1Likes
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Disagree. She cannot do these things because Gaza is in a state of war with Israel. I agree it sucks to be on the loosing side.Originally Posted by zraver
Israel is the one claiming it- if Hamas tries to declare independence Israel has threatened war, Gaza cannot conclude treaties, recieve or send ambassadors, join the Un or other international organizations, create her own currency or engage in legitmate self defense. She cannot do these things becuase Israel has not given up claims of sovergien authority.
Disagree. She cannot do these things because Gaza is in a state of war with Israel. I agree it sucks to be on the loosing side.
Socialism is simply the Collective denial of responsibility.
She is not in a state of war, a state of war requires 2 parties who are either states or claim the status of revolutionaries. Hamas does not claim either. If she was a state she might not be able to effect treaties but could still engage in international discourse. She cannot becuase Israel is the sovergien power over Gaza.
That was Rachel Corey
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.
Got the Rachel's mixed up. I regret confusing a victim of a senseless brutality to... well, whatever Ms. Corey got herself killed doing.
Israel's dilemma is that it had grabbed the bull by its horns... it cannot let go of occupied territories without fearing attacks on its citizens, but keeping Gaza and Golan Heights impose a hefty price in blood and reputation.
All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
-Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.
Gaza is a geographic place. Nothing more. It is part of the Palestinian Authority but is dominated by HAMAS politically. Whether they've truly reconciled with Fatah or are in the process of absorbing Fatah is another matter but their manifesto makes them a mortal enemy to Israel.
To put this thread back on track might be impossible but let's not forget its premise. Obama's call is clear. 1967 borders with land swaps is the basis for negotiations in the estimation of his administration. Neither Israel nor the P.A. likely see any incentive to accept such so it, like so many other proposals, shall be D.O.A.
War will eventually come and war will not resolve anything...again.
"This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs
"Israel's dilemma is that it had grabbed the bull by its horns... it cannot let go of occupied territories without fearing attacks on its citizens, but keeping Gaza and Golan Heights impose a hefty price in blood and reputation."
Under the current conditions and regional leadership flux this is absolutely correct on all counts. Nothing has fundamentally changed WRT a desire seeing Israel removed from the map. As such, the territories are required for reasons of defense now and in the future.
The cost is permanent disdain by a feckless international community whose agendas aren't served by Israel but, instead, wish assuring the flow of oil to their economies.
"This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs
I would be more sympathetic to that point of view if Israel didn't send settlers in their hundreds of thousands to the West Bank; if it did not control more of the West Bank then absolutely necessary for its defense; like the suburban areas around Jerusalem and the border regions facing Jordan.
Not like now when the entire West Bank is criss crossed by settlements and road networks, and resources, that support them that are off limits to the Palestinians; the actual areas controlled by the PA is actually less than half the West Bank at the moment; which are basically densely populated but isolated enclaves that can never be a viable state. I think the disdain you refer to is actually quite deserved.
"...if it did not control more of the West Bank then absolutely necessary for its defense;"
Who knows what's necessary for one's defense after so many wars and a number of close calls. Certainly I'd never part with the Golan were I Israeli. You didn't even mention it.
"...the actual areas controlled by the PA is actually less than half the West Bank at the moment..."
Maybe...at the moment. Could have been different under Ehud Barak had Yassar Arafat been engaged in more than lining his own pockets. Might be different again some day. Fact is that right now Israel has no incentive to negotiate. You wouldn't either.
With whom? Abbas? What can he deliver that HAMAS can't nor won't renege upon? Blame Israel all you wish but it remains only part of a solution. Palestine have their own issues that the disdainful Euros and others notably ignore.
"This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
"The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs
China is doing this in Tibet, Xinjiang and in Siberia.
I am not unsympathetic to the Palestinian plight, but whether Israel stake out settlements or not in Gaza and Golan Heights, Palestinian and Syrian intentions would have remained lethal. Additionally, Israel was willing to dismantle many of these settlements in order to move towards peace before Ariel Sharon died.
Barack Obama is not asking Israel to move out of excess territories and retain the defensive zones necessary for its survival, he is demanding, if taken at face value, the complete abandonment of lands acquired by the War of '67.
If President Obama is half the astute politician I think he is, the plan will be open to negotiations.
Last edited by Triple C; 23 May 11, at 08:28.
All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
-Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.
This is my problem with that logic. In the west, if someone is mentally insane and commits a criminal act, we send them to a mental institution.
To be fair to that individual (and ultimately the victims) You havn't established that the individual was under guidance of vigorous and long term indoctrination, in the true sence of the word - it's merely a hypothesis on your part.
Mental patients who commit crimes are not necessarily indoctrinated to act in a certain way - they have however been subjected to situations and interpretations (real, perceived and imagined) of events. One can always acknowledge that there is a history of groups that do indoctrinate, and do seek out to conduct such operations there.
Under such circumstances, its unfair to paint such an act with the same brush. Of course, this person isn't sitting in a dock, equal before the law, with expert testimony that this persons head is acting all funny, they are in tiny little bits all over the place. 16YO's are pretty passionate.
Ego Numquam
Syria was an aggressor state in 1967 in every sense of the word, the Golan is Israel's.
Egypt was an aggressor state in 1967 in every sense of the word, Gaza is Israel's.
Jordan was an aggressor state in 1967 in every sense of the word, the West Bank is Israel's.
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.
Abusing Yellow is meant to be a labor of love, not something you sell to the highest bidder.
Okay then; annex the West Bank and Gaza and give the Palestinians citizenship.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Share this thread with friends: