A new quiz: Negotiating Point or Deal-breaker

[HistoryBefore67]

Please address the following list of potential Israeli and Palestinian demands that have been, are likely to be, made in the context of potential peace talks and designate them as one of the following:

Negotiating Point: An issue that should be part of a negotiation and potential compromise.

Deal-Breaker: An issue that can never be resolved and must be abandoned for talks to be productive.

Here's the list:

1. Formal Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State.

2. A subtantive change to the Hamas Charter abandoning violence and the goal of eliminating Israel.

3. Abandonment of the Palestinian "Right of Return" demand.

4. A cessation of "settlement construction" pending full resolution of all border issues.

5. Release of all Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.

6. An end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.

7. Palestinian demand for all of "East Jerusalem" including the Old City (i.e. the so-called "1967 borders.")

8. Use of 1967 "borders" as a baseline for the creation of a Palestinian state (apart from the Jerusalem issue).


Title changed at the request of the OP

 

[Lipush]

Yallah, I'm in.

1. Formal Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State.

None of the above. It is not under any negotiation or compromise and must never be abandoned, either.

It must be accepted and declared as such for all to see and know

2. A subtantive change to the Hamas Charter abandoning violence and the goal of eliminating Israel.

Same as number 1

3. Abandonment of the Palestinian "Right of Return" demand.

Negotiating Point.

4. A cessation of "settlement construction" pending full resolution of all border issues.

Negotiating Point.

5. Release of all Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.

Meeeh, deal breaker.

6. An end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.

Negotiating Point.

7. Palestinian demand for all of "East Jerusalem" including the Old City (i.e. the so-called "1967 borders.")

"If I forget thee, Oh Jerusalem, let my right hand be forgotten".

Jerusalem is not to be bargained over.

8. Use of 1967 "borders" as a baseline for the creation of a Palestinian state (apart from the Jerusalem issue).

Deal breaker.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

My responses:

1. Formal Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State.

Deal-breaker. No agreement can be reached without this demand being met.

2. A subtantive change to the Hamas Charter abandoning violence and the goal of eliminating Israel.

Potential Deal-Breaker: The only alternative is for Hamas to be voted out of power.

3. Abandonment of the Palestinian "Right of Return" demand.

Deal-Breaker

4. A cessation of "settlement construction" pending full resolution of all border issues.

Negotiating point.

5. Release of all Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.

Negotiating point. But only to the extent that there might be some prisoners who might be released as part of a deal. Some should not be.

6. An end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.

Negotiating point.

7. Palestinian demand for all of "East Jerusalem" including the Old City (i.e. the so-called "1967 borders.")

Deal breaker.

8. Use of 1967 "borders" as a baseline for the creation of a Palestinian state (apart from the Jerusalem issue).

Deal breaker. Borders would necessarily have to be negotiated, but the 1967 "borders" have no validity as a starting point or a presumptive baseline.

 

[Coyote]

Off topic/no content posts have been deleted - this is a good set of questions guys...

 

[sealadaigh]

Off topic/no content posts have been deleted - this is a good set of questions guys...

they may indeed be a good set of questions, but when the answers are regarded as "irrelevant" as they had been in a prior quiz...when they are summarily dismissed...there really is no point in answering them now, is there?

if the answers are irrelevant, then so are the questions.

this post is not off topic because it relates to the single minded bigotry of the one asking the questions. she owes me an apology for her flippant and arrogant response to my post in the other thread.

 

[RoccoR]

et al,

OK, I'm still confused.

(QUESTION)

Did we answer the question about what kind of state, Israel is?

I thought is was a secular republic, which also happened to be the Jewish National Home; but not a Jewish state.

Am I wrong?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[HistoryBefore67]

et al,

OK, I'm still confused.

(QUESTION)

Did we answer the question about what kind of state, Israel is?

I thought is was a secular republic, which also happened to be the Jewish National Home; but not a Jewish state.

Am I wrong?

Most Respectfully,
R

Not sure I'm following your semantics, but I'll try to respond.

Judaism is not merely a religion, but that is part of its character.

So, in my mind, there is no distinction between a "Jewish National Home" and a "Jewish State," and neither need be considered a theocracy.

 

[HistoryBefore67]

Off topic/no content posts have been deleted - this is a good set of questions guys...

they may indeed be a good set of questions, but when the answers are regarded as "irrelevant" as they had been in a prior quiz...when they are summarily dismissed...there really is no point in answering them now, is there?

if the answers are irrelevant, then so are the questions.

this post is not off topic because it relates to the single minded bigotry of the one asking the questions. she owes me an apology for her flippant and arrogant response to my post in the other thread.

The reason your answers were deemed irrelevant is that you tried to change the questions to make them of your liking, and then respond.

If you simply respond, your answers will be, by definition, relevant (whether I or anyone else agrees with them).

 

[Coyote]

Here's how I see it, if I understand the OP correctly...

1. Formal Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State.
Negotiating Point

2. A subtantive change to the Hamas Charter abandoning violence and the goal of eliminating Israel.
Negotiating Point

3. Abandonment of the Palestinian "Right of Return" demand.
Negotiating Point

4. A cessation of "settlement construction" pending full resolution of all border issues.
Negotiating Point

5. Release of all Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.
Deal Breaker

6. An end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.
Negotiating Point

7. Palestinian demand for all of "East Jerusalem" including the Old City (i.e. the so-called "1967 borders.")
Deal Breaker

8. Use of 1967 "borders" as a baseline for the creation of a Palestinian state (apart from the Jerusalem issue).
Negotiating Point

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Here are my answers:

1. Formal Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State.

If they refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish State - that is a deal breaker.

2. A subtantive change to the Hamas Charter abandoning violence and the goal of eliminating Israel.

The very foundation of the Hamas Charter is the goal of eliminating the Israeli people. Let's be clear that Hamas is a terrorist organization using terrorism to exact its revenge on Israeli civilians and forcing other Palestinians including their children to participate. They have been an obstacle to any opportunity to resolve the conflict. Hamas was formed in the 1980's and on August 18, 1988, it officially declared it's objectives. In the Preamble, Hamas declared, Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam can obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it. Hamas does not recognize Israels right to exist as a nation. Point 1 is impossible without removing Hamas from the equation in my humble opinion. So keeping Hamas is a deal breaker. They must go.

3. Abandonment of the Palestinian "Right of Return" demand.

Absolutely. This is not negotiable. There is no right of return. This isn't Burger King. They don't get it their way. They get it Israeli way or no way at all. To be blunt about it.

4. A cessation of "settlement construction" pending full resolution of all border issues.

A negotiating point only if #1 and #2 happen first. Otherwise? There is no point.

5. Release of all Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.

Deal breaker. Those are terrorists, not innocent Sudanese refugees with bones sticking out of their skin.

6. An end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.

negotiable depending on response from answer 1 & 2

7. Palestinian demand for all of "East Jerusalem" including the Old City (i.e. the so-called "1967 borders.")

Deal breaker. Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel. ALL of it. I am for Jerusalem being under the control of the Israeli government. The complete control. UN should keep out of it. So should their international whatchamacallits...........

8. Use of 1967 "borders" as a baseline for the creation of a Palestinian state (apart from the Jerusalem issue).

DEAL BREAKER. Forget the past because she is not going back to 67' borders. That would be an act of suicide for Israel.

These questions were pretty good. Good job!

-Jeri

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

et al,

OK, I'm still confused.

(QUESTION)

Did we answer the question about what kind of state, Israel is?

I thought is was a secular republic, which also happened to be the Jewish National Home; but not a Jewish state.

Am I wrong?

Most Respectfully,
R

Yes, Roccor. You are. Israel is a Jewish State. He worded it perfectly. - Jeri

 

[Roudy]

et al,

OK, I'm still confused.

(QUESTION)

Did we answer the question about what kind of state, Israel is?

I thought is was a secular republic, which also happened to be the Jewish National Home; but not a Jewish state.

Am I wrong?

Most Respectfully,
R

Yes, Roccor. You are. Israel is a Jewish State. He worded it perfectly. - Jeri

He explains the identity of Israel as a Jewish state very well.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Please address the following list of potential Israeli and Palestinian demands that have been, are likely to be, made in the context of potential peace talks and designate them as one of the following:

Negotiating Point: An issue that should be part of a negotiation and potential compromise.

Deal-Breaker: An issue that can never be resolved and must be abandoned for talks to be productive.

Here's the list:

1. Formal Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State.

2. A subtantive change to the Hamas Charter abandoning violence and the goal of eliminating Israel.

3. Abandonment of the Palestinian "Right of Return" demand.

4. A cessation of "settlement construction" pending full resolution of all border issues.

5. Release of all Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.

6. An end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.

7. Palestinian demand for all of "East Jerusalem" including the Old City (i.e. the so-called "1967 borders.")

8. Use of 1967 "borders" as a baseline for the creation of a Palestinian state (apart from the Jerusalem issue).


Title changed at the request of the OP

1. Negotiating point. Israel calls itself whatever she wants. No need to end negotiations over semantics.

2. Deal Breaker, if Hamas in included in the negotiations.

3. Deal Breaker. Financial Compensation to both Jewish and Arab refugees. Any right of return would be to the West Bank.

4. Deal Breaker. Although I consider the West Bank part of Eretz Yisroel which will be returned to us in Messiah's time, we have to look at it from their viewpoint also.

5. Negotiating point. Each case has to be looked over as individual cases.

6. Negotiating point. Obviously if the rockets and hostility ceases, so will the blockade.

7. Negotiating point--but in this sense. Some decrepit Arab villages such as Silwan were annexed to Jerusalem after the Six-day War. They can be an Arab capital.
In a final peace deal, we will probably give up Hebron, Bethlehem, Jericho, Shechem, Bethel, and Shilo--practically our whole history and heritage. Our heritage is not Tel-Aviv or even Haifa. Jerusalem is our heart and soul. Muslims have Mecca and Medina, and Jerusalem isn't mentioned in the Koran even once. We will not overturn the miracles of 1967 and our soldiers' blood, to give up the Old City. "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand wither, if I place not Jerusalem above my chiefest joy..."

8. Negotiating point. There will be probable land swaps.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Here are my answers:

1. Formal Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State.

If they refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish State - that is a deal breaker.

2. A subtantive change to the Hamas Charter abandoning violence and the goal of eliminating Israel.

The very foundation of the Hamas Charter is the goal of eliminating the Israeli people. Let's be clear that Hamas is a terrorist organization using terrorism to exact its revenge on Israeli civilians and forcing other Palestinians including their children to participate. They have been an obstacle to any opportunity to resolve the conflict. Hamas was formed in the 1980's and on August 18, 1988, it officially declared it's objectives. In the Preamble, Hamas declared, Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam can obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it. Hamas does not recognize Israels right to exist as a nation. Point 1 is impossible without removing Hamas from the equation in my humble opinion. So keeping Hamas is a deal breaker. They must go.

3. Abandonment of the Palestinian "Right of Return" demand.

Absolutely. This is not negotiable. There is no right of return. This isn't Burger King. They don't get it their way. They get it Israeli way or no way at all. To be blunt about it.

4. A cessation of "settlement construction" pending full resolution of all border issues.

A negotiating point only if #1 and #2 happen first. Otherwise? There is no point.

5. Release of all Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.

Deal breaker. Those are terrorists, not innocent Sudanese refugees with bones sticking out of their skin.

6. An end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.

negotiable depending on response from answer 1 & 2

7. Palestinian demand for all of "East Jerusalem" including the Old City (i.e. the so-called "1967 borders.")

Deal breaker. Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel. ALL of it. I am for Jerusalem being under the control of the Israeli government. The complete control. UN should keep out of it. So should their international whatchamacallits...........

8. Use of 1967 "borders" as a baseline for the creation of a Palestinian state (apart from the Jerusalem issue).

DEAL BREAKER. Forget the past because she is not going back to 67' borders. That would be an act of suicide for Israel.

These questions were pretty good. Good job!

-Jeri

We need friends like you. Thanx.

 

[Coyote]

I am confused by the terms deal breaker/negotiating point - I think I may not be understanding the OP correctly so I'm going to add to my reply.

Here's how I see it, if I understand the OP correctly...

1. Formal Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish State.
Negotiating Point

Negotiating point because it doesn't matter what the rest of the world "recognizes" Israel as, so long as it's recognized as a sovereign nation with a right to exist.

2. A subtantive change to the Hamas Charter abandoning violence and the goal of eliminating Israel.
Negotiating Point

Negotiating point - if the charter is changed, then negotiations are possible

3. Abandonment of the Palestinian "Right of Return" demand.
Negotiating Point

Negotiating point because if the Right of Return demand is abandoned, then negotiations are possible.

4. A cessation of "settlement construction" pending full resolution of all border issues.
Negotiating Point

Negotiating point because if settlement construction is ended, then negotiations are possible.

5. Release of all Palestinians imprisoned by Israel.
Deal Breaker

Deal breaker because whole sale release could release some serious criminals as those being held unjustly. I agree with 67, it would have to be case by case.

6. An end to Israel's blockade of Gaza.
Negotiating Point

Negotiating point - if blockade is lifted, negotiations are possible.

7. Palestinian demand for all of "East Jerusalem" including the Old City (i.e. the so-called "1967 borders.")
Deal Breaker

Deal breaker because that demand can not be reasonably met.

8. Use of 1967 "borders" as a baseline for the creation of a Palestinian state (apart from the Jerusalem issue).
Negotiating Point

[/quote]

Negotiating point because it's a good point for starting.

 

[MHunterB]

Coyote: most likely result of lifting the blockade *before a peace settlement* is:

Weapon pouring into Gaza and ONE MILLION PLUS people inside Israel subjected to rocket attacks. The rockets will reach further and some will carry chemical rounds - sarin or similar.

AND there is likely to be much more infiltration and attacks into Israel via land and sea as well.

Do I need to explain what the result of *that* will be?