Quote:
|
I am curious. Why do you think Palestinians, who have no state, should recognize the "right to exist" of Israel before the state of Israel recognizes the "right to exist" of a Palstinians state, while in fact engaging in policies of rejectionism of that same right? It's grossly hypocritical.
|
Various Israeli leaders have recognized the right to a Palestinian state, starting with at the latest Barak, continuing with Sharon, and most recently Olmert.
Quote:
|
You said I "consider Israeli opinions to be irrelevant", but failed to provide any example wherein I demonstrated any such thing. If you somehow got this impression from anything I've said, it's incorrect.
|
You: A Palestinian state is not something which Israel can give. It's not theirs to give.
This implies that nothing any Israeli says about the situation matters.
Quote:
|
You said that "withdrawing with no agreement on mutual recognition will not stop the violence". The corollary is that there should be an "agreement on mutual recognition" before any withdrawal. Well, the PA has long recognized Israel within the "green line". Israel, on the other hand, rejects the right of Palestinians to self-determination. The solution, therefore, to create the prerequisite for withdrawal, the prerequisite to end the violence, is obvious.
|
Hamas recognizes no such agreement. In Arabic, Arafat renounced the agreement he made. Israel does not reject Palestinian self-determination, they reject a phased attempt to replace their state with a Palestinian one. Therefore what Hamas and Islamic Jihad must do to get a Palestinian state is obvious.
Quote:
|
As for the "offer" you spoke of, I don't know who made it up. I never suggested it was "The Jewish-controlled media". But the fact is that no such "offer" as you have described was made. Whether you yourself made it up or simply parroted what you'd heard elsewhere, I know not.
|
I realize I made a slight error. After doing a bit more research I realized the deal was actually as follows. The deal offered was actually 94% of the West Bank (measured without including Jerusalem in it) plus 1-3% of Israel. As well, they would have custodianship (though not sovereignty) over the Temple Mount, the single most important place to Jews, and sovereignty over much of the rest of East Jerusalem. This is fact.
Quote:
Your history, that "Israel came to be in possession of the terrories" because "Egypt and Jordan launched an unjust war" is equally false. Perhaps another myth, the origins of which I likewise know not. The 1967 war, from which resulted the occupation, was launched by Israel on June 5, when they commited commenced with a war of aggression against Egypt.
Israel fired the first shot.
|
The war started because Egypt expelled the United Nations Emergency Force from the Sinai Peninsula, increased its military activity near the border, and blockaded the Straits of Tiran to Israeli ships, Israel launched a pre-emptive attack on Egypt's airforce fearing an imminent attack by Egypt. If you are Britain and France says they will open fire on any British ships moving through the English channel, that is an act of war against you. If you are Israel and Egypt blocks the Straights of Tiran that is an act of war against you. And in the battle between Israel and Jordan, Jordan fired the first shot.