusal.

Again, for reference:
--The West Bank is carved and today looks more like a piece of swiss cheese.
--Gaza is a freakin cage and is disconnected by miles now.
--Jerusalem has been almost completely taken over by the zionists and has never even been part of Israel.

Now, look at a map of Israel/Palestine today and tell us all, oh wise one, where the hell are you putting a contiguous Palestinian state?