What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote

[Spartacactcus]

Tomorrow peoples , it's getting on so will pick this up again tomorrow

 

[Mindful]

US releases map of Israel/Palestine under peace deal
Borders of Israel, proposed state of Palestine under 'Deal of the Century' revealed.

Arutz Sheva Staff, 28/01/20 20:52

the map


US releases map of Israel/Palestine under peace deal

 

[ForeverYoung436]

US releases map of Israel/Palestine under peace deal
Borders of Israel, proposed state of Palestine under 'Deal of the Century' revealed.

Arutz Sheva Staff, 28/01/20 20:52

the map


US releases map of Israel/Palestine under peace deal

The Palestinians should grab this while they can.

 

[Coyote]

;';lp

All of the "settlements" ARE in Israel. The Palestinians can have self-determination when they accept peace, recognize Israel, yes, as the state for the Jewish people, put down their weapons, and just develop their state.

They can start by accepting one of the peace visions on offer. What the hell are they holding out for?

The settlements are in Occupied Palestinian Territory and thus illegal as per the ICJ opinion on them

Imo they are " holding out " for a genuine self determination and resisting a deal that would lock in forever with everyone whistling and looking the other way , most of the worst aspects of life under occupation in a "state" that is really a state lite and by some distance a state lite

There is no such thing as "Palestinian territory", occupied or not. The "settlements" are in territory under full Israeli sovereignty whose final status will not be determined until a Peace Treaty is signed between Israel and a future State of Palestine. And you have consistently ignored this.

"Genuine self-determination" is a vague and foolish sound byte with no objective definition. (Perfect for rejecting anything and everything as an excuse to continue to be belligerent). Be specific. What do the Arab Palestinians NEED for "genuine self-determination"?

A recognized state? Check. Continguity? Check. Direct access between WB and Gaza? Check. Direct access to Jordan and Egypt? Check. Ports? Check. Access to holy places? Check. Choice of citizenship and remaining where they live? Check. Economic prosperity? Check. Better medical care, better education, better access to water, a new university, an airport, a history museum, free trade, improved technology, better life expectancy, lower infant mortality rate, release of their prisoners? Check. And check. And freaking check.

What are they NOT getting with a peace deal like this?

Any say in the process.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

What a load of bullshit! Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time? Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape. Did Israel take the peace process seriously? Absolutely. Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously. Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza. What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace? Absolutely nothing. In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.

You talk of " bullshit " then come out with a whole load of it in the above diatribe. The reference to rape is an old hasbara mainstay and is always, always misrepresented as it has been here. It's an appeal , and an irrational one at that , to the emotional in the face of a lack of a proper reesponse. If you need it explaining I will gladly do so and believe me you won't look good after it.

Both publics took the Oslo Process seriously at first. You probably wouldn't know about the Palestinian support for it in the early years because you don't want to know what they think nor care about it. Both sides have stopped their support for it because it was a BS process and once they realized that all hell let loose again.

On peace with the other Arabs

Egypt

Anwar Sadat informed the UN Jarring mission that unless the Israelis left the occupied Sinai he would be forced to attack them and remove them himself. This is 2 years prior to the 1973 Egyptian war of territorial liberation. So the land that Israel " gave up " was sovereign Egyptian territory it was occupying and had no title to

Jordan

The Jordanian-Israel peace treaty saw Israel " give back " an insignificant amount of land, basically a man made island with a power station on it , that was formerly Jordanian sovereign territory.

Gaza was never " given back " either. At least if given back means they can run it as they like seeing as it is now their territory. They took out the illegal settlers , moved the guards from the inside to the perimeter fence and opened the largest open ait prison in the world.

Image seperated from reality

I don't think the Palestinians ever took Oslo seriously. The more land Israel gave up on the West Bank, the more suicide bombings there were. Bereaved Israelis shouted at Peres, "Look at what your 'peace process' gave us!"

I'm glad you find suicide bombings funny, Tinmore. Must be nice not to have human emotions.

 

[toomuchtime_]

What a load of bullshit! Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time? Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape. Did Israel take the peace process seriously? Absolutely. Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously. Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza. What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace? Absolutely nothing. In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.

You talk of " bullshit " then come out with a whole load of it in the above diatribe. The reference to rape is an old hasbara mainstay and is always, always misrepresented as it has been here. It's an appeal , and an irrational one at that , to the emotional in the face of a lack of a proper reesponse. If you need it explaining I will gladly do so and believe me you won't look good after it.

Both publics took the Oslo Process seriously at first. You probably wouldn't know about the Palestinian support for it in the early years because you don't want to know what they think nor care about it. Both sides have stopped their support for it because it was a BS process and once they realized that all hell let loose again.

On peace with the other Arabs

Egypt

Anwar Sadat informed the UN Jarring mission that unless the Israelis left the occupied Sinai he would be forced to attack them and remove them himself. This is 2 years prior to the 1973 Egyptian war of territorial liberation. So the land that Israel " gave up " was sovereign Egyptian territory it was occupying and had no title to

Jordan

The Jordanian-Israel peace treaty saw Israel " give back " an insignificant amount of land, basically a man made island with a power station on it , that was formerly Jordanian sovereign territory.

Gaza was never " given back " either. At least if given back means they can run it as they like seeing as it is now their territory. They took out the illegal settlers , moved the guards from the inside to the perimeter fence and opened the largest open ait prison in the world.

Image seperated from reality

It appears there is nothing to you but bullshit, and dull witted bullshit to boot. You argued that because Israelis aspired to more land they were never serious about peace, and were always scheming to get more land and never give any up, essentially saying you just can't trust a Jew.

The fact is that in every negotiation, with Arab nations or with the so called Palestinians, Israel has offered to give up land for peace, and have followed through in good faith when It found a credible partner for peace.
Egypt
Sadat was a better politician than he was a general, and when he did attack in 1973, he was soundly defeated. Israel broke through the anti aircraft barrier the Russians had constructed for Egypt, captured 500 Soviet tanks and tons of ammunition and Israeli tanks were rolling toward Alexandria and Cairo and were only stopped by pressure from the US. The few Egyptian troops left in Sinai could have been destroyed at any time, but under pressure from the US Israel allowed them to remain while occupying significant Egyptian territory across the Canal in order to leave the door open for peace talks. Was Sinai sovereign Egyptian territory? In modern times Sinai was not a part of Egypt until the British attached it their Egyptian colony in 1906 to better secure the Canal. That being the case, it is not at all clear that Egypt had a better right to it than Israel. Nevertheless, Israel was always serious about peace and security and gave up Sinai despite all the pain it caused to secure peace.

Jordan

Before 1948, Jordan was known as Trans Jordan, meaning across the Jordan River, and held no land west of the river, however, in a war of aggression in 1948 Jordan captured Judea and Samaria and held it from 1948 to 1967 despite having no legal right to it. Only Pakistan and the UK recognized Jordan's right to the land, so Jordan had no legitimate claim on the land when negotiating peace with Israel, but again, Israel was so determined to make peace with the Arabs that it agreed to allow Jordan to keep title to some of the land adjacent to the river that it had developed during its illegal occupation of the land. That's how serious Israel was about making peace.

Oslo

While it is true that both Israelis and Palestinians supported Oslo at first, at the end, when Barak offered all of Gaza, 93% of Judea and Samaria, PA jurisdiction over Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem and Arafat said, no, Israelis still supported the peace process, but the Palestinians turned to violence and launched the second intifada, and it was the intifada that convinced Israelis that it as impossible to negotiate peace with people who turned to violence whenever they don't get everything they want. Israel was very serious about peace with the Palestinians and was willing to make great sacrifices to secure it, but the Palestinians were clearly not serious about peace since they were unwilling to make any compromises to secure it.

Gaza

Sharon gave Gaza to the PA with the understanding that Abbas would maintain peace there, but despite the PA forces outnumbering Hamas and the other terrorists, the PA quickly lost Gaza to Hamas and there was no peace. This was the final nail in the coffin of a negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians since it showed that there was no political entity among the Palestinians that could credibly offer peace to Israel.

 

[Shusha]

;';lp

All of the "settlements" ARE in Israel. The Palestinians can have self-determination when they accept peace, recognize Israel, yes, as the state for the Jewish people, put down their weapons, and just develop their state.

They can start by accepting one of the peace visions on offer. What the hell are they holding out for?

The settlements are in Occupied Palestinian Territory and thus illegal as per the ICJ opinion on them

Imo they are " holding out " for a genuine self determination and resisting a deal that would lock in forever with everyone whistling and looking the other way , most of the worst aspects of life under occupation in a "state" that is really a state lite and by some distance a state lite

There is no such thing as "Palestinian territory", occupied or not. The "settlements" are in territory under full Israeli sovereignty whose final status will not be determined until a Peace Treaty is signed between Israel and a future State of Palestine. And you have consistently ignored this.

"Genuine self-determination" is a vague and foolish sound byte with no objective definition. (Perfect for rejecting anything and everything as an excuse to continue to be belligerent). Be specific. What do the Arab Palestinians NEED for "genuine self-determination"?

A recognized state? Check. Continguity? Check. Direct access between WB and Gaza? Check. Direct access to Jordan and Egypt? Check. Ports? Check. Access to holy places? Check. Choice of citizenship and remaining where they live? Check. Economic prosperity? Check. Better medical care, better education, better access to water, a new university, an airport, a history museum, free trade, improved technology, better life expectancy, lower infant mortality rate, release of their prisoners? Check. And check. And freaking check.

What are they NOT getting with a peace deal like this?

Any say in the process.

They keep refusing a seat at the table. I think part of the point of this Vision is to point out, “Look Israel is going to take what she needs for security and the safety of her citizens so you can either get ALL sorts of goodies or you can keep walking away from it all, which is it going to be?”

 

[Shusha]

Also, this is not an actual Peace Treaty. It’s just a Potential plan. The Palestinians have plenty of time to make counter-offers.

What do they need to make it work for them?

 

[toomuchtime_]

;';lp

All of the "settlements" ARE in Israel. The Palestinians can have self-determination when they accept peace, recognize Israel, yes, as the state for the Jewish people, put down their weapons, and just develop their state.

They can start by accepting one of the peace visions on offer. What the hell are they holding out for?

The settlements are in Occupied Palestinian Territory and thus illegal as per the ICJ opinion on them

Imo they are " holding out " for a genuine self determination and resisting a deal that would lock in forever with everyone whistling and looking the other way , most of the worst aspects of life under occupation in a "state" that is really a state lite and by some distance a state lite

There is no such thing as "Palestinian territory", occupied or not. The "settlements" are in territory under full Israeli sovereignty whose final status will not be determined until a Peace Treaty is signed between Israel and a future State of Palestine. And you have consistently ignored this.

"Genuine self-determination" is a vague and foolish sound byte with no objective definition. (Perfect for rejecting anything and everything as an excuse to continue to be belligerent). Be specific. What do the Arab Palestinians NEED for "genuine self-determination"?

A recognized state? Check. Continguity? Check. Direct access between WB and Gaza? Check. Direct access to Jordan and Egypt? Check. Ports? Check. Access to holy places? Check. Choice of citizenship and remaining where they live? Check. Economic prosperity? Check. Better medical care, better education, better access to water, a new university, an airport, a history museum, free trade, improved technology, better life expectancy, lower infant mortality rate, release of their prisoners? Check. And check. And freaking check.

What are they NOT getting with a peace deal like this?

Any say in the process.

They keep refusing a seat at the table. I think part of the point of this Vision is to point out, “Look Israel is going to take what she needs for security and the safety of her citizens so you can either get ALL sorts of goodies or you can keep walking away from it all, which is it going to be?”

Actually, it's not quite that simple. In order to get the goodies, the Palestinians would have to make fundamental reforms such as disarming, ending payments to terrorist, stop demonizing Israel and Jews in their schools, media, mosques, put an end to corruption which is an integral part of how they do business and run their governments and more, however how can they do any of this since there is no Palestinian government that has enough control to make it happen?

 

[toomuchtime_]

Also, this is not an actual Peace Treaty. It’s just a Potential plan. The Palestinians have plenty of time to make counter-offers.

What do they need to make it work for them?

In fact, Netanyahu said he accepted it as a basis for negotiations, not tht he accepted it as written.

 

[Shusha]

;';lp

All of the "settlements" ARE in Israel. The Palestinians can have self-determination when they accept peace, recognize Israel, yes, as the state for the Jewish people, put down their weapons, and just develop their state.

They can start by accepting one of the peace visions on offer. What the hell are they holding out for?

The settlements are in Occupied Palestinian Territory and thus illegal as per the ICJ opinion on them

Imo they are " holding out " for a genuine self determination and resisting a deal that would lock in forever with everyone whistling and looking the other way , most of the worst aspects of life under occupation in a "state" that is really a state lite and by some distance a state lite

There is no such thing as "Palestinian territory", occupied or not. The "settlements" are in territory under full Israeli sovereignty whose final status will not be determined until a Peace Treaty is signed between Israel and a future State of Palestine. And you have consistently ignored this.

"Genuine self-determination" is a vague and foolish sound byte with no objective definition. (Perfect for rejecting anything and everything as an excuse to continue to be belligerent). Be specific. What do the Arab Palestinians NEED for "genuine self-determination"?

A recognized state? Check. Continguity? Check. Direct access between WB and Gaza? Check. Direct access to Jordan and Egypt? Check. Ports? Check. Access to holy places? Check. Choice of citizenship and remaining where they live? Check. Economic prosperity? Check. Better medical care, better education, better access to water, a new university, an airport, a history museum, free trade, improved technology, better life expectancy, lower infant mortality rate, release of their prisoners? Check. And check. And freaking check.

What are they NOT getting with a peace deal like this?

Any say in the process.

They keep refusing a seat at the table. I think part of the point of this Vision is to point out, “Look Israel is going to take what she needs for security and the safety of her citizens so you can either get ALL sorts of goodies or you can keep walking away from it all, which is it going to be?”

Actually, it's not quite that simple. In order to get the goodies, the Palestinians would have to make fundamental reforms such as disarming, ending payments to terrorist, stop demonizing Israel and Jews in their schools, media, mosques, put an end to corruption which is an integral part of how they do business and run their governments and more, however how can they do any of this since there is no Palestinian government that has enough control to make it happen?

Oh for sure.

Its a test. With a four year time limit. Can Palestine meet the requirements to be a peaceful member of the family of nations?

 

[P F Tinmore]

What a load of bullshit! Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time? Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape. Did Israel take the peace process seriously? Absolutely. Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously. Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza. What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace? Absolutely nothing. In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.

You talk of " bullshit " then come out with a whole load of it in the above diatribe. The reference to rape is an old hasbara mainstay and is always, always misrepresented as it has been here. It's an appeal , and an irrational one at that , to the emotional in the face of a lack of a proper reesponse. If you need it explaining I will gladly do so and believe me you won't look good after it.

Both publics took the Oslo Process seriously at first. You probably wouldn't know about the Palestinian support for it in the early years because you don't want to know what they think nor care about it. Both sides have stopped their support for it because it was a BS process and once they realized that all hell let loose again.

On peace with the other Arabs

Egypt

Anwar Sadat informed the UN Jarring mission that unless the Israelis left the occupied Sinai he would be forced to attack them and remove them himself. This is 2 years prior to the 1973 Egyptian war of territorial liberation. So the land that Israel " gave up " was sovereign Egyptian territory it was occupying and had no title to

Jordan

The Jordanian-Israel peace treaty saw Israel " give back " an insignificant amount of land, basically a man made island with a power station on it , that was formerly Jordanian sovereign territory.

Gaza was never " given back " either. At least if given back means they can run it as they like seeing as it is now their territory. They took out the illegal settlers , moved the guards from the inside to the perimeter fence and opened the largest open ait prison in the world.

Image seperated from reality

I don't think the Palestinians ever took Oslo seriously. The more land Israel gave up on the West Bank, the more suicide bombings there were. Bereaved Israelis shouted at Peres, "Look at what your 'peace process' gave us!"

I'm glad you find suicide bombings funny, Tinmore. Must be nice not to have human emotions.

The funny part is Israel giving up anything.

 

[flacaltenn]

What they seem to be endorsing is the two state solution the Israeli state has wanted/worked for since the onset of the Palestinian peace offensive from the 1970's onwards

You just contradicted yourself from one page ago.. What happened to --

If some people are only just now coming to the conclusion that Israel/Zionism never had any intention of honouring a two state soution,

???? Let me help you.. The 2 state solution has ALWAYS the go to model for international plans for peace.. It's been declared dead often by BOTH sides many times but even in 2018 you can find a lot of endorsement for it..

What they seem to be endorsing is the two state solution the Israeli state has wanted/worked for since the onset of the Palestinian peace offensive from the 1970's onwards which is FAR from what the application of international law would afford the Palestinians as the basis to start negotiations.

There was no real "partner in peace" until the PA came into existence and had the PEOPLE'S authority to speak for them.. At the height of the PA, they had their own local security. The Israelis were helping them develop policing and other critical safety infrastructure... Tensions were greatly reduced to the POINT where Israel attempted to EXIT the Gaza completely and TRUST the PA for its administration under their own cognizance.

We all know how that turned out.. Battles between Hamas and Fatah in the streets of ALL the occupied territory and a STILL CONTINUING very cold relationship between Fatah and Hamas in Gaza.. Yasser Arafat was NOT that guy.. SO -- you're time period sucks..

You cannot negotiate for peace without a strong STABLE partner.. That existed for a very brief period of time in the late 90s and early 2000s where this was the case. Not only was every Jew REMOVED from Gaza, but there were plans (encouraged by the intl allies) for Israel to ASSIST in rebuilding the Gaza airport and perhaps improving a deep water port off of Gaza... Like I told you -- THAT mistake is never gonna be repeated again. And I don't blame Israel one bit for the outcome...

The problem for Zionism is and always has been how to acquire the land without the acquiring the Arabs that are living on it.

This is patently false.. I remember when I was in Silicon Valley I went to an exhibit at Stanford about the history of Tel Aviv and Haifa. Stanford had acquired the FOUNDING DOCUMENTS for Tel Aviv and Haifa and a treasure chest of photos showing the DEVELOPMENT of those cities.. Among the documents were the DEEDS TO THE LAND which were SOLD by Arabs to the Zionists. These were largely ABSENTEE landlords and there is some evidence that not ARABS were screwed, but the BRITISH (or even going back to the Ottoman Empire masters) got screwed.. In that those deeds to JEWS violated the process of transferring land.. But that's a problem with the EMPIRES -- not with the Arabs...

THEREFORE -- there were "no Arabs to ACQUIRE" for those principal settlements. These photos and deeds USED to on the web and I linked them to USMB about 10 years ago now.. But since that exhibit got transferred or archived, Stanford took them down and I haven't been able to relocate them.. A trip to Stanford museum next time I'm out there, might rectify that...

Today Israel wants to annexe most of the settlements , have control over the crucial water resources and most valuable land in the WB whilst ridding itself of the burden of the millons of Palestinians there forcing them to live in a series of disconnected and unviable state lite with that being locked into a deal for all time

There is no land more valuable than others. Other than bare hilltops being at a premium.. It's just buildable or NOT buildable land. "MILLIONS OF PALIS" dont live in the settlements yet.. 85% of their population are within the city limits of their 6 or 7 major cities and SAFE from that awful "jewish settler threat" that you whine about... This is why I'm pushing a City State or Emirate autonomy rather than a full-on powerful NATIONAL govt.. The culture and tone of those cities VARIES greatly due to religious and tribal differences.. And an Emirates style Pali govt would give maximum freedom for MOST govt to be local.. MY favorite plan is ALSO a 2 state solution.. Because these city states can have a "loose" Federation Council at the national level to fly the Pali flag, do diplomacy, international representation and all of that.. But it IS NOT under ONE President or Prime Minister and there needs to be no "national consensus" on leadership.. But the Federation council WOULD SPEAK for them on an international level.. It's very much like the UAE governance..

So in this vision of 2 state, the 6 or 7 Pali city centers would ANNEX all the land in their immediate surroundings that contained the MAJORITY of the Pali settlements spread out on a current map like swiss cheese. That takes the AUTONOMOUS PALI TOTAL included in the deal to close to about 95%... The rest of the West Bank would be annexed to Israel.. And the remaining Palis or Israeli remaining in the WRONG areas would be given choices on citizenship... Maybe to include DUAL citizenship options.. All that is not up to outsiders.

Reason for that is --- what are CALLED "Israeli settlements" ALSO includes A LOT of MILITARY outposts that would STILL be required for defense of both ISRAEL and the new Pali entity... And to protect Israel from further invasions, they need access to the border with Jordan and the transit roads in that area,

Bottom line is -- you can put up to 95% of the WB Pali population under self-rule EVEN WITH a map that is not exactly contiguous or drawn with straight lines... But of course there needs to be interconnection BETWEEN cities and to the rest of the world..

It doesn't take a lot of whining about the past or romantic notions that Palis need millions of acres of "farm land" to survive"... It's not the 19th or 20th century any more.. Time for the DEFENDERS of the Palis to realize a WORKABLE plan for their independence...

 

[flacaltenn]

Water IS an issue for both Palis and Jews in the West Bank.. There are some major misconceptions about "battles over water" in WB.. There are some ground water sources in the West Bank hills and Jordan valley but I get the impression it's not reliable enough for MASSIVE density of people.... A MAP of where MOST of the water comes from tells it pretty clearly...

That lake "thingy" is the sea of Galliee and its CLEARLY not on West Bank territory.. So if West Bankers of ANY kind want water in BULK for expansion of housing --- they are gonna be buying from Israel and paying for the overhead of getting it there.. No "fighting" required...

I suppose --- SYRIA and JORDAN could do a similar expansive pipeline from THEIR side of Galliee along Jordan river valley, But the government of Syria has a full plate right now even BEING a country...

This is MY understanding of "water battles" .. I'm not an expert on water sources, but the literature is very clear that most of water comes from where Jesus fished..

 

[Mindful]

Water IS an issue for both Palis and Jews in the West Bank.. There are some major misconceptions about "battles over water" in WB.. There are some ground water sources in the West Bank hills and Jordan valley but I get the impression it's not reliable enough for MASSIVE density of people.... A MAP of where MOST of the water comes from tells it pretty clearly...

That lake "thingy" is the sea of Galliee and its CLEARLY not on West Bank territory.. So if West Bankers of ANY kind want water in BULK for expansion of housing --- they are gonna be buying from Israel and paying for the overhead of getting it there.. No "fighting" required...

I suppose --- SYRIA and JORDAN could do a similar expansive pipeline from THEIR side of Galliee along Jordan river valley, But the government of Syria has a full plate right now even BEING a country...

This is MY understanding of "water battles" .. I'm not an expert on water sources, but the literature is very clear that most of water comes from where Jesus fished..

Israel is leading in desalination technology.

 

[Mindful]

What a load of bullshit! Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time? Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape. Did Israel take the peace process seriously? Absolutely. Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously. Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza. What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace? Absolutely nothing. In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.

You talk of " bullshit " then come out with a whole load of it in the above diatribe. The reference to rape is an old hasbara mainstay and is always, always misrepresented as it has been here. It's an appeal , and an irrational one at that , to the emotional in the face of a lack of a proper reesponse. If you need it explaining I will gladly do so and believe me you won't look good after it.

Both publics took the Oslo Process seriously at first. You probably wouldn't know about the Palestinian support for it in the early years because you don't want to know what they think nor care about it. Both sides have stopped their support for it because it was a BS process and once they realized that all hell let loose again.

On peace with the other Arabs

Egypt

Anwar Sadat informed the UN Jarring mission that unless the Israelis left the occupied Sinai he would be forced to attack them and remove them himself. This is 2 years prior to the 1973 Egyptian war of territorial liberation. So the land that Israel " gave up " was sovereign Egyptian territory it was occupying and had no title to

Jordan

The Jordanian-Israel peace treaty saw Israel " give back " an insignificant amount of land, basically a man made island with a power station on it , that was formerly Jordanian sovereign territory.

Gaza was never " given back " either. At least if given back means they can run it as they like seeing as it is now their territory. They took out the illegal settlers , moved the guards from the inside to the perimeter fence and opened the largest open ait prison in the world.

Image seperated from reality

I don't think the Palestinians ever took Oslo seriously. The more land Israel gave up on the West Bank, the more suicide bombings there were. Bereaved Israelis shouted at Peres, "Look at what your 'peace process' gave us!"

I'm glad you find suicide bombings funny, Tinmore. Must be nice not to have human emotions.

The funny part is Israel giving up anything.

Israel settled for far less, back in the day. They had to.

The population didn't go around blowing things up out of resentment.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

What a load of bullshit! Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time? Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape. Did Israel take the peace process seriously? Absolutely. Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously. Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza. What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace? Absolutely nothing. In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.

You talk of " bullshit " then come out with a whole load of it in the above diatribe. The reference to rape is an old hasbara mainstay and is always, always misrepresented as it has been here. It's an appeal , and an irrational one at that , to the emotional in the face of a lack of a proper reesponse. If you need it explaining I will gladly do so and believe me you won't look good after it.

Both publics took the Oslo Process seriously at first. You probably wouldn't know about the Palestinian support for it in the early years because you don't want to know what they think nor care about it. Both sides have stopped their support for it because it was a BS process and once they realized that all hell let loose again.

On peace with the other Arabs

Egypt

Anwar Sadat informed the UN Jarring mission that unless the Israelis left the occupied Sinai he would be forced to attack them and remove them himself. This is 2 years prior to the 1973 Egyptian war of territorial liberation. So the land that Israel " gave up " was sovereign Egyptian territory it was occupying and had no title to

Jordan

The Jordanian-Israel peace treaty saw Israel " give back " an insignificant amount of land, basically a man made island with a power station on it , that was formerly Jordanian sovereign territory.

Gaza was never " given back " either. At least if given back means they can run it as they like seeing as it is now their territory. They took out the illegal settlers , moved the guards from the inside to the perimeter fence and opened the largest open ait prison in the world.

Image seperated from reality

I don't think the Palestinians ever took Oslo seriously. The more land Israel gave up on the West Bank, the more suicide bombings there were. Bereaved Israelis shouted at Peres, "Look at what your 'peace process' gave us!"

I'm glad you find suicide bombings funny, Tinmore. Must be nice not to have human emotions.

The funny part is Israel giving up anything.

All of the land between the Jordan River and the Med. Sea is what's known as Eretz Yisrael, whether or not it's been formally annexed as of yet.

 

[Olde Europe]

Any say in the process.

As they say, You either have a seat at the table, or you are on the menu.

Did you watch the announcement of the fabulous plan? If not, you should, as it was quite instructive. There was a little interruption near the end when Trump gloated, together with Pompeo, over the "good job" the latter did on the "reporter". Actually, it wasn't much of an interruption, as the whole thing was self-congratulatory gloating over the "good job" they did on Them. Just, while doing another "job" on the reporter, they didn't even try to hide the malignant vulgarity.

 

[Picaro]

It's pure STUPID to let West Bank thugs vote in Israeli elections.

I agree, dismantle the illegal settlements and send them back to Israel where they should be living and let the Palestinians have their rights and self determination

They already decided; Jordan, the Palestinian state, relinquished any claims on the West Bank; it is now open for Jewish settlements with Palestinian consent. the squatters just need to go back to Syria, Egypt, and the other Arab states they came from. Just because Arab racists illegally denied Jews to settle anywhere in the Mandate doesn't mean their settlements are illegitimate, they are in fact completely legal an long overdue. It's clear the illegal squatters Jordan left behind have no interest in developing the land anyway, they just continue to rely on extortion and murder for hire as their primary source of income.

Jordan doesn't decide for the Palestinians what or how their state should be constructed anymore than they should your own state.

Your denial of the people of Palestine, in true Joan Peters style, is acknowledged and rejected. Your own racism against Arabs is noted and rejected too

Your 'Stuck In The Fifties' commie propaganda has already been noted and laughed out of the room. Your 'talking points' are now just a standard joke among anyone who is even moderately informed. Of course Jordan speaks for Palestinians, it is the two state solution. The fact they got themselves expelled from Jordan doesn't make them Israel's responsibility, no matter what Kruschev and Brezshnev decided for you way back when.

 

[Picaro]

What a load of bullshit! Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time? Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape. Did Israel take the peace process seriously? Absolutely. Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously. Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza. What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace? Absolutely nothing. In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.

You talk of " bullshit " then come out with a whole load of it in the above diatribe. The reference to rape is an old hasbara mainstay and is always, always misrepresented as it has been here. It's an appeal , and an irrational one at that , to the emotional in the face of a lack of a proper reesponse. If you need it explaining I will gladly do so and believe me you won't look good after it.

Both publics took the Oslo Process seriously at first. You probably wouldn't know about the Palestinian support for it in the early years because you don't want to know what they think nor care about it. Both sides have stopped their support for it because it was a BS process and once they realized that all hell let loose again.

On peace with the other Arabs

Egypt

Anwar Sadat informed the UN Jarring mission that unless the Israelis left the occupied Sinai he would be forced to attack them and remove them himself. This is 2 years prior to the 1973 Egyptian war of territorial liberation. So the land that Israel " gave up " was sovereign Egyptian territory it was occupying and had no title to

Jordan

The Jordanian-Israel peace treaty saw Israel " give back " an insignificant amount of land, basically a man made island with a power station on it , that was formerly Jordanian sovereign territory.

Gaza was never " given back " either. At least if given back means they can run it as they like seeing as it is now their territory. They took out the illegal settlers , moved the guards from the inside to the perimeter fence and opened the largest open ait prison in the world.

Image seperated from reality

I don't think the Palestinians ever took Oslo seriously. The more land Israel gave up on the West Bank, the more suicide bombings there were. Bereaved Israelis shouted at Peres, "Look at what your 'peace process' gave us!"

You wouldn't know what the Palestinians take seriously because in your book what they think doesn't count for anything. That's why you didn't know that the polls initially showed much Palestinian support for Oslo up until they realized what Oslo actually was and that it didn't even put a stop to the illegal settlement of their land by Israelis etc etc

The suicide bombings came only after the mass shootings of Palestinians during the Second Intifada , months after them in fact. Killings beget further killings and both sides are guilty

Total rubbish. They have relied on terror attacks since the Ottomans were still around. You really have no idea what you're talking about.