20 replies to this topic

[and then]

http://www.timesofis...ast-peace-plan/

The writer of this piece used to be the editor in chief of the Jerusalem Post.  I found it to be informative and cogent.  It is slightly pro Israel without being horribly biased.  In March the EU plans to begin pushing both sides to the table.  A Palestinian state based on 67 borders and east Jerusalem as capital is the end game apparently.  My guess is that if Israel does not acquiesce to most of the demands made by the pro Palestinian Europeans, they will be sanctioned heavily.  

Thoughts?  And BTW - I realize that these topics are fraught with the chance of devolving into insults and derogatory personal statements so lets all TRY to be respectful please?  This issue is really a very important one to world events and I'd like to hear opinions on where you all feel this will lead.  Thanks!

[Professor T]

I hope this does happen..

It's doable, but pressure needs to be pushed on both sides by all parties.. Somehow I dont see America capable of puting pressure on Israel & refraining from taking a stab at the palestinians.. and Likewise, I don't see Egypt and Iran capable of the same..

[and then]

 Professor T, on 19 January 2013 - 06:13 AM, said:

I hope this does happen..

It's doable, but pressure needs to be pushed on both sides by all parties.. Somehow I dont see America capable of puting pressure on Israel & refraining from taking a stab at the palestinians.. and Likewise, I don't see Egypt and Iran capable of the same..

I get the feeling that Obama will be more than happy to step away from the process and let the EU do the strong arm thing.  The coming elections there seem to portend an even more Right centered coalition government.  If that turns to be the case then it will be interesting to watch just how far the EU will be willing to go with threats of sanction against Israel.  I think that the recent history here indicates that most of the pressure will be on Israel.  Most think that to be fair.  The real question, I think, is how far will Israel go to pacify the EU?  Jerusalem is fated to be an international city I think.  It will be called the capitol of both Israel and Palestine and Jews and Palestinians will have to allow free passage.  For the Palestinians to agree to Jewish worship on the Temple Mount would be unheard of - but they just might go for it if pushed.  
The Bible states that a seven year peace treaty with the "many" will be confirmed at some point and that the outer court of the Temple will be trodden down of the gentiles for 42 months.  So that sounds like a prediction that the location will be shared for a time.  But the seven years will only last for 3.5 before the treaty is broken.  Recent moves by the Hamas indicate they may finally have decided to make nice so they can consolidate some advantage.

[Zaphod222]

 and then, on 19 January 2013 - 04:35 AM, said:

http://www.timesofis...ast-peace-plan/

The writer of this piece used to be the editor in chief of the Jerusalem Post.  I found it to be informative and cogent.  It is slightly pro Israel without being horribly biased.  In March the EU plans to begin pushing both sides to the table.  A Palestinian state based on 67 borders and east Jerusalem as capital is the end game apparently.  My guess is that if Israel does not acquiesce to most of the demands made by the pro Palestinian Europeans, they will be sanctioned heavily.  

Thoughts?  And BTW - I realize that these topics are fraught with the chance of devolving into insults and derogatory personal statements so lets all TRY to be respectful please?  This issue is really a very important one to world events and I'd like to hear opinions on where you all feel this will lead.  Thanks!

Absolutely impossible. Who is supposed to represent the "Palestinian side" anyway? Al Fatah? They are rapidly being pushed out by Hamas (and have been eliminated in Gazah already). Or Hamas? Read the Hamas constitution: It states clearly theyr goal is the total destruction of Israel, and not any sort of "peace".

People who believe that "peace" in this situation is possible are simply projecting their wishful thinking onto the situation, without acknowleding the nature of the conflict.

[and then]

 Zaphod222, on 19 January 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

Absolutely impossible. Who is supposed to represent the "Palestinian side" anyway? Al Fatah? They are rapidly being pushed out by Hamas (and have been eliminated in Gazah already). Or Hamas? Read the Hamas constitution: It states clearly theyr goal is the total destruction of Israel, and not any sort of "peace".

People who believe that "peace" in this situation is possible are simply projecting their wishful thinking onto the situation, without acknowleding the nature of the conflict.

It is my opinion that the Palestinians might take advantage of this situation.  Abbas, and the leaders of the Fatah and Hamas and other ancillary parties might see this as a once in a decade chance to gain more territory without bloodshed.  I firmly believe it will be a ruse on their part but when you look at the situation from their side they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.  The EU strong arms Israel and gets most of the concessions the Palestinians want.  The Palestinians say they will share the Temple mount and disarm except for "defensive weapons".  Israel probably agrees to share the Temple mount and allow east Jerusalem to be named the capitol of Palestine.  Some insignificant number of "refugees" are allowed to return to land that will be seized by the Knesset in an "imminent domain" type of action.  The EU is happy. The Palestinian leaders tell their people in Arabic that it's just hudna and part of the struggle....  My point being that Israel will be forced to actually vacate land - again - and all the Palestinians will have to do is make promises - again.  And if peace actually could take hold I think it would be wonderful.  After watching this little drama for 40 years though, let's just say I have my doubts long term.

[ExpandMyMind]

 Zaphod222, on 19 January 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

Absolutely impossible. Who is supposed to represent the "Palestinian side" anyway? Al Fatah? They are rapidly being pushed out by Hamas (and have been eliminated in Gazah already). Or Hamas? Read the Hamas constitution: It states clearly theyr goal is the total destruction of Israel, and not any sort of "peace".

People who believe that "peace" in this situation is possible are simply projecting their wishful thinking onto the situation, without acknowleding the nature of the conflict.

Hamas doesn't have a constitution, and they have not, in any way, shape or form, adopted the Charter that is loosely affiliated with them. Also, both Hamas and Fatah have been looking to sort a peace between the two for around a year now.

[shaddow134]

Isreal has always walked her own path regardless of any outside threats or critiscism and quite frankly nothing will come of this.

[and then]

 shaddow134, on 19 January 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

Isreal has always walked her own path regardless of any outside threats or critiscism and quite frankly nothing will come of this.

I wouldn't be so quick to discount the mood in the EU and what a punishing round of sanctions could do to the mood in Israel.  I also don't believe a lasting peace will come from it but that doesn't mean that another self destructive surrender of land might not happen.  If it does it will just complicate things in future.  Buying a little quiet for a few months at best I imagine.  Peace of a sort is destined to happen there just prior to one of the worst wars in human history.  The Bible mentions the phrase "peace and safety" as being a key indicator of this time.  "For when they say peace and safety, sudden destruction will come upon them and they will not escape"  You can't read a story from the region without seeing the phrase - two states living side by side in peace and security.  Looks like the band is warming up

[Corp]

Well the US hasn't made any headway over the years and they're a bit too involved in the situation. Maybe the EU can have better luck. Frankly as long as some kind of lasting peace can be created where both sides get growth and security I don't care who makes it happen.

[and then]

 Corp, on 21 January 2013 - 06:00 PM, said:

Well the US hasn't made any headway over the years and they're a bit too involved in the situation. Maybe the EU can have better luck. Frankly as long as some kind of lasting peace can be created where both sides get growth and security I don't care who makes it happen.

Right.  And I can honestly say that I'll be happy to see it signed.  But don't you think it a bit odd that it could be that easy so suddenly?  The US and European nations have thrown time and money at this problem for decades.  We'll see how things go in March I guess.

[Corp]

I highly doubt there will be a final peace treaty within a year, though at the same time a lot can happen in a year. Going to take a "believe it when I see it" approach to this.

[WHO U KIDDIN]

Well Netanyahu just rejected the two state solution, goodbye to Europe's new peace initiative:

Binyamin Netanyahu rejects calls for Palestinian state within 1967 lines

Israeli prime minister says border would be impossible to defend and allow 'Hamas 400 metres from my home'

"When they say, 'Go back to the 67 lines,' I stand against. When they say, 'Don't build in Jerusalem,' I stand against," the Israeli prime minister told Channel 2 in a television interview.

http://www.guardian....nian-state-1967


Perhaps Europe will respond by joining the BDS movement ? More isolation for the Isrealis.

Israelis should seriously reconsider their political leadership's moves to annex the West Bank.

From Haaretz:

There will never be social justice, shared burdens, true faith, clearly defined borders or a future that is not frightening in Israel – until it brings the occupation to a decisive end. As that latter-day prophet, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, used to say, there are two options: Two states for two peoples, or all-out war that will be fought by future generations against tens of millions of Arabs, from Kuwait to Morocco, while the world, which is against us anyway, backs them completely.
“Whoever thinks that there is a third option is either a fool or a liar,” Leibowitz said in a thundering voice that shook the walls of the Tzavta Theater in Tel Aviv in the 1970s. It's a theater for progressive culture, but where is that culture progressing to?
http://www.haaretz.c...remium-1.495302

[and then]

 WHO U KIDDIN, on 21 January 2013 - 09:30 PM, said:

Well Netanyahu just rejected the two state solution,c
Binyamin Netanyahu rejects calls for Palestinian state within 1967 lines

Israeli prime minister says border would be impossible to defend and allow 'Hamas 400 metres from my home'

"When they say, 'Go back to the 67 lines,' I stand against. When they say, 'Don't build in Jerusalem,' I stand against," the Israeli prime minister told Channel 2 in a television interview.

http://www.guardian....nian-state-1967


Perhaps Europe will respond by joining the BDS movement ? More isolation for the Isrealis.

Israelis should seriously reconsider their political leadership's moves to annex the West Bank.

From Haaretz:

There will never be social justice, shared burdens, true faith, clearly defined borders or a future that is not frightening in Israel – until it brings the occupation to a decisive end. As that latter-day prophet, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, used to say, there are two options: Two states for two peoples, or all-out war that will be fought by future generations against tens of millions of Arabs, from Kuwait to Morocco, while the world, which is against us anyway, backs them completely.
“Whoever thinks that there is a third option is either a fool or a liar,” Leibowitz said in a thundering voice that shook the walls of the Tzavta Theater in Tel Aviv in the 1970s. It's a theater for progressive culture, but where is that culture progressing to?
http://www.haaretz.c...remium-1.495302

Maybe I'm wrong but I think it isn't so easy as that this time.  I think the Europeans are eager to get into the peace business because it will detract a little from their own economic incompetence.  I fully expect sanctions talk - and possible action - in 2013.  If that happens and Israel has just shown the world it is moving to the right then it could be an interesting year politically and militarily.  If they are pushed on '67 borders and feel less secure they might decide to start something elsewhere to change the world's focus - ya know?  After all, Iran isn't the only country capable of misdirection in military affairs.

[WHO U KIDDIN]

 and then, on 21 January 2013 - 10:33 PM, said:

Maybe I'm wrong but I think it isn't so easy as that this time.  I think the Europeans are eager to get into the peace business because it will detract a little from their own economic incompetence.  I fully expect sanctions talk - and possible action - in 2013.  If that happens and Israel has just shown the world it is moving to the right then it could be an interesting year politically and militarily.  If they are pushed on '67 borders and feel less secure they might decide to start something elsewhere to change the world's focus - ya know?  After all, Iran isn't the only country capable of misdirection in military affairs.

Unfortunately If the right wing factions lead by Netanyahu and Bennet don't compromise with the Palestinians and accept the 67 borders, then they will have placed Israel on a course of never-ending war with the Arabs which may lead eventually to the destruction of Israel.

Of course Israel may attempt to misdirect notice of their "Greater Israel" efforts by once again turning to it's standard "Bomb Iran" choir of media and political pundits in to order to try to defuse any repercussions from its attempts to annex the West Bank. But short of an Israeli suicide mission on Iran's nuclear facilities, which would drag the USA into the fray, the majority of world ain't buying Israel's crying wolf this time.

That being the case Israel may indeed find itself quite isolated.

Let's all pray that rationality instead of fanaticism wins out.

Edited by WHO U KIDDIN, 22 January 2013 - 12:17 AM.

[and then]

 WHO U KIDDIN, on 21 January 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

Unfortunately If the right wing factions lead by Netanyahu and Bennet don't compromise with the Palestinians and accept the 67 borders, then they will have placed Israel on a course of never-ending war with the Arabs which may lead eventually to the destruction of Israel.

Of course Israel may attempt to misdirect notice of their "Greater Israel" efforts by once again turning to it's standard "Bomb Iran" choir of media and political pundits in to order to try to defuse any repercussions from its attempts to annex the West Bank. But short of an Israeli suicide mission on Iran's nuclear facilities, which would drag the USA into the fray, the majority of world ain't buying Israel's crying wolf this time.

That being the case Israel may indeed find itself quite isolated.

Let's all pray that rationality instead of fanaticism wins out.

I'm curious WUK...if the Palestinians get their state - as I believe will happen now, and within a few months or a year begin attacking Israel with it sporadically with rockets and mortars, just a few, now and again.... how do you think the Israelis should react?  If some Israelis are killed and the war like rhetoric of Hamas begins anew...what then?  This is what I anticipate.