Pre-Conditions

[patrickcaturday]

There are lots of things that I don't understand, but when it comes to the Israeli Palestian conflict this is one of the most puzzeling. If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations an idea that I wholehartedly ( sp ) agree with then why in the next breath do they set preconditions such as;

1 ) there must be no deviding of Jerusalem and it MUST BE A jEWISH CITY
2 ) we will not accept negotiations based upon the 1967 borders as established by the Israel Supreme Court
3 ) there will be no negotiations concerning the RIGHT TO TRTURN

I am serious about this, if anyone can give me any insights about these things I would appreiciate ( sp ) it !!!

 

[Lipush]

Sorry but I didn't get, what exactly is the question.

 

[MJB12741]

Not too bright, are you Patrick? When Israel makes peace offerings, the Palestinians thank Israel with jihads. When Israel builds a security fence so the Palestinians can remain in Israel, the Palestinians call it an aparthied wall. When Israel grants them their own Jew free Gaza for nothing in return, Israel is rewarded with rocket missiles.

Hey Patrick, how about Israel gives the Palestinians all of the West Bank for a Palestinian State with Jerusalem as its capitol. And Israel returns to the 67 borders. And Israel allows all the Palestinian refugees to return. Can you imagine how eternally thankful to Israel the noble, peace loving, life loving Palestinians would be? Wouldn't that be wonderful for a lasting peace?

Consider the facts that history has taught us. Jordan massacred about 20,000 Palestinians during Black September & bingo, the one & only lastoing peace from Palestinians. When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

There are lots of things that I don't understand, but when it comes to the Israeli Palestian conflict this is one of the most puzzeling. If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations an idea that I wholehartedly ( sp ) agree with then why in the next breath do they set preconditions such as;

1 ) there must be no deviding of Jerusalem and it MUST BE A jEWISH CITY
2 ) we will not accept negotiations based upon the 1967 borders as established by the Israel Supreme Court
3 ) there will be no negotiations concerning the RIGHT TO TRTURN

I am serious about this, if anyone can give me any insights about these things I would appreiciate ( sp ) it !!!

 

[RoccoR]

patrickcaturday, et al,

The use of pre-conditions, as a tool in setting the format for direct peace negotiations, is a form of indirect negotiation in and by itself. Consider it like a qualifying heat, in which a preliminary contest for the opening strategy and agenda is determined; positioning to enter the final contest.

There are lots of things that I don't understand, but when it comes to the Israeli Palestian conflict this is one of the most puzzeling. If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations an idea that I wholehartedly ( sp ) agree with then why in the next breath do they set preconditions such as;

1 ) there must be no deviding of Jerusalem and it MUST BE A jEWISH CITY
2 ) we will not accept negotiations based upon the 1967 borders as established by the Israel Supreme Court
3 ) there will be no negotiations concerning the RIGHT TO TRTURN

I am serious about this, if anyone can give me any insights about these things I would appreiciate ( sp ) it !!!

(COMMENT)

The pre-conditions, listed above, is a time altering strategy that attempts to turn the clock back to a position that is favorable.

• In the case of Jerusalem, the attempt is to bring it as close to the original intent of the Partition Plan where Jerusalem was "internationalized" --- neither Jewish or Arab.

• In the case of the border points, the attempt is to bring it as close to the Green Line (1949) Armistice Arrangement as possible.

• The "right of return" is such a complex issue, that neither side wants to deal with it. It too, is a post-1949 condition.

Such conditions might limit the war reparation, restitution and settlements in equity.

It will be interesting to see how it works-out. The strategies for Negotiations are nearly a science unto themselves. What is always unclear to the outsider is what the expectations are when entering the contest, and how far each is willing to compromise on their expected final outcomes. But in every negotiation, each side must, at the outset, show they are willing to offer something of value in exchange for something of value. Otherwise, it is not really a negotiated settlement.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Lipush]

The right of return is a big no-no.

The right of return speaks of the Palestinians "returning" to Israel.

If there is a two states solution, then there will be a Palestine, and and Israel which is filled up with Palestinian refugees (because Israel is so f***ing ENLIGHTENED! that it would not tell them to sod off).

So what will be the result?

A Palestine which is Yuden Frei, and an Israel with no Jewish mijority whatsoever.

=

Israel's demise.

=

The world happy.




NOT GONNA HAPPEN!

 

[MJB12741]

As listed by Patrick, here is Israel's reponse to the Palestinian pre conditions on Israel for peace talks. Patrick is so right in stating he is against any pre conditions for peace talks. And so am I.

1 ) there must be no deviding of Jerusalem and it MUST BE A jEWISH CITY
2 ) we will not accept negotiations based upon the 1967 borders as established by the Israel Supreme Court
3 ) there will be no negotiations concerning the RIGHT TO TRTURN

 

[toastman]

I still can't believe some people here think that the Israeli government will allow Israel to be flooded with tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees, many of whom are likely very hostile towards Israel and who want revenge. I mean really. What planet are some if these Palestinian supporters living in.

Dividing Jerusalem and returning to the '67 borders are also a pipe dream, but Right of Return is definitely the least likely to happen of the three

 

[MJB12741]

Jordan sure acted wisely in rejecting Israel's offer to return the entire West Bank to them after the 67 war so they could sacrifice this piece of land to dump their Palestinians on Israel to deal with. Who knows Palestinians better than Jordan? And Jordan will not grant their Palestinians any right of return.

I still can't believe some people here think that the Israeli government will allow Israel to be flooded with tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees, many of whom are likely very hostile towards Israel and who want revenge. I mean really. What planet are some if these Palestinian supporters living in.

Dividing Jerusalem and returning to the '67 borders are also a pipe dream, but Right of Return is definitely the least likely to happen of the three

 

[toastman]

Jordan sure acted wisely in rejecting Israel's offer to return the entire West Bank to them after the 67 war so they could sacrifice this piece of land to dump their Palestinians on Israel to deal with. Who knows Palestinians better than Jordan? And Jordan will not grant their Palestinians any right of return.

I still can't believe some people here think that the Israeli government will allow Israel to be flooded with tens of thousands of Palestinian refugees, many of whom are likely very hostile towards Israel and who want revenge. I mean really. What planet are some if these Palestinian supporters living in.

Dividing Jerusalem and returning to the '67 borders are also a pipe dream, but Right of Return is definitely the least likely to happen of the three

Jordan treats Palestinian refugees like TRASH. Yet not a single word of protest from Sherri, Seal, Pbel etc..... Whenever I bring it up, their response is "But this is the I/P forum, not the Israel/Jordan forum!"

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kj3abntez3A]The Humiliation of Palestinian Refugees - part 2 Jordan - YouTube[/ame]

Watch this video

 

[Coyote]

Not too bright, are you Patrick? When Israel makes peace offerings, the Palestinians thank Israel with jihads. When Israel builds a security fence so the Palestinians can remain in Israel, the Palestinians call it an aparthied wall. When Israel grants them their own Jew free Gaza for nothing in return, Israel is rewarded with rocket missiles.

Hey Patrick, how about Israel gives the Palestinians all of the West Bank for a Palestinian State with Jerusalem as its capitol. And Israel returns to the 67 borders. And Israel allows all the Palestinian refugees to return. Can you imagine how eternally thankful to Israel the noble, peace loving, life loving Palestinians would be? Wouldn't that be wonderful for a lasting peace?

Consider the facts that history has taught us. Jordan massacred about 20,000 Palestinians during Black September & bingo, the one & only lastoing peace from Palestinians. When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

There are lots of things that I don't understand, but when it comes to the Israeli Palestian conflict this is one of the most puzzeling. If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations an idea that I wholehartedly ( sp ) agree with then why in the next breath do they set preconditions such as;

1 ) there must be no deviding of Jerusalem and it MUST BE A jEWISH CITY
2 ) we will not accept negotiations based upon the 1967 borders as established by the Israel Supreme Court
3 ) there will be no negotiations concerning the RIGHT TO TRTURN

I am serious about this, if anyone can give me any insights about these things I would appreiciate ( sp ) it !!!

Your "LET THEIR BE PEACE ALREADY" falters when, after reading your lengthy post it utterly fails to answer Patricks question. Perhaps you are too busy reading into it your own agenda.

His question was simple - If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations then why in the next breath do they set preconditions?

Or is your reply simply an affirmation of a pleasing double standard?

 

[MJB12741]

I repeat, Israel DID NOT set these pre conditions listed by Patrick. As Patrick posted, he gave us Israel's replies to the pre conditions demanded by the Palestinians for peace negotiations.

Not too bright, are you Patrick? When Israel makes peace offerings, the Palestinians thank Israel with jihads. When Israel builds a security fence so the Palestinians can remain in Israel, the Palestinians call it an aparthied wall. When Israel grants them their own Jew free Gaza for nothing in return, Israel is rewarded with rocket missiles.

Hey Patrick, how about Israel gives the Palestinians all of the West Bank for a Palestinian State with Jerusalem as its capitol. And Israel returns to the 67 borders. And Israel allows all the Palestinian refugees to return. Can you imagine how eternally thankful to Israel the noble, peace loving, life loving Palestinians would be? Wouldn't that be wonderful for a lasting peace?

Consider the facts that history has taught us. Jordan massacred about 20,000 Palestinians during Black September & bingo, the one & only lastoing peace from Palestinians. When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

There are lots of things that I don't understand, but when it comes to the Israeli Palestian conflict this is one of the most puzzeling. If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations an idea that I wholehartedly ( sp ) agree with then why in the next breath do they set preconditions such as;

1 ) there must be no deviding of Jerusalem and it MUST BE A jEWISH CITY
2 ) we will not accept negotiations based upon the 1967 borders as established by the Israel Supreme Court
3 ) there will be no negotiations concerning the RIGHT TO TRTURN

I am serious about this, if anyone can give me any insights about these things I would appreiciate ( sp ) it !!!

Your "LET THEIR BE PEACE ALREADY" falters when, after reading your lengthy post it utterly fails to answer Patricks question. Perhaps you are too busy reading into it your own agenda.

His question was simple - If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations then why in the next breath do they set preconditions?

Or is your reply simply an affirmation of a pleasing double standard?

 

[Coyote]

I repeat, Israel DID NOT set these pre conditions listed by Patrick. As Patrick posted, he gave us Israel's replies to the pre conditions demanded by the Palestinians for peace negotiations.

But they are pre-conditions - yes or no?

 

[Bloodrock44]

I repeat, Israel DID NOT set these pre conditions listed by Patrick. As Patrick posted, he gave us Israel's replies to the pre conditions demanded by the Palestinians for peace negotiations.

But they are pre-conditions - yes or no?

I believe what Israel is saying is they won't allow the Palestinians to set their pre-conditions.

 

[Coyote]

I repeat, Israel DID NOT set these pre conditions listed by Patrick. As Patrick posted, he gave us Israel's replies to the pre conditions demanded by the Palestinians for peace negotiations.

But they are pre-conditions - yes or no?

I believe what Israel is saying is they won't allow the Palestinians to set their pre-conditions.

Ah, I see - so those are responses to pre-conditions, not pre-conditions themselves? If so, I misunderstood.

 

[toastman]

But they are pre-conditions - yes or no?

I believe what Israel is saying is they won't allow the Palestinians to set their pre-conditions.

Ah, I see - so those are responses to pre-conditions, not pre-conditions themselves? If so, I misunderstood.

They are pre pre-conditions maybe ??? lol

 

[Hossfly]

Not too bright, are you Patrick? When Israel makes peace offerings, the Palestinians thank Israel with jihads. When Israel builds a security fence so the Palestinians can remain in Israel, the Palestinians call it an aparthied wall. When Israel grants them their own Jew free Gaza for nothing in return, Israel is rewarded with rocket missiles.

Hey Patrick, how about Israel gives the Palestinians all of the West Bank for a Palestinian State with Jerusalem as its capitol. And Israel returns to the 67 borders. And Israel allows all the Palestinian refugees to return. Can you imagine how eternally thankful to Israel the noble, peace loving, life loving Palestinians would be? Wouldn't that be wonderful for a lasting peace?

Consider the facts that history has taught us. Jordan massacred about 20,000 Palestinians during Black September & bingo, the one & only lastoing peace from Palestinians. When will Israel ever learn? LET THERE BE PEACE ALREADY!

There are lots of things that I don't understand, but when it comes to the Israeli Palestian conflict this is one of the most puzzeling. If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations an idea that I wholehartedly ( sp ) agree with then why in the next breath do they set preconditions such as;

1 ) there must be no deviding of Jerusalem and it MUST BE A jEWISH CITY
2 ) we will not accept negotiations based upon the 1967 borders as established by the Israel Supreme Court
3 ) there will be no negotiations concerning the RIGHT TO TRTURN

I am serious about this, if anyone can give me any insights about these things I would appreiciate ( sp ) it !!!

Your "LET THEIR BE PEACE ALREADY" falters when, after reading your lengthy post it utterly fails to answer Patricks question. Perhaps you are too busy reading into it your own agenda.

His question was simple - If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations then why in the next breath do they set preconditions?

Or is your reply simply an affirmation of a pleasing double standard?

Israel didn't set any pre-conditions. They are saying those pre-conditions set by Palestine won't be considered in peace negotiatons.

 

[Connery]

Violative posts cleaned

The Administration and the Moderation Team are serious in their efforts to have a civil discourse as it pertains to the OP and any further posts which violate Zone 2 rules will be viewed in a more serious manner where infractions will be administered on a case by case basis.

 

[patrickcaturday]

patrickcaturday, et al,

The use of pre-conditions, as a tool in setting the format for direct peace negotiations, is a form of indirect negotiation in and by itself. Consider it like a qualifying heat, in which a preliminary contest for the opening strategy and agenda is determined; positioning to enter the final contest.

There are lots of things that I don't understand, but when it comes to the Israeli Palestian conflict this is one of the most puzzeling. If Israel insists that there be no preconditions to peace negotiations an idea that I wholehartedly ( sp ) agree with then why in the next breath do they set preconditions such as;

1 ) there must be no deviding of Jerusalem and it MUST BE A jEWISH CITY
2 ) we will not accept negotiations based upon the 1967 borders as established by the Israel Supreme Court
3 ) there will be no negotiations concerning the RIGHT TO TRTURN

I am serious about this, if anyone can give me any insights about these things I would appreiciate ( sp ) it !!!

(COMMENT)

The pre-conditions, listed above, is a time altering strategy that attempts to turn the clock back to a position that is favorable.

• In the case of Jerusalem, the attempt is to bring it as close to the original intent of the Partition Plan where Jerusalem was "internationalized" --- neither Jewish or Arab.

• In the case of the border points, the attempt is to bring it as close to the Green Line (1949) Armistice Arrangement as possible.

• The "right of return" is such a complex issue, that neither side wants to deal with it. It too, is a post-1949 condition.

Such conditions might limit the war reparation, restitution and settlements in equity.

It will be interesting to see how it works-out. The strategies for Negotiations are nearly a science unto themselves. What is always unclear to the outsider is what the expectations are when entering the contest, and how far each is willing to compromise on their expected final outcomes. But in every negotiation, each side must, at the outset, show they are willing to offer something of value in exchange for something of value. Otherwise, it is not really a negotiated settlement.

Most Respectfully,
R

I find your responce to be non-responsive to say the least and to at the worst to be an attempt to excuse the Israelis from there responcibilities to open negotiations in an open and honest manner. Taking your points one by one;

1 ) It amazes me that one fails to follow the history of the plans for Jerusalem. The first time in the UN that it was brought up that Jerusalem be come an international city was in resolution 181 and Israel agreed to it. It is interesting to note that Israel had no control of the city at this time. The second time that it was brought up was in UN resolution 273 and once again, Israel with no control of the city agreed to it. But since the 67 war Israel has had complete control of the city they have not taken any steps to implement their agreements, indeed they have taken and continue to take steps to cement their complete control of the city, by destroying Arab sectors of the city and building infastructur which further isolates the Arab communities.
2 ) It must be remembered that an armistice agreement is only a prelude to a final agreement that would be reached in a peace settlement.
3 ) Once again I refer you to UN resolutions 181 and 273 where Israel agreed to RIGHT OF RETURN.

It seems to me that, to use your analogy, if it is a race then Israel wants the Palestinians to run it with one foot encased in a cement bucket !!!

 

[RoccoR]

patrickcaturday, et al,

Actually I agree on all your points.

patrickcaturday, et al,

The use of pre-conditions, as a tool in setting the format for direct peace negotiations, is a form of indirect negotiation in and by itself. Consider it like a qualifying heat, in which a preliminary contest for the opening strategy and agenda is determined; positioning to enter the final contest.

(COMMENT)

The pre-conditions, listed above, is a time altering strategy that attempts to turn the clock back to a position that is favorable.

• In the case of Jerusalem, the attempt is to bring it as close to the original intent of the Partition Plan where Jerusalem was "internationalized" --- neither Jewish or Arab.

• In the case of the border points, the attempt is to bring it as close to the Green Line (1949) Armistice Arrangement as possible.

• The "right of return" is such a complex issue, that neither side wants to deal with it. It too, is a post-1949 condition.

Such conditions might limit the war reparation, restitution and settlements in equity.

It will be interesting to see how it works-out. The strategies for Negotiations are nearly a science unto themselves. What is always unclear to the outsider is what the expectations are when entering the contest, and how far each is willing to compromise on their expected final outcomes. But in every negotiation, each side must, at the outset, show they are willing to offer something of value in exchange for something of value. Otherwise, it is not really a negotiated settlement.

Most Respectfully,
R

I find your responce to be non-responsive to say the least and to at the worst to be an attempt to excuse the Israelis from there responcibilities to open negotiations in an open and honest manner. Taking your points one by one;

1 ) It amazes me that one fails to follow the history of the plans for Jerusalem. The first time in the UN that it was brought up that Jerusalem be come an international city was in resolution 181 and Israel agreed to it. It is interesting to note that Israel had no control of the city at this time. The second time that it was brought up was in UN resolution 273 and once again, Israel with no control of the city agreed to it. But since the 67 war Israel has had complete control of the city they have not taken any steps to implement their agreements, indeed they have taken and continue to take steps to cement their complete control of the city, by destroying Arab sectors of the city and building infastructur which further isolates the Arab communities.
2 ) It must be remembered that an armistice agreement is only a prelude to a final agreement that would be reached in a peace settlement.
3 ) Once again I refer you to UN resolutions 181 and 273 where Israel agreed to RIGHT OF RETURN.

It seems to me that, to use your analogy, if it is a race then Israel wants the Palestinians to run it with one foot encased in a cement bucket !!!

(COMMENT)

I just look at it from the opposite side of the field.

I'm Sicilian. We would put both your feet in the cement bucket. (It is just our way.)

• The Emirate of Sicily was an Islamic State (an emirate) on the Island of Sicily during the Arab Occupation, from 831 to 1072. Way back in our linage, we all have some Arab blood; although we don't talk about it. My Grandmother spoke Arabic with a Moroccan accent.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[ForeverYoung436]

patrickcaturday, et al,

The use of pre-conditions, as a tool in setting the format for direct peace negotiations, is a form of indirect negotiation in and by itself. Consider it like a qualifying heat, in which a preliminary contest for the opening strategy and agenda is determined; positioning to enter the final contest.


(COMMENT)

The pre-conditions, listed above, is a time altering strategy that attempts to turn the clock back to a position that is favorable.

• In the case of Jerusalem, the attempt is to bring it as close to the original intent of the Partition Plan where Jerusalem was "internationalized" --- neither Jewish or Arab.

• In the case of the border points, the attempt is to bring it as close to the Green Line (1949) Armistice Arrangement as possible.

• The "right of return" is such a complex issue, that neither side wants to deal with it. It too, is a post-1949 condition.

Such conditions might limit the war reparation, restitution and settlements in equity.

It will be interesting to see how it works-out. The strategies for Negotiations are nearly a science unto themselves. What is always unclear to the outsider is what the expectations are when entering the contest, and how far each is willing to compromise on their expected final outcomes. But in every negotiation, each side must, at the outset, show they are willing to offer something of value in exchange for something of value. Otherwise, it is not really a negotiated settlement.

Most Respectfully,
R

I find your responce to be non-responsive to say the least and to at the worst to be an attempt to excuse the Israelis from there responcibilities to open negotiations in an open and honest manner. Taking your points one by one;

1 ) It amazes me that one fails to follow the history of the plans for Jerusalem. The first time in the UN that it was brought up that Jerusalem be come an international city was in resolution 181 and Israel agreed to it. It is interesting to note that Israel had no control of the city at this time. The second time that it was brought up was in UN resolution 273 and once again, Israel with no control of the city agreed to it. But since the 67 war Israel has had complete control of the city they have not taken any steps to implement their agreements, indeed they have taken and continue to take steps to cement their complete control of the city, by destroying Arab sectors of the city and building infastructur which further isolates the Arab communities.
2 ) It must be remembered that an armistice agreement is only a prelude to a final agreement that would be reached in a peace settlement.
3 ) Once again I refer you to UN resolutions 181 and 273 where Israel agreed to RIGHT OF RETURN.

It seems to me that, to use your analogy, if it is a race then Israel wants the Palestinians to run it with one foot encased in a cement bucket !!!

1) As far as Jerusalem being under international control, that ship has passed. Even the Palestinians speak of East Jerusalem being their capital, and not about international control. Jerusalem consists of 3 sections. West Jerusalem is home to the Knesset and most ministries. The Old City is one square mile and home to many religious sites. East Jerusalem is mainly Arab, though there used to be Jewish neighborhoods there, like Shimon Hatzaddik, which were destroyed by the Arabs. The Arabs also destroyed many ancient synogogues when they were in control, and used Jewish gravestones as latrines and to pave roads. Jews were denied access to the Western Wall as well. In contrast, Israel has always provided access to all shrines for all faiths. In short, the Old City of Jerusalem is the heart-and-soul of Jews everywhere. A feasible solution would be to let the Palestinians to run their neighborhoods in East Jerusalem and even call it their capital, but minus the Old City.

2) There are two main problems with returning to the 1967 borders. The first is that of security. After Israel quit Lebanon and Gaza, they were repaid with rockets being rained on them in both those fronts. Giving up the West Bank would make Israel only 9 miles wide in some points, and vulnerable to such attacks. The other problem is that close to a half-million Israelis have settled in the West Bank. Solutions might include any Palestinian state being without a military, and being forbidden to sign alliances with countries hostile to Israel, such as Iran. There would also need to be land swaps to accomodate the settler blocs.

3) Whereas Israel agreed to accomodate a token amount of "refugees", a swamp of them would, of course, destroy Israel. There were also Jewish refugees from Arab countries into Israel but they were, of course, absorbed by Israel. Financial compensation would be the best solution in this regard.