@ Jewbacca: Two State/One State?

Multiple things happened:

  1. The arbitrary line drawing left people on either side that didn’t want to be there. This is not unique to Israel. Go look at India/Pakistan for Exhibit A. Or basically most of Europe at various times in history (e.g., ethnically German areas of Poland, Russia/Ukraine/Crimea).

  2. WWI didn’t resolve most of the underlying issues of the Ottoman Empire collapse and elsewhere.

  3. Trans-Jordan was taken over by the Hashemites which eliminated the most logical homeland for these Arabs (who themselves largely migrated from what-is-now Syria, Eqypt, and Jordan). All ill-fated war by these Arabs further solidified the problems, as did the recent support of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

  4. Germany was being a dick to England/France.

  5. Oil was discovered all over, changing the dynamics. Oil also became much more important.

  6. WWII/Nazis (who expelled Jews/Jews fled, but they also created/reinforced certain preexisting hatreds among the Muslim populace – going so far as to create Waffen SS Troops with the local populations.

  7. No one cared. They had bigger fish to fry.

That’s an interesting map… Notice I said could, not would. That choice of words was deliberate because of the many complications involved and a seeming masochistic streak in the Palestinians to thrive on immiserating themselves and each other.

Not withstanding, the conditions of peace to even get off the ground require not demanding the genocide of the Jewish people and renouncing violence. There are several plans in place, that would help a Palestinian state get off the ground should they choose to lose their blood lust.

Now we agree on the point, that, that is not going to happen.

Jewbacca thought of annexing the territories to their unwilling neighbors, which is plan I like and perhaps can be negotiated. It would be better if Jordan didn’t already have a million Syrian refugees, because I can see this being just another refugee crisis.

Personally, I think Israel won that territory fair and square. They fought and won. Usually that means tough shit for the losers. You don’t have to ethnically cleanse them, you can simply bus them out if they don’t like Israel. Drop them off at the border of Saudi Arabia. Let’s see those bastards do something rather than nothing for a change.

Those are all hypotheticals of course, but I disagree that peace isn’t possible. It’s possible just not likely.

While it might feel cathartic to propose such ‘solutions,’ this is all in flagrant violation of international law and the Geneva Conventions. Signatory countries are not allowed to annex land gained under arms, “fair and square” or otherwise. Forcibly removing people of a given ethnicity from an area is the very definition of ethnic cleansing. Saudi Arabia would rightfully object to having ~4 million unwanted individuals dropped off at their border, just as I’m certain you would object to Mexico solving their Central American refugee problem by shipping 4M to the our border.

Did you read the part where I said these were hypotheticals? I.E. speculative, not actionable.

EDIT: I should add that this is the exact pronouncement required by the Palestinians to renounce violence, except they prefer to kill all the Jews. Run the streets red with Jewish blood, men, woman and children until there are none left. ← Their words not mine.

I was under the impression you were presenting your personal view on the subject, which is why I described it as “cathartic” prior to pointing out its illegality.

Excepting the territory is legally just as much Israeli territory as it is anyone’s territory, the Palis are not indigenous but rather invaders/migrants themselves, and they were not a country at the time (if even now), you’d have a point.

Well, it’s a pretty murky issue here - are we going back to the Biblical times to define who’s the invader? For example, the Palestinians are a pretty recent invention, until 1948 they were simply “Arabs” where the adjective “Palestinian” was used to simply define a geographical location. The modern “Palestinian” identity was primarily built in the refugee camps post-1948.

Also, the population of what was the Palestine mandate in 1948 changed throughout the centuries, not least due to frequent massacres (Crusades, ahem, ahem) - for example, when Sephardi Jews from Spain started settling in the Ottoman Empire post 1492 fleeing the Inquisition, there were only 70 Jewish families in the city of Jerusalem. The numbers weren’t much higher in what is today the territory modern-day Israel.

Not according to the UN, specifically per Resolution 242:

ED:

It’s maps like this one that may me look at this whole issue with Israel much more philosophically (with the UN being almost as Anti-Israel as the PLO or Hamas).

This little tiny spec of land…with no oil…that is only habitable because of the years and years of Jewish work put into it.

My understanding is that you can drive from one side of Israel to the other in a shorter time than it takes me to get to work in the morning (~20 minutes. JB can confirm that).

And people are going to get on some pedestal and suggest: “It’s all the JEWS fault!” “They need to concede MORE!” “There would be peace if they would just give up land for peace!”

What land? Do you mean that little spec surrounded by billions of people who don’t want them to exist?

Does anyone REALLY think that if somehow all the Jews in Israel resettled somewhere else, that there would all of a sudden be the great and grand middle-eastern “PAX ROMANA”?

(JB…is there a word for “bullshit” in Yiddish and/or Hebrew?)

These countries don’t give a shit about the “Palestinians”…This whole area would be engulfed in War sooner than you could say “Shia…”

The rest of the Arab World is about War, excuses and blaming their problems on others.

While I think that they never will do it…they all need to look in the mirror and accept that the only true road to Peace is up to them…not based on anything Israel does or does not do.

2 Likes

Really? How many rockets has the UN fired into Israel? Has the UN questioned Israel’s right to exist? Has the UN vowed to wipe Israel from the face of the earth?

This sort of exaggeration and hyperbole doesn’t help matters.

No one here has said anything remotely like that.

Again, no one here has said anything of the sort.

Then forget peace, and just consider Israel’s future–the sort of state it is going to be 10, 20, 30 years from now. Will it continue living up to its own democratic ideals, or will it become an apartheid state? Because how Israel is then depends upon what Israel does now.

1 Like

ED:

You responded like this was some personal attack…it was not.

Nor did I suggest in the least to “forget Peace”…but any “peace” is going to have to come from the Arab/Muslim side.

I just don’t see how that is going to happen any time soon when they they are too preoccupied with killing each other.

I ask this seriously, ED (and it goes back the original question):

What exactly is Israel supposed to do here?

And if they do what you suggest; do you honestly believe that there will then be peace?

I would like Israel to announce that they are ready to engage in ‘land for peace’ talks with the PA. The starting point would be the (pre) 1967 borders. There would be no preconditions.

Obviously, the final border would not be the 1967 one, and the final agreement would include 1) recognition of Israel’s right to exist, and 2) the renunciation of violence.

The PA would have to figure out a way to get Hamas and Hezbollah on board–which may not be possible, at least in the short term. But by staking out this position (ie, ready and willing to negotiate from the 1967 borders with no preconditions), Israel would obviate any excuse the Palestinians have for not engaging in negotiations. And I think that, eventually, the Palestinians would come to the table. (The US and others would play a role in encouraging them.)

And yes, other than occasional violence committed by dead-enders (on both sides), I think there would be peace.

Obey the rule of international law. Accept the resolutions, keep the demilitarised zones . A two state solution has been adjudicated by the UN. History should not count for a lot , it is the future that matters. There are militants on either side.
United Nations Disengagement Observer Force Zone – The United Nations Security Council approved the creation of a demilitarized zone in a portion of the Israeli-occupied territory of the Golan Heights in Syria in Resolution 350. The zone is monitored by the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force.

RESOLUTION FOR STATE TWO SOLUTION reinvoked
http://web.archive.org/web/20110728142758/http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/7EB10BD6D4BCACCF85257829005379D9

UNITED
NATIONS
A

General Assembly
Distr.
GENERAL

A/RES/65/16
25 January 2011

Sixty-fifth session
Agenda item 37

Resolution adopted by the General Assembly
[without reference to a Main Committee (A/65/L.17 and Add.1)]

65/16. Peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine

The General Assembly,
Recalling its relevant resolutions, including those adopted at its tenth emergency special session,
Recalling also its resolution 58/292 of 6 May 2004,
Recalling further relevant Security Council resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967, 338 (1973) of 22 October 1973, 1397 (2002) of 12 March 2002, 1515 (2003) of 19 November 2003, 1544 (2004) of 19 May 2004 and 1850 (2008) of 16 December 2008,
Recalling the affirmation by the Security Council of the vision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side within secure and recognized borders,
Noting with concern that it has been more than sixty years since the adoption of its resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947 and forty-three years since the occupation of Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, in 1967,
Having considered the report of the Secretary-General submitted pursuant to the request made in its resolution 64/19 of 2 December 2009, 1
Reaffirming the permanent responsibility of the United Nations with regard to the question of Palestine until the question is resolved in all its aspects in accordance with international law and relevant resolutions,
Recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice on the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, 2 and recalling also its resolutions ES-10/15 of 20 July 2004 and ES-10/17 of 15 December 2006,
Convinced that achieving a just, lasting and comprehensive settlement of the question of Palestine, the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict, is imperative for the attainment of comprehensive and lasting peace and stability in the Middle East,
Stressing that the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples is among the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations,
Reaffirming the principle of the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war,
Recalling its resolution 2625 (XXV) of 24 October 1970,
Reaffirming the illegality of the Israeli settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem,
Stressing the extremely detrimental impact of Israeli settlement policies, decisions and activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, on efforts to resume and advance the peace process and to achieve peace in the Middle East,
Reaffirming the illegality of Israeli actions aimed at changing the status of Jerusalem, including measures such as the so-called E-l plan, home demolitions, evictions of Palestinian residents, excavations in and around religious and historic sites, and all other unilateral measures aimed at altering the character, status and demographic composition of the city and of the Territory as a whole,
Reaffirming also that the construction by Israel, the occupying Power, of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, and its associated regime are contrary to international law,
Expressing deep concern about the continuing Israeli policy of closures and severe restrictions on the movement of persons and goods, including medical and humanitarian, via the imposition of prolonged closures and severe economic and movement restrictions that in effect amount to a blockade, as well as of checkpoints and a permit regime throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the consequent negative impact on the socio-economic situation of the Palestinian people, which remains that of a humanitarian crisis, and on the efforts aimed at rehabilitating and developing the damaged Palestinian economy and on the contiguity of the Territory, while taking note of recent developments regarding the situation of access to the Gaza Strip,
Recalling the mutual recognition between the Government of the State of Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization, the representative of the Palestinian people, 3 and the need for full compliance with the agreements concluded between the two sides,
Recalling also the endorsement by the Security Council, in resolution 1515 (2003), of the Quartet road map to a permanent two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict 4 and the call in Council resolution 1850 (2008) for the parties to fulfil their obligations under the road map, as affirmed in the Israeli-Palestinian Joint Understanding reached at the international conference held in Annapolis, United States of America, on 27 November 2007, 5 and to refrain from any steps that could undermine confidence or prejudice the outcome of negotiations,
Noting the Israeli withdrawal in 2005 from the Gaza Strip and parts of the northern West Bank and the dismantlement of the settlements therein as a step towards the implementation of the road map, and recalling in this regard the road map obligation upon Israel to freeze settlement activity, including so-called “natural growth”, and to dismantle all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,
Recalling the Arab Peace Initiative adopted by the Council of the League of Arab States at its fourteenth session, held in Beirut on 27 and 28 March 2002, 6
Expressing support for the agreed principles for bilateral negotiations, as affirmed by the parties at the Annapolis conference, aimed at concluding a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues, including all core issues, without exception, for the achievement of a just, lasting and peaceful settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and ultimately of the Arab-Israeli conflict as a whole for the realization of a comprehensive peace in the Middle East,
Reiterating support for the convening of an international conference in Moscow, as envisioned by the Security Council in resolution 1850 (2008), for the advancement and acceleration of a resumed peace process,
Noting the important contribution to the peace process of the United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process and Personal Representative of the Secretary-General to the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority, including within the framework of the activities of the Quartet,
Welcoming the reconvening of the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee for the Coordination of the International Assistance to Palestinians, under the chairmanship of Norway, at United Nations Headquarters on 21 September 2010, affirming the importance of continued follow-up and fulfilment of pledges made at the International Conference in Support of the Palestinian Economy for the Reconstruction of Gaza, held in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, on 2 March 2009, for the provision of emergency assistance and support for reconstruction and economic recovery in the Gaza Strip and alleviation of the socio-economic and humanitarian crisis being faced by the Palestinian people, and acknowledging the contribution of the Palestinian-European Mechanism for the Management of Socio-Economic Aid of the European Commission in this regard,
Recognizing the efforts being undertaken by the Palestinian Authority, with international support, to rebuild, reform and strengthen its damaged institutions, emphasizing the need to preserve and develop the Palestinian institutions and infrastructure and affirming, in this regard, its support for the Palestinian Authority’s August 2009 plan for constructing the institutions of an independent Palestinian State within a twenty-four-month period, and commending the significant progress towards that goal, as confirmed by international institutions, including the World Bank in its Economic Monitoring Report of 13 April 2010 to the Ad Hoc Liaison Committee,
Welcoming the continued efforts and tangible progress made in the security sector by the Palestinian Authority, calling upon the parties to continue cooperation that benefits both Palestinians and Israelis, in particular by promoting security and building confidence, and expressing the hope that such progress will be extended to all major population centres,
Reiterating its concern over the negative developments that have continued to occur in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, including the large number of deaths and injuries, mostly among Palestinian civilians, the construction and expansion of settlements and the wall, acts of violence, vandalism and brutality committed against Palestinian civilians by Israeli settlers in the West Bank, the widespread destruction of public and private Palestinian property and infrastructure, the internal displacement of civilians and the serious deterioration of the socio-economic and humanitarian conditions of the Palestinian people,
Expressing grave concern, in particular, over the crisis in the Gaza Strip as a result of the continuing prolonged Israeli closures and severe economic and movement restrictions that in effect amount to a blockade and the military operations in the Gaza Strip between December 2008 and January 2009, which caused extensive loss of life and injury, particularly among Palestinian civilians, including children and women, widespread damage and destruction to Palestinian homes, properties, vital infrastructure, public institutions, including hospitals and schools, and United Nations facilities, and internal displacement of civilians,
Stressing the need for the full implementation by all parties of Security Council resolution 1860 (2009) of 8 January 2009 and General Assembly resolution ES-10/18 of 16 January 2009,
Expressing concern over continuing military actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including raids and arrest campaigns, and over the continued imposition of hundreds of checkpoints and obstacles to movement in and around Palestinian population centres by the Israeli occupying forces, and emphasizing in this regard the need for the implementation by both sides of the Sharm el-Sheikh understandings,
Emphasizing the importance of the safety, protection and well-being of all civilians in the whole Middle East region, and condemning all acts of violence and terror against civilians on both sides,
Expressing concern over the unlawful takeover of Palestinian Authority institutions in the Gaza Strip in June 2007, and calling for the restoration of the situation to that which existed prior to June 2007 and for the continuation of the serious efforts being exerted by Egypt, the League of Arab States and other concerned parties for the promotion of dialogue for the achievement of reconciliation and the restoration of Palestinian national unity,
Stressing the urgent need for sustained and active international involvement, including by the Quartet, to support both parties in resuming, advancing and accelerating the peace process negotiations for the achievement of a just, lasting and comprehensive peace settlement, on the basis of United Nations resolutions, the road map and the Arab Peace Initiative,
Noting the Quartet’s determination in the recent period to support the parties throughout the negotiations, which can be completed and resolve all final status issues within one year, and in the implementation of an agreement between the two sides that ends the occupation which began in 1967 and results in the emergence of an independent, democratic and viable Palestinian State living side by side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbours,
Acknowledging the efforts being undertaken by civil society to promote a peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine,
Recalling the findings by the International Court of Justice, in its advisory opinion, including on the urgent necessity for the United Nations as a whole to redouble its efforts to bring the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which continues to pose a threat to international peace and security, to a speedy conclusion, thereby establishing a just and lasting peace in the region, 7
Affirming once again the right of all States in the region to live in peace within secure and internationally recognized borders,

  1. Reaffirms the necessity of achieving a peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine, the core of the Arab-Israeli conflict, in all its aspects, and of intensifying all efforts towards that end;
  2. Also reaffirms its full support for the Middle East peace process, based on the relevant United Nations resolutions, the terms of reference of the Madrid Conference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative adopted by the Council of the League of Arab States at its fourteenth session,6 and the Quartet road map to a permanent two-State solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,4 and for the existing agreements between the Israeli and Palestinian sides, stresses the necessity for the establishment of a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, and welcomes in this regard the ongoing efforts of the Quartet and of the League of Arab States;
  3. Encourages continued serious regional and international efforts to follow up and promote the Arab Peace Initiative, including by the Ministerial Committee formed at the Riyadh summit in March 2007;
  4. Urges the parties to undertake, with the support of the Quartet and the international community, immediate and concrete steps in follow-up to the Israeli-Palestinian Joint Understanding reached at the international conference held in Annapolis,5 including through the resumption of active and serious bilateral negotiations;
  5. Encourages, in this regard, the convening of an international conference in Moscow, as envisioned by the Security Council in resolution 1850 (2008), for the advancement and acceleration of a resumed peace process;
  6. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law and their previous agreements and obligations, in particular adherence to the road map, irrespective of reciprocity, in order to create the conditions necessary for the resumption and accelerated advancement of negotiations in the near term;
  7. Calls upon the parties themselves, with the support of the Quartet and other interested parties, to exert all efforts necessary to halt the deterioration of the situation and to reverse all unilateral and unlawful measures taken on the ground since 28 September 2000;
  8. Calls upon the parties to observe calm and restraint and to refrain from provocative actions and inflammatory rhetoric, especially in areas of religious and cultural sensitivity;
  9. Underscores the need for the parties to take confidence-building measures aimed at improving the situation on the ground, promoting stability and fostering the peace process, including the need for the further release of prisoners;
  10. Stresses the need for the removal of checkpoints and other obstructions to the movement of persons and goods throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and the need for respect and preservation of the territorial unity, contiguity and integrity of all of the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem;
  11. Also stresses the need for an immediate and complete cessation of all acts of violence, including military attacks, destruction and acts of terror;
  12. Reiterates its demand for the full implementation of Security Council resolution 1860 (2009);
  13. Reiterates the need for the full implementation by both parties of the Agreement on Movement and Access and of the Agreed Principles for the Rafah Crossing, of 15 November 2005, and the need, specifically, to allow for the sustained opening of all crossings into and out of the Gaza Strip for humanitarian supplies, movement and access, as well as for commercial flows and all necessary construction materials, which are essential for alleviating the humanitarian crisis, improving the living conditions of the Palestinian people and promoting the recovery of the Palestinian economy;
  14. Stresses, in this regard, the urgent necessity for the advancement of reconstruction in the Gaza Strip, including through the completion of numerous suspended projects managed by the United Nations and the commencement of United Nations-led civilian reconstruction activities;
  15. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to comply strictly with its obligations under international law, including international humanitarian law, and to cease all of its measures that are contrary to international law and unilateral actions in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, that are aimed at altering the character, status and demographic composition of the Territory, including via the de facto annexation of land, and thus at prejudging the final outcome of peace negotiations;
  16. Reiterates its demand for the complete cessation of all Israeli settlement activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan, and calls for the full implementation of the relevant Security Council resolutions;
  17. Stresses, in this regard, the need for Israel forthwith to abide by its road map obligation to freeze all settlement activity, including so-called “natural growth”, and to dismantle settlement outposts erected since March 2001;
  18. Calls for the cessation of all provocations, including by Israeli settlers, in East Jerusalem, including in and around religious sites;
  19. Demands, accordingly, that Israel, the occupying Power, comply with its legal obligations under international law, as mentioned in the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice2 and as demanded in General Assembly resolutions ES-10/13 of 21 October 2003 and ES-10/15, and, inter alia, that it immediately cease its construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and calls upon all States Members of the United Nations to comply with their legal obligations, as mentioned in the advisory opinion;
  20. Reaffirms its commitment, in accordance with international law, to the two-State solution of Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security within recognized borders, based on the pre-1967 borders;
  21. Stresses the need for:
    (a) The withdrawal of Israel from the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem;
    (b) The realization of the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people, primarily the right to self-determination and the right to their independent State;
  22. Also stresses the need for a just resolution of the problem of Palestine refugees in conformity with its resolution 194 (III) of 11 December 1948;
  23. Calls upon the parties to resume and accelerate direct peace negotiations towards the conclusion of a final peaceful settlement on the basis of relevant United Nations resolutions, especially of the Security Council, the terms of reference of the Madrid Conference, the road map and the Arab Peace Initiative;
  24. Urges Member States to expedite the provision of economic, humanitarian and technical assistance to the Palestinian people and the Palestinian Authority during this critical period in order to help to alleviate the humanitarian crisis being faced by the Palestinian people, particularly in the Gaza Strip, to rehabilitate the Palestinian economy and infrastructure and to support the rebuilding, restructuring and reform of Palestinian institutions and Palestinian State-building efforts;
  25. Encourages, in this regard, the continuing efforts of the Quartet’s Special Representative, Mr. Tony Blair, to strengthen Palestinian institutions, promote Palestinian economic development and mobilize international donor support;
  26. Requests the Secretary-General to continue his efforts with the parties concerned, and in consultation with the Security Council, towards the attainment of a peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine and the promotion of peace in the region and to submit to the General Assembly at its sixty-sixth session a report on these efforts and on developments on this matter.

55th plenary meeting
30 November 2010

Notes

1A/65/380-S/2010/484 and A/65/380/Add.3-S/2010/484/Add.1.
2 See A/ES-10/273 and Corr.1; see also Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136.
3 See A/48/486-S/26560, annex.
4 S/2003/529, annex.
5 Available from http://unispal.un.org.
6 A/56/1026-S/2002/932, annex II, resolution 14/221.
7 See A/ES-10/273 and Corr.1, advisory opinion, para. 161; see also Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports 2004, p. 136.


I read through all that twice.

Where is:

  1. Hamas and Hezbollah officially recognize Israel’s right to Exist and expunge all references of the complete annihilation of the Jewish people from their charters.

  2. All suicide excursions into Israel; and all rocket launches into Israel cease for a defined period of time in order to show commitment to the Peace Effort.

  3. A plan be agreed upon for a) Buffer Zones/Demilitarized Zones and b) sufficient safeguards and security plans for the almost inevitable terrorist activity that will occur.

To me; there just seems to be and awful lot of “Israel do this/Israel do that” in these Resolutions

3 Likes

And what of Hamas and Hezbollah?

While you’re a very welcpme addition to PWI, I thibk you have not been around these parts frequently for long enough ED…I think it is pretty telling that these strong words are coming from Mufasa–possibly the most neutral poster in this entire subforum lol. He’s practically like Switzerland. That increases their weight in my opinion frankly.

I agree with him actually, even though he is exaggerating some for effect. The UN has done a number on this topic.

@ Mufasa Israel is the player in a position of power. It more or less decides what happens. Israel is voluntarily a party UN Treaty. It has agreed to obey the resolutions. Also not to displace people ( I also do not think that is true ethnic cleansing despite it counting as the definition thereof.) It as a state has committed acts of torture such as bombing entire villages, fencing people in, harassing people at checkpoints including Jewish Israelis who protest getting stopped at airports for hours, using human shields running people over with JCBS and tanks.

I would like to think that Hamas and Hezbollah do not represent the Palestinian people as a whole.
'Over the years, polls have consistently shown "respectable Israeli and Palestinian majorities in favor of a negotiated two-state settlement ’ It is not the state that committed terrorist acts but Palestinian terrorists.
When a people is oppressed there will always be uprisings.

Guys…I think I look at the Middle East and say to myself (out of frustration, mostly)…

How is the world can someone look at this small amount of Land with a people that represent a fraction of the Middle East’s total population; and somehow they are both the problem AND the answer to the Middle East’s problems?

Where are all these Oil-Rich countries in all this?

It just makes no sense to me…

I’m open to some answers…I really am.

1 Like

Hezbollah is currently fighting sunnis - JaN. TaL, ISIS around Aleppo in Syria and ISIS around Mosul in Iraq. Hezbollah is not an independent entity, it’s a paramilitary terrorist organization under the control of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, for all practical purposes, as can be seen from many IRG officers embedded with them in both Syria and Iraq.

Recently, Hezbollah is on the receiving end of suicide attacks by te Syrian “rebels” I mean AQ/JaN for the last couple of days, to which they’ve responded both conventionally - Hezbollah artillery strikes coupled with RaF sorties and unconventionally by planting a shitload of IEDs against sunnis.

Cutting a deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran means cutting a deal with Hezbollah. Of course this to happen it would mean that the grand US-Iran rapprochement is on the table, which doesn’t seem likely at the moment.

Interestingly, there is a sliver of ISIS controlled territory in Syria literally bordering Israel - around the city Tasil, just east of the Golan heights. Wondering why everything is so quiet there?

1 Like

Not sure what you’re asking here. Obviously, they will have to be brought to heel before any deal is finalized.

Comparing the UN to terror organizations that have murdered civilians, including women and children? “Exaggerating some” doesn’t begin to cover it. It’s an absurd and offensive comparison that trivializes the barbarism that has characterized the existence of Hamas and Hezbollah–like when someone compares Trump to Hitler.

1 Like