Do you there can be a 2 state solution in the Middle East?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I don't see any politically palatable way to divide the west bank. I think we're a generation away from a one state solution being imposed on Israel one the politics in the US shifts

I agree. One state with equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis.

Sounds like you support a de facto Palestinian state. What happens if the Jews don't agree to it? Are you going to force them?

Western powers stole the land from Palestinians and gave it to Israel. The same hand that gave to Israel can take from it.

Not exactly. The entire region was part of the Ottoman Empire, which lasted about 600 years in the region. There was no Lebanon or Syria or Jordan or Palestine. It was the Ottoman Empire. Which was defeated in WWI. Then Versailles. Brief mandates. WWII. The UN. Lots of things. Not particularly different than the dissolution of the Habsburg Empire and all the nations and conflicts that sprung from that.

Except the Palestinians are... special. Not interested in having their own country, which has been offered to them many times. Palestinians always choose conflict, which is why no Arab country is accepting Palestinian refugees. It's a problem.

I thought other Arab countries won't accept Palestinian refugees because they are afraid of letting Hamas in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the US hadn't supported Israel all this time, it would have ceased to exist a long time ago, courtesy of Arab neighbors.

I hope we can curtail support just sufficiently to make the Israeli government wake up and stop crushing Palestinians into oblivion, and bring it to the table for reasonable 2-state talks.

There should be a joint management of Jerusalem and Golan water tables. Because this is really what this is about in that rapidly aridifying region: control of the water.

Israel was able to defend itself from Arab invasions in 1948, 1967, and 1973. That was not the US saving Israel.

The present government sucks. But Israel is a democracy. There have been many governments willing to negotiate with the Palestinians. The problem is the Palestininan side. You tell me. How do you negotiate with Hamas?

Honestly, I think even the Israelis would be happy to turn over Jerusalem to an international authority. It's an extremely unpleasant place. Fanatics everywhere.

Nobody invaded Israel in 1967. Israel attacked first.

Israel made it clear to Egypt that closure of the Straits of Tiran was a cause for war. Egypt closed the strait anyway, moved its army to the border of Israel, and kicked out the UN peacekeepers.

Israel then attacked.

Don’t look like you want war if you don’t want war.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I don't see any politically palatable way to divide the west bank. I think we're a generation away from a one state solution being imposed on Israel one the politics in the US shifts

I agree. One state with equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis.

Sounds like you support a de facto Palestinian state. What happens if the Jews don't agree to it? Are you going to force them?

Western powers stole the land from Palestinians and gave it to Israel. The same hand that gave to Israel can take from it.

Not exactly. The entire region was part of the Ottoman Empire, which lasted about 600 years in the region. There was no Lebanon or Syria or Jordan or Palestine. It was the Ottoman Empire. Which was defeated in WWI. Then Versailles. Brief mandates. WWII. The UN. Lots of things. Not particularly different than the dissolution of the Habsburg Empire and all the nations and conflicts that sprung from that.

Except the Palestinians are... special. Not interested in having their own country, which has been offered to them many times. Palestinians always choose conflict, which is why no Arab country is accepting Palestinian refugees. It's a problem.

I thought other Arab countries won't accept Palestinian refugees because they are afraid of letting Hamas in.

No if they “let them in” they rewarding the Israelis by making the Palestinians disappear from Israel. This would be the dream scenario for Israel. Force the Palestinians to flee by killing them if they stay and cheer when they “finally” becomes someone else problem. Lots and lots of free land! All in the name of a Jewish state!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I don't see any politically palatable way to divide the west bank. I think we're a generation away from a one state solution being imposed on Israel one the politics in the US shifts

I agree. One state with equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis.

Sounds like you support a de facto Palestinian state. What happens if the Jews don't agree to it? Are you going to force them?

Western powers stole the land from Palestinians and gave it to Israel. The same hand that gave to Israel can take from it.

Status quo it is then. Good luck on your jihad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the US hadn't supported Israel all this time, it would have ceased to exist a long time ago, courtesy of Arab neighbors.

I hope we can curtail support just sufficiently to make the Israeli government wake up and stop crushing Palestinians into oblivion, and bring it to the table for reasonable 2-state talks.

There should be a joint management of Jerusalem and Golan water tables. Because this is really what this is about in that rapidly aridifying region: control of the water.

Israel was able to defend itself from Arab invasions in 1948, 1967, and 1973. That was not the US saving Israel.

The present government sucks. But Israel is a democracy. There have been many governments willing to negotiate with the Palestinians. The problem is the Palestininan side. You tell me. How do you negotiate with Hamas?

Honestly, I think even the Israelis would be happy to turn over Jerusalem to an international authority. It's an extremely unpleasant place. Fanatics everywhere.

Nobody invaded Israel in 1967. Israel attacked first.

Israel made it clear to Egypt that closure of the Straits of Tiran was a cause for war. Egypt closed the strait anyway, moved its army to the border of Israel, and kicked out the UN peacekeepers.

Israel then attacked.

Don’t look like you want war if you don’t want war.

Just to be clear, as you have said, Israel invaded Egypt in 1967(and 1956). So when you stated that Israel was invaded in 1967 were you deliberately lying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At some point the Palestinians have to offer something besides we want it all. Otherwise, it’s just perpetual war until one side wins.

Arab Peace Initiative or Saudi peace initiative was a good faith offer signed on by all the regional Arab countries and palestinians.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the US hadn't supported Israel all this time, it would have ceased to exist a long time ago, courtesy of Arab neighbors.

I hope we can curtail support just sufficiently to make the Israeli government wake up and stop crushing Palestinians into oblivion, and bring it to the table for reasonable 2-state talks.

There should be a joint management of Jerusalem and Golan water tables. Because this is really what this is about in that rapidly aridifying region: control of the water.

Israel was able to defend itself from Arab invasions in 1948, 1967, and 1973. That was not the US saving Israel.

The present government sucks. But Israel is a democracy. There have been many governments willing to negotiate with the Palestinians. The problem is the Palestininan side. You tell me. How do you negotiate with Hamas?

Honestly, I think even the Israelis would be happy to turn over Jerusalem to an international authority. It's an extremely unpleasant place. Fanatics everywhere.

Is that the version of events Zionist propagandists are teaching in Israeli schools nowadays? I guess the detailed French intelligence on Arab army movements and invasion plans that alerted Israel in 1948 and foiled the Arab element of surprise, as well as the French smuggling of arms to Israel in 1948 that enabled Israel to win the war, all just…never…happened.

The U.K.’s ongoing supply of arms and training to Israel from 1948 onward definitely had nothing to do with Israel’s ability to launch a preemptive strike in 1967.

And the fact that immediately after the Six Day War, the U.S. ramped up its financial, technological, and military aid to Israel to such a degree that Israel topped the list of countries receiving U.S. aid from 1967 onward has *nothing* to do with Israel’s survival in 1973. Oh, and Resolution 242? Never happened!

And the fact that the French literally gave Israel the nuclear capabilities it threatened Kissinger it would use if America did not intervene on its behalf with arms shipments and diplomacy in 1973 (which America did) also just…never…happened.

Plus, Israel hasn’t been gorging itself at the trough of billions in U.S. aid annually for decades now and definitely doesn’t come shaking its begging bowl at America whenever it’s in some new drama with Palestinians or its Arab neighbors. Never happens.

Just some examples of how Israel definitely won all of its battles ALONE, I tell you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I don't see any politically palatable way to divide the west bank. I think we're a generation away from a one state solution being imposed on Israel one the politics in the US shifts

I agree. One state with equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis.

Sounds like you support a de facto Palestinian state. What happens if the Jews don't agree to it? Are you going to force them?

Western powers stole the land from Palestinians and gave it to Israel. The same hand that gave to Israel can take from it.

Not exactly. The entire region was part of the Ottoman Empire, which lasted about 600 years in the region. There was no Lebanon or Syria or Jordan or Palestine. It was the Ottoman Empire. Which was defeated in WWI. Then Versailles. Brief mandates. WWII. The UN. Lots of things. Not particularly different than the dissolution of the Habsburg Empire and all the nations and conflicts that sprung from that.

Except the Palestinians are... special. Not interested in having their own country, which has been offered to them many times. Palestinians always choose conflict, which is why no Arab country is accepting Palestinian refugees. It's a problem.

Yawn. You know what definitely wasn’t in the region? Israel and the millions of Ashkenazis who originate from Europe. You know who definitely got a state only by colluding with Europeans to steal Arab land? Israel. You know who still relies on U.S. and European largesse and who is STILL being propped up by Western aid? Israel. The pretense that Israel isn’t a Western colonial project through and through is just funny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I don't see any politically palatable way to divide the west bank. I think we're a generation away from a one state solution being imposed on Israel one the politics in the US shifts

I agree. One state with equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis.

Sounds like you support a de facto Palestinian state. What happens if the Jews don't agree to it? Are you going to force them?

Western powers stole the land from Palestinians and gave it to Israel. The same hand that gave to Israel can take from it.

Not exactly. The entire region was part of the Ottoman Empire, which lasted about 600 years in the region. There was no Lebanon or Syria or Jordan or Palestine. It was the Ottoman Empire. Which was defeated in WWI. Then Versailles. Brief mandates. WWII. The UN. Lots of things. Not particularly different than the dissolution of the Habsburg Empire and all the nations and conflicts that sprung from that.

Except the Palestinians are... special. Not interested in having their own country, which has been offered to them many times. Palestinians always choose conflict, which is why no Arab country is accepting Palestinian refugees. It's a problem.

I thought other Arab countries won't accept Palestinian refugees because they are afraid of letting Hamas in.

Palestinian refugees have a history of bringing trouble everywhere they go. Google Black September. Kuwait and Egypt also had their hands bitten.

Same can be said about Israelis. Google the Middle East.

And Europe and North Africa. Israel supporters had better not make us take a trip down memory lane and visit who exactly has been thrown out of the most countries. To use that despicable talking point against Palestinians while pretending it doesn’t cut even more against Israel is just stupid.

[Anonymous]

The Europeans wanted Jews to get a homeland - so long as it was not in Europe, they were happy to see them go.

Churchill even said it

[Anonymous]

Palestinians haven’t caused problems in Jordan and the West Bank for a long time now but Israeli settlers are causing problems there.

The Saudis are building a huge “smart city” in the desert next to Israel/Jordan with the name Neom Which will be 33 times the size of New York City and a technologically advanced tourist spot. This will be a way for Israel and Saudi to push Palestinians in the West Bank to Jordan and Saudi . Israel has not been shy about wanting to take the entire Gaza and pushing them to Egypt and taking the entire West Bank and pushing those Palestinians to Jordan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Palestinians haven’t caused problems in Jordan and the West Bank for a long time now but Israeli settlers are causing problems there.

The Saudis are building a huge “smart city” in the desert next to Israel/Jordan with the name Neom Which will be 33 times the size of New York City and a technologically advanced tourist spot. This will be a way for Israel and Saudi to push Palestinians in the West Bank to Jordan and Saudi . Israel has not been shy about wanting to take the entire Gaza and pushing them to Egypt and taking the entire West Bank and pushing those Palestinians to Jordan.

Links?

Why would Saudi do this at the expense of its Arab neighbors?

Other posters claim that Israel has little interest in taking Gaza and is only interested in controlling it for security reasons.

[Anonymous]

Zionazis have always aimed for greater Israel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Zionazis have always aimed for greater Israel.

Such a devious, evil bunch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. I don't see any politically palatable way to divide the west bank. I think we're a generation away from a one state solution being imposed on Israel one the politics in the US shifts

I agree. One state with equal rights for Palestinians and Israelis.

Sounds like you support a de facto Palestinian state. What happens if the Jews don't agree to it? Are you going to force them?

Western powers stole the land from Palestinians and gave it to Israel. The same hand that gave to Israel can take from it.

Not exactly. The entire region was part of the Ottoman Empire, which lasted about 600 years in the region. There was no Lebanon or Syria or Jordan or Palestine. It was the Ottoman Empire. Which was defeated in WWI. Then Versailles. Brief mandates. WWII. The UN. Lots of things. Not particularly different than the dissolution of the Habsburg Empire and all the nations and conflicts that sprung from that.

Except the Palestinians are... special. Not interested in having their own country, which has been offered to them many times. Palestinians always choose conflict, which is why no Arab country is accepting Palestinian refugees. It's a problem.

I thought other Arab countries won't accept Palestinian refugees because they are afraid of letting Hamas in.

Palestinian refugees have a history of bringing trouble everywhere they go.

If you replaced “Jews” in the first line that would be a clear and horrible antisemitic statement.