Trump Deal - details, reactions and development on the ground

[Indeependent]

You don't need a standing army to wage war or attack. Witness ISIS and Al Queda (not that I am comparing their actions to the Palestinian) - but the point is attack and defense isn't dependent on the traditional army.

The Palestinians were virtually all unarmed civilians attacked by Israel's military that included WWII military equipment.

The Palis were never attacked; perhaps that’s why there are 6 million of them at the moment.

yes. They were. The conflicts surrounding the end of the mandate included Jewish militias attacking Palestinians just as included Palestinians. But it is a pointless argument that accomplishes nothing today

Abbas' leadership is not very strong and he is not very popular.

I think parts of the Arab world is maturing in the area of world wide geo-politics and economies. I think they realize making peace with Israel is in everyone's best interest. IMO only. But seeing the refugees from the conflicts in Iraq and Syria, the growth of much more sophisticated terrorist ideologies that are destabilizing to themselves. I don't know...

Exactly. But Abbas is likely to be replaced by someone MORE extremist, rather than less. Which leaves us, what? Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, West Bank on the one side and Israel, Saudia Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Oman on the other and a WHOLE LOT of wishy washy. I'd hope Egypt and Jordan are smart enough well, not to be stupid.

All good questions...

You got a Link for those attacks?

I'm sure they've been discussed in one of the historical threads involving the Mandate era, that are pinned to the top of forum. Otherwise I'm not going to derail this into a discussion that belongs in one of those threads.

Translation...
There are Links on Arab sites.
Making any statements regarding undue aggression on either side is detailing the Thread and should be backed up with proof.

Perhaps we should establish a rule as to a past date that can be referenced and no earlier date in time.

 

[Indeependent]

I'm going to add something here...it's not really a "few harmless rockets" - it's the fact that any state has obligation to protect it's citizens, and those rockets do go into civilian areas and have caused damage and injury.

So, a de-militarized Palestine is a no-go, then, right?

BTW, I am investing considerable time expressing myself as precisely as I can. I said harmless rockets "by Israel's standards" for a purpose.

Is there any Arab nation that is demilitarized?

 

[Coyote]

I'm going to add something here...it's not really a "few harmless rockets" - it's the fact that any state has obligation to protect it's citizens, and those rockets do go into civilian areas and have caused damage and injury.

So, a de-militarized Palestine is a no-go, then, right?

BTW, I am investing considerable time expressing myself as precisely as I can. I said harmless rockets "by Israel's standards" for a purpose.

Well...I view it like this: as part of the Marshall plan we required the demilitarization of Japan. In fact much of the Marshal plan was also an economic development plan as well. The Palestinians have not been able to to stop aggressive attacks on Israel's civilian populace. While I don't consider Israel a total angel in this, much of their military actions against the Palestinians have been in response to these attacks which no other state would be expected to tolerate. I don't think it would be fair to expect Israel to accept a militerized state as part of the deal, particularly one within it's own borders, until that state has shown itself capable of showing it can stop these attacks and then some, given the long history of conflict. I don't think any other nation would be expected to tolerate that.

The more I think of it...the more I think we should view the peace plan, somewhat, along the lines of the martial plan.

 

[Olde Europe]

Moreover, have you ever asked yourself why Israel, despite overwhelming military and intelligence superiority, and several large-scale, mass murderous military incursions, couldn't get a ragtag militia in a tiny speck of land under control? If you did, what was your answer?

They HAD a fairly good start at their OWN policing, but the Pali Civil war destroyed that progress as well... I wouldn't picture daily life in the WB as "out of control".. Israel has no plans to INTERN them in a walled encampment with no quality of life as Pali refugees in Syria and Lebanon now live.. Life is OK. It's just not on THEIR TERMS as it ought to be..

And reasonable people (even in Israel or like me) are TRYING to normalize their lives and get them out of limbo.

DEMANDING chit from EITHER side is not gonna chit done..

So, that's a long-winded, meandering way of saying you have just as much of an answer to that question as I have, and it has been stumping me for quite some time.

Given they have the wherewithal to accomplish pretty much everything, including all of Gaza under tight surveillance 24/7, including the ability to go in and out without suffering much by way of casualties, my suggestion would be, they aren't really trying. Assuming it's true (which would be quite a stretch), do you have an answer as to why that would be?

 

[Coyote]

2. The Old City of Jerusalem and the holy places.

While I feel slightly bad saying so, I think this is also a non-starter. Israel just can't let the Old City and the holy places go. The Trump Plan is absolutely correct in stating that the Old City and the holy and archaeological places are doing very well under the stewardship of Israel. I can't say that we can expect that of the Palestinians.

That said, some sort of fast-track for Muslims to visit the Muslim shrines would be the right thing to do.

I think the Trump Plan got this one right. But I know this is going to be a hard place for the Arabs to give up.

I would agree that as long as the status quo for Muslims and access to the Temple Mount is retained (but I would agree to allowing Jewish prayer ) then I think it should remain in Israeli control. They have shown a respect for the archeology, religious significance for multiple faiths for decades now, and that is important. They have done nothing to make me think that would change so I think it's time for trust.

Is it difficult for Muslims to visit muslim shrines in that area?

 

[Indeependent]

2. The Old City of Jerusalem and the holy places.

While I feel slightly bad saying so, I think this is also a non-starter. Israel just can't let the Old City and the holy places go. The Trump Plan is absolutely correct in stating that the Old City and the holy and archaeological places are doing very well under the stewardship of Israel. I can't say that we can expect that of the Palestinians.

That said, some sort of fast-track for Muslims to visit the Muslim shrines would be the right thing to do.

I think the Trump Plan got this one right. But I know this is going to be a hard place for the Arabs to give up.

I would agree that as long as the status quo for Muslims and access to the Temple Mount is retained (but I would agree to allowing Jewish prayer ) then I think it should remain in Israeli control. They have shown a respect for the archeology, religious significance for multiple faiths for decades now, and that is important. They have done nothing to make me think that would change so I think it's time for trust.

Is it difficult for Muslims to visit muslim shrines in that area?

The Muslims have destroyed most of the artifacts on the Temple mount.
The play soccer up there.
That’s not showing respect.

 

[Indeependent]

2. The Old City of Jerusalem and the holy places.

While I feel slightly bad saying so, I think this is also a non-starter. Israel just can't let the Old City and the holy places go. The Trump Plan is absolutely correct in stating that the Old City and the holy and archaeological places are doing very well under the stewardship of Israel. I can't say that we can expect that of the Palestinians.

That said, some sort of fast-track for Muslims to visit the Muslim shrines would be the right thing to do.

I think the Trump Plan got this one right. But I know this is going to be a hard place for the Arabs to give up.

I would agree that as long as the status quo for Muslims and access to the Temple Mount is retained (but I would agree to allowing Jewish prayer ) then I think it should remain in Israeli control. They have shown a respect for the archeology, religious significance for multiple faiths for decades now, and that is important. They have done nothing to make me think that would change so I think it's time for trust.

Is it difficult for Muslims to visit muslim shrines in that area?

Muslims have complete religious freedom in Israel.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Palestinians know from previous experience, that making a deal with Israel'i jews is the same as making a deal with the devil. ..

You lie. The Palestinians never made any deal with me.

 

[Indeependent]

Palestinians know from previous experience, that making a deal with Israel'i jews is the same as making a deal with the devil. ..

So have you asked the Syrians to give back Lebanon yet?

 

[flacaltenn]

So, that's a long-winded, meandering way of saying you have just as much of an answer to that question as I have, and it has been stumping me for quite some time.

I actually have a plan.. From a couple decades of following the disappointment and violence attempts at peace.. It's been in writing for about a year.. And I'm shopping it around a bit...

It's not so much of "comprehensive" plan as it is a better way to LOOK at the long standing cultural, political, economic reasons why there's NO peace plan after 53 years.. New IDEAS that break the impasse of just drawing lines on a map... A better expectation for how Palis might WANT to select their leadership... A better plan that INCLUDES the connectivity for free travel and trade.. A way to involve Jordan and Egypt in the process and have them "provide land swaps" to toss into the mix in exchange for faster, better TRADE in the entire region.

Basically, I want to make the Israelis and Palis so DAMN content and prosperous that they start living for the FUTURE... Cause prosperous and HAPPY people don't shoot each other with rockets or start Civil wars and Intifadas....

 

[Olde Europe]

Well...I view it like this: as part of the Marshall plan we required the demilitarization of Japan. In fact much of the Marshal plan was also an economic development plan as well. The Palestinians have not been able to to stop aggressive attacks on Israel's civilian populace. While I don't consider Israel a total angel in this, much of their military actions against the Palestinians have been in response to these attacks which no other state would be expected to tolerate. I don't think it would be fair to expect Israel to accept a militerized state as part of the deal, particularly one within it's own borders, until that state has shown itself capable of showing it can stop these attacks and then some, given the long history of conflict. I don't think any other nation would be expected to tolerate that.

The more I think of it...the more I think we should view the peace plan, somewhat, along the lines of the martial plan.

With all due respect, Coyote, the Israeli population is suffering the attacks Israel is causing by acts of war, including the Gaza blockade. Then turning around and arguing for more indignities visited upon Palestinians doesn't look very compelling where I sit. A Marshall Plan would be fine, but it is no replacement for a population determined to achieve self-determination, and that's why this atrocity of a Trump plan will fail.

Israel, it should be clearly stated, also isn't interested in solving this, except in case annexation of the West Bank and the Golan Heights while getting out as many Arabs as they can, counts as a "solution". As long as there is a conflict brewing, with occasional eruptions of violence, Israel can claim they are merely defending themselves, and squeeze the Palestinians some more. In case there is a solution, the Israeli land grab is to stop. Isn't that obvious?

 

[Coyote]

Well...I view it like this: as part of the Marshall plan we required the demilitarization of Japan. In fact much of the Marshal plan was also an economic development plan as well. The Palestinians have not been able to to stop aggressive attacks on Israel's civilian populace. While I don't consider Israel a total angel in this, much of their military actions against the Palestinians have been in response to these attacks which no other state would be expected to tolerate. I don't think it would be fair to expect Israel to accept a militerized state as part of the deal, particularly one within it's own borders, until that state has shown itself capable of showing it can stop these attacks and then some, given the long history of conflict. I don't think any other nation would be expected to tolerate that.

The more I think of it...the more I think we should view the peace plan, somewhat, along the lines of the martial plan.

With all due respect, Coyote, the Israeli population is suffering the attacks Israel is causing by acts of war, including the Gaza blockade. Then turning around and arguing for more indignities visited upon Palestinians doesn't look very compelling where I sit. A Marshall Plan would be fine, but it is no replacement for a population determined to achieve self-determination, and that's why this atrocity of a Trump plan will fail.

Israel, it should be clearly stated, also isn't interested in solving this, except in case annexation of the West Bank and the Golan Heights while getting out as many Arabs as they can, counts as a "solution". As long as there is a conflict brewing, with occasional eruptions of violence, Israel can claim they are merely defending themselves, and squeeze the Palestinians some more. In case there is a solution, the Israeli land grab is to stop. Isn't that obvious?

I'm curious - what would you propose? Because in my view - it's not a one sided problem.

Israel has suffered attacks even when it's adhered to peace plan strategies of the past. Prior to the blockade.

What is a win win solution for both sides?

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

Well...I view it like this: as part of the Marshall plan we required the demilitarization of Japan. In fact much of the Marshal plan was also an economic development plan as well. The Palestinians have not been able to to stop aggressive attacks on Israel's civilian populace. While I don't consider Israel a total angel in this, much of their military actions against the Palestinians have been in response to these attacks which no other state would be expected to tolerate. I don't think it would be fair to expect Israel to accept a militerized state as part of the deal, particularly one within it's own borders, until that state has shown itself capable of showing it can stop these attacks and then some, given the long history of conflict. I don't think any other nation would be expected to tolerate that.

The more I think of it...the more I think we should view the peace plan, somewhat, along the lines of the martial plan.

With all due respect, Coyote, the Israeli population is suffering the attacks Israel is causing by acts of war, including the Gaza blockade. Then turning around and arguing for more indignities visited upon Palestinians doesn't look very compelling where I sit. A Marshall Plan would be fine, but it is no replacement for a population determined to achieve self-determination, and that's why this atrocity of a Trump plan will fail.

Israel, it should be clearly stated, also isn't interested in solving this, except in case annexation of the West Bank and the Golan Heights while getting out as many Arabs as they can, counts as a "solution". As long as there is a conflict brewing, with occasional eruptions of violence, Israel can claim they are merely defending themselves, and squeeze the Palestinians some more. In case there is a solution, the Israeli land grab is to stop. Isn't that obvious?

Israel is causing? You have got to be kidding me. Palestinians are controlled by vile terrorists. They are victims just like the North Korean people.

 

[Olde Europe]

A way to involve Jordan and Egypt in the process and have them "provide land swaps" to toss into the mix in exchange for faster, better TRADE in the entire region.

Yeah, I've seen you propose your plan. Since these "swaps" probably are either uninhabitable desert, or inhabited, how many Egyptians and Jordanians are you willing to displace to make room for Palestinians?

 

[Coyote]

A way to involve Jordan and Egypt in the process and have them "provide land swaps" to toss into the mix in exchange for faster, better TRADE in the entire region.

Yeah, I've seen you propose your plan. Since these "swaps" probably are either uninhabitable desert, or inhabited, how many Egyptians and Jordanians are you willing to displace to make room for Palestinians?

That certainly is an issue.

 

[Olde Europe]

I'm curious - what would you propose? Because in my view - it's not a one sided problem.

Israel has suffered attacks even when it's adhered to peace plan strategies of the past. Prior to the blockade.

What is a win win solution for both sides?

I am not proposing anything other than Israel follow international law. That's my one issue in all this brouhaha. And no, a continuing occupation, increasing settlement activity, the abuse and oppression of the West Bank and the blockade of Gaza is not what I would expect from a civilized state. Palestinians and Israelis, by their overwhelming majorities, have a common interest, living in peace together, or at least side-by-side. The criminal, mass-murderous land-grabbers in Israel, and the terrorist factions in Palestine are the problem. You are absolutely, perfectly right in proposing to look for consent with Palestinians. That requires, however, consistently to show respect for them, for their aspirations, and for the law, on the other side, including their desire to determine their own fate as one people. In case that emerges, support for terrorists will dry up.

 

[flacaltenn]

A way to involve Jordan and Egypt in the process and have them "provide land swaps" to toss into the mix in exchange for faster, better TRADE in the entire region.

Yeah, I've seen you propose your plan. Since these "swaps" probably are either uninhabitable desert, or inhabited, how many Egyptians and Jordanians are you willing to displace to make room for Palestinians?

well if they are "unhabitable desert" there won't be many human beings or camels to displace.. LOL....

Actually Haifa and Tel Aviv were "uninhabitable" sand dunes when they were started 100 years ago by the Israelis. Have you seen the pics??? Whole new cities appeared in the span of 25 years or so...

And the Jordanians and Egyptians have a MOTIVATION for ending their "occupation" of their Pali refugees now living in far WORSE conditions than in the West Bank.. So if you refer that "Highway map" I posted, it passes thru and into Egypt and Jordan and NEW settlement areas THERE could prosper just like towns BOOMED in the middle of freakin nowhere when Eisenhower thunk up the Interstate highway system here...

Chunks of land along that route on THEIR side of border would RE-CONNECT even more Palestinians than just the ones in the occupied WB.. And with the transportation, warehousing, re-distribution opportunities, I'm SURE MANY Palis stuck OUTSIDE of Israel would opt to be "founding fathers" of NEW Pali Emirates or City States...

Leaving their old make-shift camps to Egypt and Jordan to re-purpose that land as they wish...

 

[toastman]

Well...I view it like this: as part of the Marshall plan we required the demilitarization of Japan. In fact much of the Marshal plan was also an economic development plan as well. The Palestinians have not been able to to stop aggressive attacks on Israel's civilian populace. While I don't consider Israel a total angel in this, much of their military actions against the Palestinians have been in response to these attacks which no other state would be expected to tolerate. I don't think it would be fair to expect Israel to accept a militerized state as part of the deal, particularly one within it's own borders, until that state has shown itself capable of showing it can stop these attacks and then some, given the long history of conflict. I don't think any other nation would be expected to tolerate that.

The more I think of it...the more I think we should view the peace plan, somewhat, along the lines of the martial plan.

With all due respect, Coyote, the Israeli population is suffering the attacks Israel is causing by acts of war, including the Gaza blockade. Then turning around and arguing for more indignities visited upon Palestinians doesn't look very compelling where I sit. A Marshall Plan would be fine, but it is no replacement for a population determined to achieve self-determination, and that's why this atrocity of a Trump plan will fail.

Israel, it should be clearly stated, also isn't interested in solving this, except in case annexation of the West Bank and the Golan Heights while getting out as many Arabs as they can, counts as a "solution". As long as there is a conflict brewing, with occasional eruptions of violence, Israel can claim they are merely defending themselves, and squeeze the Palestinians some more. In case there is a solution, the Israeli land grab is to stop. Isn't that obvious?

Israel has NO reason to attack Palestinians other than to defend Israel from further attacks or to retaliate.

 

[Shusha]

Is it difficult for Muslims to visit muslim shrines in that area?

To be fair, I've never tried to visit the Muslim shrines as a Muslim. So...I'm not sure I'm qualified to answer that. Grin.

When I was in Israel two years ago, if I wanted to go to the Kotel, I walked through the Old City (easily accessible by taxi if you aren't lucky enough to be staying there) and down the stairs and through a simple security screen (bag on conveyor belt, walk through scanner) and I was there with free access to the Wall for as long as I wanted to be there. Free to touch the Wall, free to pray, free to watch people with glittering "JC loves you"! T-shirts take selfies. The Kotel is available 24 hours a day. I went down at noon, or at 9:00 at night or at 4:00 in the morning and it was the same. There was never a sense of being out of place, let alone unwelcome. And that seemed to be the experience of everyone. There were people there from all over the world, it was obvious. And people who lived in the Old City who came daily or weekly, also obvious. And everyone in between.

You can walk from the Jewish Quarter of the Old City to the Christian Quarter to the Muslim Quarter, and its pretty much the same in terms of welcome and its perfectly safe and no one will accost you other than aggressively wanting your tourist $$. And, as a woman alone, some of the shopkeepers are a little say, over enthusiastic, but the majority are lovely, lovely, warm people who will bring you strong coffee and ask about life in Canada. (Though I will say that at some places in the Muslim Quarter I did wish I had brought a head scarf.)

I didn't visit the Temple Mount on my last trip. I will say it seems to be a chore to do so. Have to be in line early in the morning on certain days. And limited numbers are allowed up (if you are not Muslim). I would like to attempt it on my next trip (which is in two weeks YAY!) but like my last work trip there, its work, not sure I will have the chance.

Anyway, not really what you asked, but I thought it was important to (long-windedly) share my experience.

I *think* that its really, really easy for Muslims to access the Temple Mount. Basically, the same experience as I just explained above with visiting the Kotel. You go through a gate and maybe a simple security check and then you are there.

The difference is that the Kotel experience is the same for everyone. The Temple Mount experience has different rules for Muslims and non-Muslims.

If I have this wrong or misunderstand this, please anyone let me know.

 

[Shusha]

Given they have the wherewithal to accomplish pretty much everything, including all of Gaza under tight surveillance 24/7, including the ability to go in and out without suffering much by way of casualties, ...

Wait, what gives you the impression that Israel is NOT doing this?!