Source to JPost: Egypt 'caves' to Israeli pressure, pulling UN resolution

[montelatici]

It's fascinating to watch the Kabuki. The U.S. doesn't want to be seen vetoing the resolution, so they blackmail Egypt.

The question is, how does the green light to more settlement building do anything but bring the one-state solution closer to fruition?

No, the question is, how would not building in Judea and Samaria bring a two state solution closer?

The answer is nothing could bring a two state solution closer because there is no political entity among the Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel.

I also do not believe a two-state solution is possible to achieve, for different reasons than you, but the U.S. and the EU keep claiming that they support a two-state solution. So, how can building more settlements possibly make the two-state solution easier to achieve.

Since we both agree it is impossible, Israel's communities in Judea and Samaria are irrelevant to the issue. It's like asking how will eating pancakes help me win the lottery?

I don't think you understand the point. While I believe the two-state solution is not possible, the U.S., the EU and the UN claim to support it as the only route to peace and the continued existence of Israel as a Jewish state. So, unless the parties have changed their support to a one-state solution, I don't understand why those same parties would want to support the building of more settlements.

Well, the US has changed its position on a two state solution, and a one state solution is a non starter, with the incoming Trump administration, but even if it hadn't, there is no logical connection between Israel's communities in Judea and Samaria and a final status agreement. They are simply irrelevant to any path to peace.

There is only a one state solution now. Whether the Jews implement Apartheid or perform ethnic cleansing of non-Jews is up to them.

 

[toomuchtime_]

No, the question is, how would not building in Judea and Samaria bring a two state solution closer?

The answer is nothing could bring a two state solution closer because there is no political entity among the Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel.

I also do not believe a two-state solution is possible to achieve, for different reasons than you, but the U.S. and the EU keep claiming that they support a two-state solution. So, how can building more settlements possibly make the two-state solution easier to achieve.

Since we both agree it is impossible, Israel's communities in Judea and Samaria are irrelevant to the issue. It's like asking how will eating pancakes help me win the lottery?

I don't think you understand the point. While I believe the two-state solution is not possible, the U.S., the EU and the UN claim to support it as the only route to peace and the continued existence of Israel as a Jewish state. So, unless the parties have changed their support to a one-state solution, I don't understand why those same parties would want to support the building of more settlements.

Well, the US has changed its position on a two state solution, and a one state solution is a non starter, with the incoming Trump administration, but even if it hadn't, there is no logical connection between Israel's communities in Judea and Samaria and a final status agreement. They are simply irrelevant to any path to peace.

There is only a one state solution now. Whether the Jews implement Apartheid or perform ethnic cleansing of non-Jews is up to them.

lol Now you are not making any sense. Sometimes it's necessary to think beyond the slogans to make sense.

 

[montelatici]

What slogans? Just fact. You can't believe that keeping millions of people under military occupation for the long term will work.

 

[toomuchtime_]

What slogans? Just fact. You can't believe that keeping millions of people under military occupation for the long term will work.

Millions of people are not under military occupation. There you go again, just drooling out slogans without giving any thought to the facts.

 

[fncceo]

What a sad world we live in

Sucks to be you .. the world I live in is FABULOUS!

 

[montelatici]

What slogans? Just fact. You can't believe that keeping millions of people under military occupation for the long term will work.

Millions of people are not under military occupation. There you go again, just drooling out slogans without giving any thought to the facts.

What do you call Israeli rule over the occupied territories? Civil occupation? LOL

 

[toomuchtime_]

What slogans? Just fact. You can't believe that keeping millions of people under military occupation for the long term will work.

Millions of people are not under military occupation. There you go again, just drooling out slogans without giving any thought to the facts.

What do you call Israeli rule over the occupied territories? Civil occupation? LOL

All but about 100,000 Palestinians live in areas A and B which are under Palestinian Authority "rule" or Hamas "rule". You keep ignoring the facts on the ground.

 

[fncceo]

You keep ignoring the facts on the ground.

It's REALLY hard to hate Jews if you listen to pesky things like facts.

Antisemitism is and always has been based on lies.

 

[Coyote]

It's fascinating to watch the Kabuki. The U.S. doesn't want to be seen vetoing the resolution, so they blackmail Egypt.

The question is, how does the green light to more settlement building do anything but bring the one-state solution closer to fruition?

No, the question is, how would not building in Judea and Samaria bring a two state solution closer?

The answer is nothing could bring a two state solution closer because there is no political entity among the Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel.

I also do not believe a two-state solution is possible to achieve, for different reasons than you, but the U.S. and the EU keep claiming that they support a two-state solution. So, how can building more settlements possibly make the two-state solution easier to achieve.

Since we both agree it is impossible, Israel's communities in Judea and Samaria are irrelevant to the issue. It's like asking how will eating pancakes help me win the lottery?

If two state solution is impossible then what do you propose?

 

[toomuchtime_]

It's fascinating to watch the Kabuki. The U.S. doesn't want to be seen vetoing the resolution, so they blackmail Egypt.

The question is, how does the green light to more settlement building do anything but bring the one-state solution closer to fruition?

No, the question is, how would not building in Judea and Samaria bring a two state solution closer?

The answer is nothing could bring a two state solution closer because there is no political entity among the Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel.

I also do not believe a two-state solution is possible to achieve, for different reasons than you, but the U.S. and the EU keep claiming that they support a two-state solution. So, how can building more settlements possibly make the two-state solution easier to achieve.

Since we both agree it is impossible, Israel's communities in Judea and Samaria are irrelevant to the issue. It's like asking how will eating pancakes help me win the lottery?

If two state solution is impossible then what do you propose?

I propose the Palestinians work on their internal differences to try to develop a government that can credibly offer peace to Israel and in the meantime work with Israel to improve conditions for their people.

 

[Shusha]

All but about 100,000 Palestinians live in areas A and B which are under Palestinian Authority "rule" or Hamas "rule". You keep ignoring the facts on the ground.

I think its even lower than that if you count the spill-over of built up areas from B into C, which are technically in C, but for all practical purposes are under the control of the PA. I thought I read that only 50,000 Palestinians live entirely in Area C, mostly in small villages.

 

[Coyote]

It's fascinating to watch the Kabuki. The U.S. doesn't want to be seen vetoing the resolution, so they blackmail Egypt.

The question is, how does the green light to more settlement building do anything but bring the one-state solution closer to fruition?

No, the question is, how would not building in Judea and Samaria bring a two state solution closer?

The answer is nothing could bring a two state solution closer because there is no political entity among the Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel.

I also do not believe a two-state solution is possible to achieve, for different reasons than you, but the U.S. and the EU keep claiming that they support a two-state solution. So, how can building more settlements possibly make the two-state solution easier to achieve.

Since we both agree it is impossible, Israel's communities in Judea and Samaria are irrelevant to the issue. It's like asking how will eating pancakes help me win the lottery?

If two state solution is impossible then what do you propose?

I propose the Palestinians work on their internal differences to try to develop a government that can credibly offer peace to Israel and in the meantime work with Israel to improve conditions for their people.

That is one good proposition but avoids a permanent solution. Is there any value in pursuing a two state solution? The new US ambassador supports one state though there are no details on what it would look like. Palestinian support for a two state solution is waning.

 

[Shusha]

If two state solution is impossible then what do you propose?

How can we entice Jordan into taking Areas A and B?

My thinking is that no one is going to like it at first and there will be a great big stormy tantrum. But ...

• it will (theoretically) end the "occupation" and the conflict with Israel
• international borders can be established (re-established) by treaty and "settlements" are thus no longer an issue
• it gives Palestine a chance to grow economically with the support of the Muslim ME nations
• it sets up the Palestinians to be seeking independence from a "friendly" nation rather than one in conflict
• it sets up Israel and Jordan to cement their ally status, which is mutually beneficial
• Palestine can be set up as a semi-independent Province, with more powers granted to them if they reach certain milestones, and if they want it eventual sovereignty
  
• It could cement Jordanian control over Muslim holy places

The real question with this scenario is whether or not Jordan is willing to work with Israel, rather than against her.

 

[Coyote]

If two state solution is impossible then what do you propose?

How can we entice Jordan into taking Areas A and B?

My thinking is that no one is going to like it at first and there will be a great big stormy tantrum. But ...

• it will (theoretically) end the "occupation" and the conflict with Israel
• international borders can be established (re-established) by treaty and "settlements" are thus no longer an issue
• it gives Palestine a chance to grow economically with the support of the Muslim ME nations
• it sets up the Palestinians to be seeking independence from a "friendly" nation rather than one in conflict
• it sets up Israel and Jordan to cement their ally status, which is mutually beneficial
• Palestine can be set up as a semi-independent Province, with more powers granted to them if they reach certain milestones, and if they want it eventual sovereignty
  
• It could cement Jordanian control over Muslim holy places

The real question with this scenario is whether or not Jordan is willing to work with Israel, rather than against her.

That's certainly thinking outside the box!

 

[Coyote]

If two state solution is impossible then what do you propose?

How can we entice Jordan into taking Areas A and B?

My thinking is that no one is going to like it at first and there will be a great big stormy tantrum. But ...

• it will (theoretically) end the "occupation" and the conflict with Israel
• international borders can be established (re-established) by treaty and "settlements" are thus no longer an issue
• it gives Palestine a chance to grow economically with the support of the Muslim ME nations
• it sets up the Palestinians to be seeking independence from a "friendly" nation rather than one in conflict
• it sets up Israel and Jordan to cement their ally status, which is mutually beneficial
• Palestine can be set up as a semi-independent Province, with more powers granted to them if they reach certain milestones, and if they want it eventual sovereignty
  
• It could cement Jordanian control over Muslim holy places

The real question with this scenario is whether or not Jordan is willing to work with Israel, rather than against her.

You know what though...when I look at a map I don't see how it's possible...https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/maps/oslo2000.gif

 

[toomuchtime_]

No, the question is, how would not building in Judea and Samaria bring a two state solution closer?

The answer is nothing could bring a two state solution closer because there is no political entity among the Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel.

I also do not believe a two-state solution is possible to achieve, for different reasons than you, but the U.S. and the EU keep claiming that they support a two-state solution. So, how can building more settlements possibly make the two-state solution easier to achieve.

Since we both agree it is impossible, Israel's communities in Judea and Samaria are irrelevant to the issue. It's like asking how will eating pancakes help me win the lottery?

If two state solution is impossible then what do you propose?

I propose the Palestinians work on their internal differences to try to develop a government that can credibly offer peace to Israel and in the meantime work with Israel to improve conditions for their people.

That is one good proposition but avoids a permanent solution. Is there any value in pursuing a two state solution? The new US ambassador supports one state though there are no details on what it would look like. Palestinian support for a two state solution is waning.

There can be no permanent solution until the Palestinians form a government that can credibly offer peace to Israel and that is not going to happen for the foreseeable future, so the best thing they can do until then is try to cooperate with Israel to improve living conditions under the status quo. The new US ambassador does not support a one state solution. It was the idiot, Kerry, who tried to make people believe that a one state solution was the only alternative to a two state solution, but the fact is the Palestinians are not organized to handle any kind of a state now and will not be in the foreseeable future.

 

[toomuchtime_]

If two state solution is impossible then what do you propose?

How can we entice Jordan into taking Areas A and B?

My thinking is that no one is going to like it at first and there will be a great big stormy tantrum. But ...

• it will (theoretically) end the "occupation" and the conflict with Israel
• international borders can be established (re-established) by treaty and "settlements" are thus no longer an issue
• it gives Palestine a chance to grow economically with the support of the Muslim ME nations
• it sets up the Palestinians to be seeking independence from a "friendly" nation rather than one in conflict
• it sets up Israel and Jordan to cement their ally status, which is mutually beneficial
• Palestine can be set up as a semi-independent Province, with more powers granted to them if they reach certain milestones, and if they want it eventual sovereignty
  
• It could cement Jordanian control over Muslim holy places

The real question with this scenario is whether or not Jordan is willing to work with Israel, rather than against her.

Jordan would not accept them just as Egypt would not accept Gaza.

 

[toomuchtime_]

All but about 100,000 Palestinians live in areas A and B which are under Palestinian Authority "rule" or Hamas "rule". You keep ignoring the facts on the ground.

I think its even lower than that if you count the spill-over of built up areas from B into C, which are technically in C, but for all practical purposes are under the control of the PA. I thought I read that only 50,000 Palestinians live entirely in Area C, mostly in small villages.

I have also read 50,000 and I have read 50,000 to 100,000 so I chose the higher number to avoid being drawn into a squabble about the number which would have nothing to do with the point I was trying to make.

 

[Phoenall]

Egypt was afraid of retaliation, which Israel is good at. So they can just go ahead and keep stealing land and kicking Palestinians out . What a sad world we live in.

What land have they stolen ?

 

[Phoenall]

It's fascinating to watch the Kabuki. The U.S. doesn't want to be seen vetoing the resolution, so they blackmail Egypt.

The question is, how does the green light to more settlement building do anything but bring the one-state solution closer to fruition?

No, the question is, how would not building in Judea and Samaria bring a two state solution closer?

The answer is nothing could bring a two state solution closer because there is no political entity among the Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel.

I also do not believe a two-state solution is possible to achieve, for different reasons than you, but the U.S. and the EU keep claiming that they support a two-state solution. So, how can building more settlements possibly make the two-state solution easier to achieve.

Because they are built on Jewish land, or are you denying the Jews rights to their land now ?