NationStates Jolt Archive

Let me preface this by saying it's from a biased website, but it's an interesting take on the issue of a Palestinian homeland. While I beleive that the Palestinians should be given the west bank and gaza to build an independant nation, this article raises the issue that the Palestinians are being given preferential treatment over other dispossesed ethnic groups by much of the world.

http://factsandlogic.org/ad_91.html

To be honest I don't think there is any hope for the Palestinians when people honestly believe that the Oslo Accords worked in their favour rather than the Israelis. And the mere fact Americans will subscribe (in the majority, of course there is a small activist minority) to whatever Official Line their Government puts out really proves my point about their efforts being futile.

The Palestinians are an interesting debate.

When Israel was created, they were sorta kicked out, but it seems that they did stay in the former Palestine. When pleaing to their fellow Muslim countries, the Palestinians were barred, banned, and downright stopped from entering their countries, which is rather strange. I will admit, the Palestinians got the bad end of the deal. Of course, the way they have gone about trying to "fix" their little problem is rather stupid and wrong. The PLO and the HAMAS tend to be good buddies, and both seem to think that bombing tourist buses with American citizens is a good way to rally support for their cause :/. After MANY MANY MANY dealings with Ehud Barakh, a prime minister that many Israeli's didn't like becuase he had offered such large chunks of Israeli land to the Palestinians for their state, Yassir Arafat declined, and answered with multiple terrorist attacks. It was sad, especially when i learned that 95% of the land the Palestinians wanted (everything except Jerusalem, the holiest city of the Jews) wouldve been theres, but Arafat said no. They had so many chances, and they've decided that terrorism would be a better solution.

Of course, the Israeli's aren't doing that hot of a job either. Sharon is a rather strong nationalist, and building a wall won't stop anything. Nor will going into Palestinian towns with tanks, no matter how good-intentioned he is.

Overall, I believe the Palestinian's best bet for a home would be one of the other Muslim countries. It doesn't make sense to me that other Muslims won't take them in, since there really is no difference between them (unless i'm missing something within the religion itself). Meanwhile, Israel is still the only Jewish state.

Meanwhile, Israel is still the only Jewish state.

Thank God.

The Palestinians are an interesting debate.

When Israel was created, they were sorta kicked out, but it seems that they did stay in the former Palestine. When pleaing to their fellow Muslim countries, the Palestinians were barred, banned, and downright stopped from entering their countries, which is rather strange. I will admit, the Palestinians got the bad end of the deal. Of course, the way they have gone about trying to "fix" their little problem is rather stupid and wrong. The PLO and the HAMAS tend to be good buddies, and both seem to think that bombing tourist buses with American citizens is a good way to rally support for their cause :/. After MANY MANY MANY dealings with Ehud Barakh, a prime minister that many Israeli's didn't like becuase he had offered such large chunks of Israeli land to the Palestinians for their state, Yassir Arafat declined, and answered with multiple terrorist attacks. It was sad, especially when i learned that 95% of the land the Palestinians wanted (everything except Jerusalem, the holiest city of the Jews) wouldve been theres, but Arafat said no. They had so many chances, and they've decided that terrorism would be a better solution.

Of course, the Israeli's aren't doing that hot of a job either. Sharon is a rather strong nationalist, and building a wall won't stop anything. Nor will going into Palestinian towns with tanks, no matter how good-intentioned he is.

Overall, I believe the Palestinian's best bet for a home would be one of the other Muslim countries. It doesn't make sense to me that other Muslims won't take them in, since there really is no difference between them (unless i'm missing something within the religion itself). Meanwhile, Israel is still the only Jewish state.
Building the fence has actually caused a decline in Palestinian terrorism. Sometimes the best thing for all parties involved is to stay separated.

Thank God.
Anti-Semitic much?

Building the fence has actually caused a decline in Palestinian terrorism. Sometimes the best thing for all parties involved is to stay separated.

A Wall as a Weapon

Noam Chomsky

CAMBRIDGE, Mass. — It is a virtual reflex for governments to plead security concerns when they undertake any controversial action, often as a pretext for something else. Careful scrutiny is always in order. Israel's so-called security fence, which is the subject of hearings starting today at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, is a case in point.

Few would question Israel's right to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks like the one yesterday, even to build a security wall if that were an appropriate means. It is also clear where such a wall would be built if security were the guiding concern: inside Israel, within the internationally recognized border, the Green Line established after the 1948-49 war. The wall could then be as forbidding as the authorities chose: patrolled by the army on both sides, heavily mined, impenetrable. Such a wall would maximize security, and there would be no international protest or violation of international law.

This observation is well understood. While Britain supports America's opposition to the Hague hearings, its foreign minister, Jack Straw, has written that the wall is "unlawful." Another ministry official, who inspected the "security fence," said it should be on the Green Line or "indeed on the Israeli side of the line." A British parliamentary investigative commission also called for the wall to be built on Israeli land, condemning the barrier as part of a "deliberate" Israeli "strategy of bringing the population to heel."

What this wall is really doing is taking Palestinian lands. It is also — as the Israeli sociologist Baruch Kimmerling has described Israel's war of "politicide" against the Palestinians — helping turn Palestinian communities into dungeons, next to which the bantustans of South Africa look like symbols of freedom, sovereignty and self-determination.

Even before construction of the barrier was under way, the United Nations estimated that Israeli barriers, infrastructure projects and settlements had created 50 disconnected Palestinian pockets in the West Bank. As the design of the wall was coming into view, the World Bank estimated that it might isolate 250,000 to 300,000 Palestinians, more than 10 percent of the population, and that it might effectively annex up to 10 percent of West Bank land. And when the government of Ariel Sharon finally published its proposed map, it became clear the the wall would cut the West Bank into 16 isolated enclaves, confined to just 42 percent of the West Bank land that Mr. Sharon had previously said could be ceded to a Palestinian state.

The wall has already claimed some of the most fertile lands of the West Bank. And, crucially, it extends Israel's control of critical water resources, which Israel and its settlers can appropriate as they choose, while the indigenous population often lacks water for drinking.

Palestinians in the seam between the wall and the Green Line will be permitted to apply for the right to live in their own homes; Israelis automatically have the right to use these lands. "Hiding behind security rationales and the seemingly neutral bureaucratic language of military orders is the gateway for expulsion," the Israeli journalist Amira Hass wrote in the daily Haaretz. "Drop by drop, unseen, not so many that it would be noticed internationally and shock public opinion." The same is true of the regular killings, terror and daily brutality and humiliation of the past 35 years of harsh occupation, while land and resources have been taken for settlers enticed by ample subsidies.

It also seems likely that Israel will transfer to the occupied West Bank the 7,500 settlers it said this month it would remove from the Gaza Strip. These Israelis now enjoy ample land and fresh water, while one million Palestinians barely survive, their meager water supplies virtually unusable. Gaza is a cage, and as the city of Rafah in the south is systematically demolished, residents may be blocked from any contact with Egypt and blockaded from the sea.

It is misleading to call these Israeli policies. They are American-Israeli policies — made possible by unremitting United States military, economic and diplomatic support of Israel. This has been true since 1971 when, with American support, Israel rejected a full peace offer from Egypt, preferring expansion to security. In 1976, the United States vetoed a Security Council resolution calling for a two-state settlement in accord with an overwhelming international consensus. The two-state proposal has the support of a majority of Americans today, and could be enacted immediately if Washington wanted to do so.

At most, the Hague hearings will end in an advisory ruling that the wall is illegal. It will change nothing. Any real chance for a political settlement — and for decent lives for the people of the region — depends on the United States.

Anti-Semitic much?

Oh I see, resorting to that kind of slander are we? Doesn't surprise me, 'he who throws the mud always wins' (and tends to throw when he doesn't have any arguments left) as they say. Anyways, replying to your post with a justification for why I am not anti-semitic would be a tacit endorsement of your slander. So let's leave it at that.

I forgot how much that wall costs... but it's pretty expensive. But I wonder... why can't those idiots on both sides not just live in peace? I mean, what's their problem? The country should be big enough for both sides. Idiots.

Luckily more and more people among the Israelis and the Palestines are getting fed up with the constant state of war.

Oh I see, resorting to that kind of slander are we? Doesn't surprise me, 'he who throws the mud always wins' (and tends to throw when he doesn't have any arguments left) as they say. Anyways, replying to your post with a justification for why I am not anti-semitic would be a tacit endorsement of your slander. So let's leave it at that.
Dude, your post's only message seemed to be that Jews shouldn't have any territory of their own. How do you expect me to react to that?

Dude, your post's only message seemed to be that Jews shouldn't have any territory of their own. How do you expect me to react to that?

If you are asking about my concerns regarding Zionism I myself am a Zionist, of the old leftist variety, before Herzl came along. I believed in the old Socialist Jewish idea of binationalism, the idea that originally seemed to be working.

Dude, your post's only message seemed to be that Jews shouldn't have any territory of their own. How do you expect me to react to that?
Well really, other than religious, and historical grounds (2000 whole years ago since they were kicked out) the state of Israel has very little reasons for existing in the first place.

in reality the nation of Israel just appeared out of the sea one day and kicked the Palestinians off land that had been there’s for 2000 years.

Please don’t paint me as anti-Semitic, but I am fiercely anti-Israel

Its literally amazing how the military has not staged a full blown coup there yet, then again its probably the most right wing democracy ever.

Well really, other than religious, and historical grounds (2000 whole years ago since they were kicked out) the state of Israel has very little reasons for existing in the first place.

in reality the nation of Israel just appeared out of the sea one day and kicked the Palestinians off land that had been there’s for 2000 years.

Please don’t paint me as anti-Semitic, but I am fiercely anti-Israel

Its literally amazing how the military has not staged a full blown coup there yet, then again its probably the most right wing democracy ever.
The reason the state of Israel exists is that prior to the Nazi holocaust the Jews who fled were turned away by every other nation. Because of the hatred and the frequent attempts to exterminate them it was deemed necessary for them to have a homeland that they could go to in times of trouble and persecution. Also, there was never a nation of Palestine. It's not as if one nation was destroyed to make way for another. Palestine was a region in Trans Jordan. The Palestinians are Jordanians, and therefore already have a homeland.

The reason the state of Israel exists is that prior to the Nazi holocaust the Jews who fled were turned away by every other nation. Because of the hatred and the frequent attempts to exterminate them it was deemed necessary for them to have a homeland that they could go to in times of trouble and persecution. Also, there was never a nation of Palestine. It's not as if one nation was destroyed to make way for another. Palestine was a region in Trans Jordan. The Palestinians are Jordanians, and therefore already have a homeland.

Actually Jews where largely accepted when feeling Nazi Germany by Britain, a lot of Jews I know where originally from eastern and central Europe pre-1930's.

But truly you must admit, there was a fair deal of ethnic cleansing(moving not killing), when Israel moved in. I just hate the way the Palestinians are treated by Israel and largely get away with it, one excuse i was told by some fiercely pro-Israel people in my collage (twats but that’s another matter) is that the Palestinians are terrorists and its an internal matter.

:mad:

I’m not really that informed on the issue, by my oppression sense tingles.

This whole the Palestinians "never had a nation" argument doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me. The concept of a Nation state, was a western one. Most of the middle East was simply part of the Ottoman Empire, not divided into different distinct countries. If you say the Palestinians had no right to their land because they did not have an offical country, you could say the same thing for Iraq, Kuwait, Syria etc.

This whole the Palestinians "never had a nation" argument doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me. The concept of a Nation state, was a western one. Most of the middle East was simply part of the Ottoman Empire, not divided into different distinct countries. If you say the Palestinians had no right to their land because they did not have an offical country, you could say the same thing for Iraq, Kuwait, Syria etc.
They aren't a distinct group from the Jordanians. Some of Trans Jordan was taken to build a Jewish state, but the people who were displaced (mainly by their own choice) had a homeland to go to.

The two-state proposal has the support of a majority of Americans today, and could be enacted immediately if Washington wanted to do so.


Washington tried to enact a two-state proposal several years ago, but it was rejected by Arafat in favor of more years of terrorism. So the Palestinians (or at least their leaders) are responsible for their lack of their own state, not the US