'Instead of Gaza' | How should we name the new city?

[Shusha]

Yeah, the sea blockade to prevent weapons imports to Gaza. It has worked out as it planned, hasn't it?

The sea blockade has been largely successful, as far as I am aware. Monitoring and controlling the border between Gaza and Egypt, not so much. Which suggests that Israel does not, in point of actual fact, occupy Gaza, doesn't it?

 

[ESay]

The sea blockade has been largely successful, as far as I am aware. Monitoring and controlling the border between Gaza and Egypt, not so much. Which suggests that Israel does not, in point of actual fact, occupy Gaza, doesn't it?

Gaza, not. But see all Palestinian territories (1967 borders) as one.

 

[Shusha]

These things should have led to solution. But we both know that Israel won't agree on them.

Israel has already agreed to all of them, in various peace agreements presented to the Palestinians. I think it is disingenuous to suggest that Israel is the problem here.

 

[Shusha]

Gaza, not. But see all Palestinian territories (1967 borders) as one.

Ah progress! We agree that Israel does not occupy Gaza, then?

I would argue that Israel doesn't occupy the West Bank either (for complex legal reasons we don't have to explore if you would not wish to do so) though they do have significant military control in Area B and significant military and civilian control in Area C (as is their right by treaty).

My position is that resistance is NEVER going to compel Israel to exert less control over Areas B and C. In fact, it has the opposite effect. If Palestinians in the West Bank truly want their own independent state (and I am not at all convinced they do), the path to that is less resistance and more cooperation (especially economic cooperation as toomuchtime suggested).

 

[ESay]

Ah progress! We agree that Israel does not occupy Gaza, then?

I would argue that Israel doesn't occupy the West Bank either (for complex legal reasons we don't have to explore if you would not wish to do so) though they do have significant military control in Area B and significant military and civilian control in Area C (as is their right by treaty).

My position is that resistance is NEVER going to compel Israel to exert less control over Areas B and C. In fact, it has the opposite effect. If Palestinians in the West Bank truly want their own independent state (and I am not at all convinced they do), the path to that is less resistance and more cooperation (especially economic cooperation as toomuchtime suggested).

I think it is regress. Because I never claimed that Gaza was occupied.

Sorry for my naive question. What treaty did you mention?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Alright, then. We are back at trying to find examples of Jewish extremism.

The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The main question - will the Muslims agree to such proposal?

Wholly Bombsites

Sure. Then they'll use it as a missile base.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Jewish extremism:

• denying the thousand+ years of Arab history in the land

Israel Is Our Shield

A thousand years as a threat to Western Civilization. Proof that those who glorify Moslem history are enemies within Western Civilization and must have all power taken away from them.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Yeah, the sea blockade to prevent weapons imports to Gaza. It has worked out as it planned, hasn't it?

Return of the 20th Century Jihad's Founding Fathers

The missiles came through the Sinai, delivered by Egypt's "outlawed" Moslem Brotherhood.

 

[rylah]

Not trade between Israel and the PA or with Hamas, but trade between Israelis and Palestinians. In Judea and Samaria, if an Arab owns a business that depends on Jewish customers, he will not want to go to war or his business will fail. If an Arab has a good paying job at a Jewish owned business, he will not want to go to war for fear of losing his income. When enough Palestinian families are enjoying the benefits of these kinds of transactions with Jews, the West Bank will become far less likely to support war with Israel. These kinds of mutually beneficial transactions between Israelis and Palestinians are even now laying the groundwork for peace between those Palestinians who do business with Israelis in the West Bank and the Israelis who come in contact with them.

Direct trade between Jews and Arabs is a daily reality under Israeli sovereignty.
If trading agricultural produce with Arabs in Judea and Gaza is what You
perceive as trading with PA and Hamas - then what other path is there
to that goal You describe, other than Jewish resettlement?

Either I don't understand what You mean,
or we're going in circles

Now for the sake of the argument, let's leave out trade from that equation.
because both Israel and PA/Hamas have enough for a paradise on earth.
People who want to live and die here for the land or religion,
are not going to be moved by trade,
as You said - it's only the result.

Again circles.

So how do You navigate that equation now?

Let me suggest another angle,
peace, trade, and all those beautiful things,
are allowed only with those with whom war isn't an option.

Even if You have a good proposition the adversary agrees with,
it's not a disagreement about the income tax, it cannot come
from weakness, You have to force him into that.

Now if we go back to trade, only a couple years ago,
remember the violence in mixed cities? It's another example
of the limits of trade, when keeping the illusion of "negotiating" land.

Circles.

All I'm saying, try to look at it from the Arab perspective,
rather than from the perspective of Your values.
Because that's exclusive.

You want to trade? Fine.
Now we go to war with Hamas/PA,
how do You expect the Arab man to trade,
when the "peace process" makes him a traitor?

 

[rylah]

That's how You speak Arabic.

Cabinet approves: Sanctions against PA, regulation of five communities

Cabinet approves Smotrich's measures to combat the recognition of a Palestinian state and proceedings against Israel. They include sanctions against the PA, promotion of construction and other measures.

www.israelnationalnews.com

 

[toomuchtime_]

Direct trade between Jews and Arabs is a daily reality under Israeli sovereignty.
If trading agricultural produce with Arabs in Judea and Gaza is what You
perceive as trading with PA and Hamas - then what other path is there
to that goal You describe, other than Jewish resettlement?

Either I don't understand what You mean,
or we're going in circles

Now for the sake of the argument, let's leave out money as an inventive in the equation
because both Israel and PA/Hamas have enough for a paradise on earth/
People who want to live and die here for the land or religion,
are not going to be moved by trade,
as You said - it's only the result.

Again circles.

So how do You navigate that equation now?

Let me suggest another angle,
peace, trade, and all those beautiful things,
are allowed only with those with whom war isn't an option.

Even if You have a good proposition the adversary agrees with,
it's not a disagreement about the income tax, it cannot come
from weakness, You have to force him into that.

Now if we go back to trade, only a couple years ago,
remember the violence in mixed cities? It's another example
of the limits of trade, when keeping the illusion of "negotiating" land.

Circles.

All I'm saying, try to look at it from the Arab perspective,
rather than from the perspective of Your values.
Because that's exclusive.

You want to trade? Fine.
Now we go to war with Hamas/PA,
how do You expect the Arab man to trade,
when the "peace process" makes him a traitor?

Clearly, I have not explained what I mean carefully enough. Let me try again. For the present, let's restrict the conversation to the West Bank.

There is not top down agreement that will lead to peace, so there is no point in talking to the PA about trade. I am talking about trade at the grass roots level, a Jew taking his car to a Palestinian repair shop because they charge less, for example, as a means of subverting the Palestinian population away from the various factions that endorse conflict with Israel, making each Palestinian choose between the economic welfare of his family and the agendas of the various factions that support conflict with Israel. Under PA law, it is a crime for a Palestinian to work in an Israeli settlement, yet every day the Palestinians line up to go to work in the settlements.

 

[rylah]

Clearly, I have not explained what I mean carefully enough. Let me try again. For the present, let's restrict the conversation to the West Bank.

There is not top down agreement that will lead to peace, so there is no point in talking to the PA about trade. I am talking about trade at the grass roots level, a Jew taking his car to a Palestinian repair shop because they charge less, for example, as a means of subverting the Palestinian population away from the various factions that endorse conflict with Israel, making each Palestinian choose between the economic welfare of his family and the agendas of the various factions that support conflict with Israel. Under PA law, it is a crime for a Palestinian to work in an Israeli settlement, yet every day the Palestinians line up to go to work in the settlements.

So You describe the situation until Oslo.
What is the logical conclusion of that?

This is previous week.

Amnon Mukhtar was shot dead in Qalqiliya

Amnon Mukhtar, 67, has been named as the victim of Saturday's murder in Qalqiliya.

www.israelnationalnews.com

 

[toomuchtime_]

So You describe the situation until Oslo.
What is the logical conclusion of that?

This is previous week.

Amnon Mukhtar was shot dead in Qalqiliya

Amnon Mukhtar, 67, has been named as the victim of Saturday's murder in Qalqiliya.

www.israelnationalnews.com

Before Oslo there was the first intifada and before that there was very little interaction between Jews and Arabs in the West Bank. Oslo failed because it was an attempt to improve relations between Israel and the presumptive Palestinian leadership, the PA, and that is impossible because the Palestinians have never had a leadership that was committed to peace with Israel, but even as Oslo was failing, relations between ordinary Jews and Arabs in the West Bank were improving, but that ended when Arafat launched the second intifada.
Mutually beneficial transactions between ordinary Israelis and ordinary Palestinians will provide incentives for Palestinians to want to live in peace with Israelis, and the lack of such transactions will make ordinary Palestinians more amenable to following the various terrorist factions.

 

[rylah]

Before Oslo there was the first intifada and before that there was very little interaction between Jews and Arabs in the West Bank. Oslo failed because it was an attempt to improve relations between Israel and the presumptive Palestinian leadership, the PA, and that is impossible because the Palestinians have never had a leadership that was committed to peace with Israel, but even as Oslo was failing, relations between ordinary Jews and Arabs in the West Bank were improving, but that ended when Arafat launched the second intifada.
Mutually beneficial transactions between ordinary Israelis and ordinary Palestinians will provide incentives for Palestinians to want to live in peace with Israelis, and the lack of such transactions will make ordinary Palestinians more amenable to following the various terrorist factions.

Look it up, before the "peace process" Jews would regularly go shopping in places like Jenin,
or buy furniture in Gaza without any hustle, and a soldier could cross the town alone.

So again, what if that backwards Harvard mantra,
about substituting trade with a decisive victory,
actually prevents trade and ensures war?

That's why I've asked if You can
navigate the equation with
other variables.