Let us discuss this openly... What exactly IS the "two states solution"?

[P F Tinmore]

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

Since you are the only one on this thread to frame the problem this way, you are the only one who can answer this question.

So, what do you suggest? Removing the "settler colonists"?

Of course not.

 

[Sixties Fan]

It is just that the Palestinians call for equal rights and the Israelis call for expelling and killing.

I think this is indicative of the moral values of the people involved.

I don't think it is that simple.

The Palestinians might be calling for equal rights but many are also unwilling to allow Israeli Jews to remain there in the settlements should that become part of their new state. In other words they are calling for expelling. Likewise...they are and have been killing.

I think it's a mistake to broad brush the moral values of a people in that way - neither the Palestinians nor the Israeli's.

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

From your first sentence:
Who are you talking about when you say one cannot right an injustice by creating another?

And to answer your other sentences:
IF the Muslims/Arabs have not been the ones rejecting the Partition in 1947 and all other peace offers put in front of them, which even Arab countries post 2000 thought the Palestinian leaders thought they were crazy to not accept and put an end to the conflict, then who has?

1947 Partition = Rejected by the Palestinians
2000 and 2008 Peace Treaties rejected by the Palestinians
Negotiations = rejected by Abbas
Come to the table to negotiate = rejected by Abbas.


Why are you generalizing without giving specifics as to how things got to the way they are?

 

[Sixties Fan]

It is just that the Palestinians call for equal rights and the Israelis call for expelling and killing.

I think this is indicative of the moral values of the people involved.

I don't think it is that simple.

The Palestinians might be calling for equal rights but many are also unwilling to allow Israeli Jews to remain there in the settlements should that become part of their new state. In other words they are calling for expelling. Likewise...they are and have been killing.

I think it's a mistake to broad brush the moral values of a people in that way - neither the Palestinians nor the Israeli's.

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

<<The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other>>

You have no idea what you are saying in that sentence.

Again, how many Jews living in Gaza or areas A and B of the West Bank?

How many Arab Christians or Muslims living in Israel and Area C or the West Bank?

 

[fanger]

If someone invaded your house by force of Arms, would you negotiate the return of your kitchen and part of the garage?

 

[Sixties Fan]

If someone invaded your house by force of Arms, would you negotiate the return of your kitchen and part of the garage?

The Jews had no arms and they did not invade their own homeland in all the centuries they returned to their homeland due to oppression or persecution.

The only time the Jews saw the need for weapons was when the Mandate was affirmed and the Arab leaders set riots against them, and they had to defend themselves.

So, yes, when the rightful owners to the land, who had to buy the land back in order to work and live in it, are attacked by gangs of angry anti Jewish Muslims, the Jews will most definitely stand up and protect their lives and properties, just as the natives from other areas of the world had to do with the invading Europeans, as North Africa, Spain and other areas had to do with the invasion of other Arab/Muslim armies and groups.

The Muslims lost the wars of WWI, WWII.

The 1948 war against Israel, and also the wars of 1957, 1967 and 1973.

The invading Muslims who lost all of those wars against the indigenous Jews from 1948 to present need to stop wanting all Jews dead and Israel destroyed and once and for all make peace with Israel just as Egypt and Jordan had the courage to do.

 

[Coyote]

I don't think it is that simple.

The Palestinians might be calling for equal rights but many are also unwilling to allow Israeli Jews to remain there in the settlements should that become part of their new state. In other words they are calling for expelling. Likewise...they are and have been killing.

I think it's a mistake to broad brush the moral values of a people in that way - neither the Palestinians nor the Israeli's.

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

<<The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other>>

You have no idea what you are saying in that sentence.

Again, how many Jews living in Gaza or areas A and B of the West Bank?

How many Arab Christians or Muslims living in Israel and Area C or the West Bank?

Yes, I absolutely no what I'm saying.

A lack of recognition of each for the rights the other...

One example would be the continued and even increased settlement building.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I don't think it is that simple.

The Palestinians might be calling for equal rights but many are also unwilling to allow Israeli Jews to remain there in the settlements should that become part of their new state. In other words they are calling for expelling. Likewise...they are and have been killing.

I think it's a mistake to broad brush the moral values of a people in that way - neither the Palestinians nor the Israeli's.

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

From your first sentence:
Who are you talking about when you say one cannot right an injustice by creating another?

And to answer your other sentences:
IF the Muslims/Arabs have not been the ones rejecting the Partition in 1947 and all other peace offers put in front of them, which even Arab countries post 2000 thought the Palestinian leaders thought they were crazy to not accept and put an end to the conflict, then who has?

1947 Partition = Rejected by the Palestinians
2000 and 2008 Peace Treaties rejected by the Palestinians
Negotiations = rejected by Abbas
Come to the table to negotiate = rejected by Abbas.


Why are you generalizing without giving specifics as to how things got to the way they are?

All of those required the Palestinians to surrender and cede land.

 

[P F Tinmore]

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

<<The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other>>

You have no idea what you are saying in that sentence.

Again, how many Jews living in Gaza or areas A and B of the West Bank?

How many Arab Christians or Muslims living in Israel and Area C or the West Bank?

Yes, I absolutely no what I'm saying.

A lack of recognition of each for the rights the other...

One example would be the continued and even increased settlement building.

Indeed, the continuation of the settler colonial process.

 

[Sixties Fan]

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

<<The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other>>

You have no idea what you are saying in that sentence.

Again, how many Jews living in Gaza or areas A and B of the West Bank?

How many Arab Christians or Muslims living in Israel and Area C or the West Bank?

Yes, I absolutely no what I'm saying.

A lack of recognition of each for the rights the other...

One example would be the continued and even increased settlement building.

When Israel only builds within the existing cities or villages in Areas A and B, as per the Oslo Accords (do you know what the Oslo Accords say?) , and even builds for Arabs who live in those areas, just how is that lacking recognition of the other ?

Tell me of homes built for Jews in Areas A and B?

And also, why do you keep ignoring the lack of Jews in their ancient land of Gaza and TransJordan since 1920, as they were expelled by the Muslims and the British?

The Muslims want to make Judea and Samaria ( where the birth of Judaism was, and where the ancient kingdoms of King David and all the other Kings were rooted) Jewish free.
No Jews will be allowed to live on ancient Jewish land (Abbas has said so himself).

You may not know it, but you are definitely repeating someone's narrative, you simply do not know that you are doing it.

 

[Coyote]

I don't think it is that simple.

The Palestinians might be calling for equal rights but many are also unwilling to allow Israeli Jews to remain there in the settlements should that become part of their new state. In other words they are calling for expelling. Likewise...they are and have been killing.

I think it's a mistake to broad brush the moral values of a people in that way - neither the Palestinians nor the Israeli's.

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

<<But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration.>>

You seem to miss the meaning of the word Native/Indigenous.

All the tribes living in the Americas and Australia, Hawaii, New Zealand before the 1492 European "discovery" and colonization are the Indigenous, Native people of the land.

The people who had a Nation, culture and history living at the time of the various European invasions, or even the Assyrian invasion, were the Jewish People, also known as the Jewish Nation.

They were there when the Greeks, Romans, Byzantine and the Muslims arrived on that land. It is all recorded in their documents, books, etc

Native = Indigenous = having formed a distinct people whose ancient history happened on that piece of land.

There are the Pagan, Christian and Muslim invaders of the Jewish Homeland, what had been the Nation of Israel.

A new majority due to Muslim and Christian migration to the land does not make that land, or in the Americas, etc.... any less belonging to any of the 500 First Nations, or the Mayans, Aztecs, etc.

All it means is that since that invasion the Indigenous people lost sovereignty over their land.

The Jews worked for and regained sovereignty over some of their land. Only 20% out of 100% of it, as it had been promised.

I totally disagree. Who is or is not "indiginous" in the strict meaning of the term is irrelevent. It's irrelevant in the face of the fact that you have thousands of people who have been living in that region for generations, centuries, millinia including many who were once Jews and converted to invading religions (and this too is documented in history) and in the people's genome. It's irrelevent because you can't just tell people with deep roots and ties that all of a sudden they don't belong there and it does nothing to provide a solution.

You may have missed somewhere that there are no non Muslims living in what was known in TranJordan today, although they did live in it until 1925 when the British simply gave a recently arrived Arab Muslim clan 77% of the Mandate for Palestine, which was part of the Jewish Homeland and where Jews were going to be allowed to stay and live in it, as they had done for thousands of years.

Or, you missed where there were Jews living in the area of the Gaza Strip for thousands of years, until 1920, when they were expelled by the British for "security" concerns.

Or you missed where all the Jews were expelled from the oldest Jewish town in the area, around 3800 years, in 1929 when they were attacked by Muslims and then expelled by the British (Mandate, anyone?) instead of expelling those who were responsible for the attacks.

Or....you may have missed when Jordan's Hashemite clan invaded Israel, with the help of the British who had just given up their Mandate,after Israel's Independence and murdered and expelled ALL JEWS from ALL of Judea, Samaria and the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem (known, now, to some as "Arab East Jerusalem)


So, your point is that it is irrelevant as to who is the indigenous people, with ancestral rights (like any other ancestral people) to their ancient homeland.

Frankly I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.

Both sets of people have rights to that area. Yes or no?

If no, why not?

Both sets of people have suffered under expulsions and through war. Yes or no?

So what is your point?

The Muslims disagree.

They do know that the Jews are the ancestral people of that ancestral land. But that is not the point in Islam to many Muslims.
It is about never allowing Jews to be sovereign to even a tiny piece of what is left since the British betrayed the Jews in 1922 and decided to give 77% of the Mandate to Arabs who had just been kicked out of THEIR homeland in Arabia by another Arab clan.

Also, you are assuming, because it has been repeated a Million times by Jew haters, that ALL Jews on that land had converted to Christianity or Islam.

Actually, you're the one who seems to be doing a lot of assuming. Maybe you ought to read what people actually post for a change instead of reverting to labels.

I've never claimed that "all Jews" converted to another religion nor am I about to. However, with each successive wave of conquests you have a number of people who end up converting to the dominant religion. Or...are you going to claim that all the none Jews are foreign invaders?

That is totally incorrect. And NO, the Jews who returned to the Jewish homeland (and had always done so in every century since the fall of the Roman Empire) are not "Europeans", as in .....their ancestral homes were in Germany, England, France, Spain, etc, etc.

And, in many instances - the people in Europe at one time came from elsewhere as well through successive waves of migration and conquest. The Jews that came from Europe, who had established roots in Europe for thousands of years are as European as any other European and infact almost certainly married Europeans in the process.

They are descendants of those Jews who at one point or another did go to Europe, like anyone else and created communities (Italian, English, Spanish, Scottish, etc) somewhere else.

They continue to be descendants from those who came from Asia Minor, from the land of Israel, from the Nation of Israel.

Apaches who moves to Europe for many centuries are still Apaches, their ancient homeland is still where it is in the USA, and no Apache will be telling them that they have no right of return to their homeland.

Jews from Europe, Americas, Mesopotamia, Iran, Syria, Egypt, etc.
All of them have the right to their ancient homeland, and be known as the indigenous people of that land.

They have no more right then any of the other people's living there.

Final point:

There are 2.5 Million non-Jews living in Israel, still. None of them were uprooted. They stayed on the land during the Independence war of 1948. They were not asked to leave or expelled by Israel.

Just look at all the expulsions done by Arabs and the British of the Jewish population from 1920 to 1948.

What's your point with this exactly? There were a good many Palestinians expelled during the war as well, and the myth that it was soley due to Arab leaders telling them to flee is a myth.

How many Jews are left in Muslim countries?

Saudi Arabia = 0
Jordan = 0
Egypt = 40-50
Iraq = about 7
Yemen =300
Bahrai = 36
Iran = 12,000
Lebanon = 200

Jewish population by country - Wikipedia

The Jewish populations in all of those countries were much larger before 1948. Since then Jews were expelled or forced to escape.
What did they have to do with Israel? They were Jews.

Agree, there was an expulsion of Jews from Arab countries during this time. Not sure where you are going with this since no one is arguing that there wasn't or justifying it.

The same thing is happening in Europe where Jews are being forced to leave due to the increase in the Muslim population and their anti Israel/Jewish sentiments.

Increase in Muslim population = increase in attacks on Jews.
Not just Israelis.

Ok, are you a muslim hater then?

No Jews in Gaza.
No Jews in areas A and B or the West Bank (Judea and Samaria)


Just which people have been told that they do not belong and have no roots to the land?
And which people have avoided accepting a partition in 1947, or Peace treaties in 2000 and 2008?

Which people took all of their people out of an area which protected the South of Israel from rocket attacks, only to have the other people continue to attack with about 14,000 rockets and no intent of negotiations for Peace, since 2005?

So...again, what is your point here in relation to what I've said?

Think about all the points I made before you answer.

Do you actually believe that Hawaiians, Maoris, Aboriginal tribes, Amazonian tribes, etc, do not care if they are called the Indigenous people of the land, with what that word actually means? And with the endless attempts to take more and more of their land?

When thousands of years have passed, and other peoples have inhabited that area for that long - even as long - then what does it mean? It means nothing in terms of RIGHTS. In other words - they have no greater rights than the people living there.

 

[Coyote]

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

<<The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other>>

You have no idea what you are saying in that sentence.

Again, how many Jews living in Gaza or areas A and B of the West Bank?

How many Arab Christians or Muslims living in Israel and Area C or the West Bank?

Yes, I absolutely no what I'm saying.

A lack of recognition of each for the rights the other...

One example would be the continued and even increased settlement building.

When Israel only builds within the existing cities or villages in Areas A and B, as per the Oslo Accords (do you know what the Oslo Accords say?) , and even builds for Arabs who live in those areas, just how is that lacking recognition of the other ?

How many new Arab settlements or expansions have been approved?
How many new Jewish settlements or expansions have been approved?

Tell me of homes built for Jews in Areas A and B?

And also, why do you keep ignoring the lack of Jews in their ancient land of Gaza and TransJordan since 1920, as they were expelled by the Muslims and the British?

The Muslims want to make Judea and Samaria ( where the birth of Judaism was, and where the ancient kingdoms of King David and all the other Kings were rooted) Jewish free.

You are trying to make the argument that Israel recognizes the rights of the Palestinians and Palestinians do not recognize the rights of Israel.

I'm making the argument that NEITHER recognizes the rights of the other. The only argument you've come up with is Israel is a little better than the Palestinians in this.

No Jews will be allowed to live on ancient Jewish land (Abbas has said so himself).

You may not know it, but you are definitely repeating someone's narrative, you simply do not know that you are doing it.

No...Abbas didn't say that. That's a frequently misquoted statement and taken out of context:

“In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli — civilian or soldier — on our lands,” Abbas said following a meeting with interim Egyptian President Adly Mansour in Cairo.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

<<The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other>>

You have no idea what you are saying in that sentence.

Again, how many Jews living in Gaza or areas A and B of the West Bank?

How many Arab Christians or Muslims living in Israel and Area C or the West Bank?

Yes, I absolutely no what I'm saying.

A lack of recognition of each for the rights the other...

One example would be the continued and even increased settlement building.

When Israel only builds within the existing cities or villages in Areas A and B, as per the Oslo Accords (do you know what the Oslo Accords say?) , and even builds for Arabs who live in those areas, just how is that lacking recognition of the other ?

Tell me of homes built for Jews in Areas A and B?

And also, why do you keep ignoring the lack of Jews in their ancient land of Gaza and TransJordan since 1920, as they were expelled by the Muslims and the British?

The Muslims want to make Judea and Samaria ( where the birth of Judaism was, and where the ancient kingdoms of King David and all the other Kings were rooted) Jewish free.
No Jews will be allowed to live on ancient Jewish land (Abbas has said so himself).

You may not know it, but you are definitely repeating someone's narrative, you simply do not know that you are doing it.

Actually, if you want to be technical about ancient Israel, then Gaza and even Transjordan weren't a vital part of that land. Gaza was ruled by the Philistines, a la Samson and Delilah. As for Transjordan, the tribes of Reuben and Gad took up about half of what is today Jordan. Furthermore, G-d told Moses to ascend Mount Nebo in Jordan and peer across the river to the Holy Land because he would never set foot there. At least part of Jordan were the Lands of Moab and Ammon.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

From your first sentence:
Who are you talking about when you say one cannot right an injustice by creating another?

And to answer your other sentences:
IF the Muslims/Arabs have not been the ones rejecting the Partition in 1947 and all other peace offers put in front of them, which even Arab countries post 2000 thought the Palestinian leaders thought they were crazy to not accept and put an end to the conflict, then who has?

1947 Partition = Rejected by the Palestinians
2000 and 2008 Peace Treaties rejected by the Palestinians
Negotiations = rejected by Abbas
Come to the table to negotiate = rejected by Abbas.


Why are you generalizing without giving specifics as to how things got to the way they are?

All of those required the Palestinians to surrender and cede land.

You are not a Palestinian and therefore have no right to tell the Palestinians not to make concessions for peace. It is thanks to people like you that there is no peace in the Holy Land. Do you think that, as a Jew, it's not difficult for me to see parts of Eretz Yisroel being given away to the Arabs, who have sooo much land and oil already?

 

[teddyearp]

All of the "Israeli" solutions deny the rights of over half of the Palestinians.

And when are you going to post your solution as I asked in post #80? In your own words without any cutting and pasting?

It is just that the Palestinians call for equal rights and the Israelis call for expelling and killing.

I think this is indicative of the moral values of the people involved.

In other words, though you have plenty of vignettes, after numerous polite requests, you refuse to reveal your full solution.

Groan!

 

[Coyote]

I don't think it is that simple.

The Palestinians might be calling for equal rights but many are also unwilling to allow Israeli Jews to remain there in the settlements should that become part of their new state. In other words they are calling for expelling. Likewise...they are and have been killing.

I think it's a mistake to broad brush the moral values of a people in that way - neither the Palestinians nor the Israeli's.

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

From your first sentence:
Who are you talking about when you say one cannot right an injustice by creating another?

The creation of Israel - as a means to redress the horror that the holocaust perpetrated on the Jewish people created another injustice to the people who were displaced or opposed Israel. In the process of it's creation - the Jews,, like the Arabs, utilized terrorism, took land from villagers that fled, refused to allow them to return and made it tremendously difficult for displaced Palestinians to reclaim property (while conversely made it easy for Jews to). So there were injustices there.

But - Israel has formed a state, it's succeeded, it's established law and order, it's thriving in a largely democratic society, it's peaceful other than the conflict with the Palestinians and even there - it's often provoked first. You have generations of people now who have lived there, it's there home, and it's the home of the Middle Eastern Jews for even longer. It's the only place in the world where they aren't persecuted or a minority. That counts for something. You can't uproot people and send them elsewhere (as some call for) and forcing that - exposing all those people to the mercies of those who hate them - dispersing them again would be a crime against humanity and a great injustice. So you aren't going to fix the problem that way.

And to answer your other sentences:
IF the Muslims/Arabs have not been the ones rejecting the Partition in 1947 and all other peace offers put in front of them, which even Arab countries post 2000 thought the Palestinian leaders thought they were crazy to not accept and put an end to the conflict, then who has?

1947 Partition = Rejected by the Palestinians
2000 and 2008 Peace Treaties rejected by the Palestinians
Negotiations = rejected by Abbas
Come to the table to negotiate = rejected by Abbas.


Why are you generalizing without giving specifics as to how things got to the way they are?

Generalizing about what?

 

[Coyote]

This is a difficult topic to discuss because the truth is untenable. Mentioning the truth brings an onslaught name calling and accusations. We will never achieve peace until the core issues are addressed. When the Palestinians, and others, call Israel 1948 occupied Palestine they are correct. No amount of time or political recognition will change that fact.

Israel is a settler colonial project. Both Britain and the Zionists said this regularly during the mandate period. That is what they called it. That is what it was. The facts on the ground confirm it. Nobody can deny it.

Settler colonialism is not an event it is a process that continues to today. Settler colonialism is the removal of the native population and replacing them with another people. We can see this process before our eyes. It is in the news all the time.

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

From your first sentence:
Who are you talking about when you say one cannot right an injustice by creating another?

And to answer your other sentences:
IF the Muslims/Arabs have not been the ones rejecting the Partition in 1947 and all other peace offers put in front of them, which even Arab countries post 2000 thought the Palestinian leaders thought they were crazy to not accept and put an end to the conflict, then who has?

1947 Partition = Rejected by the Palestinians
2000 and 2008 Peace Treaties rejected by the Palestinians
Negotiations = rejected by Abbas
Come to the table to negotiate = rejected by Abbas.


Why are you generalizing without giving specifics as to how things got to the way they are?

All of those required the Palestinians to surrender and cede land.

When you say that - do you accept ANY land as rightfully that of Israel?

 

[Shusha]

Both peoples have suffered injustices. Both peoples have rights. There is no point in re-hashing the obvious. What are the solutions?

Here we are discussing a solution wherein both peoples are allotted territory and self-governance. If you don't think that should happen, you should be on the other thread. If you do think that should happen. -- how should it happen?

There have already been some great suggestions from several posters. And those posters are largely in agreement. Maybe that's all there is to it and we've actually found the two state solution.

 

[Coyote]

I've always felt that a good solution is going to involve land swaps. I'm going to go back and look at foreveryoung's posts.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The problem is, 1948 is 70 years ago. And in the meantime a state has been established. You can't unwind it.

There is also another aspect that is ignored. It's inaccurate to claim it's just the Jews colonizing a foreign land. It isn't just that. It's a bit of land, where multiple peoples live and have a heritage. During the Jewish nationalistic struggle for that bit of land, there was an Arab nationalistic struggle for that same land. But there seems to be a deliberate ignoring of the fact that the Jews were just as much the local people. There are arguments about immigration. You have one side claiming the Palestinians are all foreign squatters and the other claiming the Jews are all foreign invaders. But the truth is - both are native, and both sustained an influx of immigration. Going against the "colonial settlement" model is the fact that Jews were also indiginous. There have always been Jewish people there, even though many more migrated in. Now if you are going to complain about that then why aren't you complaining the Arabs who immigrated into the area and are just as foreign as the Europeans? And - why don't you acknowledge that the Jews also have a right to be there and have as much right to form a state in that period of time as the Palestinian Arabs did?

I don't think your going to fix the problem by "unwinding" history and you can't fix an injustice by creating more injustices. You have to take what is there as it is now and work with it. That means Israel, as a Jewish state, is not going to disappear. It's established, it's proven it can run and hold a state, even though it most certainly has serious issues regarding equality and justice, it's far more democratic, and has a far higher standard of human rights and religious freedom then any of it's neighboring states. So fixing the problem should not be ending Israel's existence as a Jewish state because the Jews have as much right as the Palestinians to be there and to form a state.

You are giving Israel's narrative. Are you saying that we should let injustice slide? What justification can you give for that. Israel has created a massive problem and you want to let them off the hook. Why?

No...I'm not giving Israel's narrative.

But you can not right an injustice by creating a another - right? So how do you go about fixing it? And in fairness - who is it Israel that created a massive problem? Seems to me it took TWO to tango since at multiple points the Arabs could have accepted that Israel would have a state and they could develop a state alongside. The lack of peace is complicated by a lack of recognition of each for the rights of the other. It's by no means one sided.

From your first sentence:
Who are you talking about when you say one cannot right an injustice by creating another?

And to answer your other sentences:
IF the Muslims/Arabs have not been the ones rejecting the Partition in 1947 and all other peace offers put in front of them, which even Arab countries post 2000 thought the Palestinian leaders thought they were crazy to not accept and put an end to the conflict, then who has?

1947 Partition = Rejected by the Palestinians
2000 and 2008 Peace Treaties rejected by the Palestinians
Negotiations = rejected by Abbas
Come to the table to negotiate = rejected by Abbas.


Why are you generalizing without giving specifics as to how things got to the way they are?

All of those required the Palestinians to surrender and cede land.

When you say that - do you accept ANY land as rightfully that of Israel?

I can find no evidence that Israel has ever legally acquired any land.

Just a lot of smoke and say so.

 

[Shusha]

Now, how do we unwind this and fix the problem?

Since you are the only one on this thread to frame the problem this way, you are the only one who can answer this question.

So, what do you suggest? Removing the "settler colonists"?

Of course not.

Well?! What ARE you suggesting? Why are you even participating on this thread if you won't address the topic?