I decided to post a new thread on this topic instead of just replying with a post on the "extrajudicial killing" thread partly because I didn't get any response to a post I put on there yesterday, which I took quite a bit of time over, and partly because this thread is different in that I want to try and offer what I beleive may be the eventual outcome concerning the conflict.

Is it not the case that in ten years the demographic in Israel will change in that the Palastinians will become the majority?

This being the case and with Israels new policy of extracation and wall building there may be hope for a settlement.
It seems that the wall being built cuts deep into the West Bank (Samea/Judea). I think if you were a jew living there you could maybe see the justification for this wall but it would be a bit harder to see why it is nessessery to encroach even further on the 1967 boundaries.
I think you have to "live it" to understand each side a little better.
I can also understand Palastinian anger over what must be a feeling of imprisonment in these small enclaves, often stopped and humiliated by Russian jews in uniform who don't speek very good Hebrew and have only been in the country a few months, stopping people from reaching their ansestoral land, it must be frustrating to say the least.
On the other hand, continuous suicide bombings must have an effect on the jewish phsyc.

So now the wall has changed the borders yet again it is now obvious that an independent Palastinian state is no longer a viable propersition, the chances that various agreements have offered in the past seem to have disintergrated and dissappeared into the annals or anals of history, sadly.
Who was at fault? it is really difficult to say because both sides have valid arguments. I try and put myself in the shoes of people from both sides and come up with a pragmatic conclusion, but in this case it is too difficult.
I also think new settlements are deliberatly created so that they can become bargaining chips a later dates, although the settlers themselves beleive they are claiming their rightful and biblical homeland.
The bible, has any other book caused so much grief?
I beleive 2 dozen settlements have been designated to be dissmantled in return for the annexation of the larger ones which the wall will circumnavigate.
Basically it is obvious, or should be, that Palastine doesn't have enough contiguous land left to form a viable state, so....
Now this is the big bit;
Why don't the Palastinians just say, O.K to hell with the independent state business, in 10 years we will be in the majority, why don't we do a Nelson Mandela?
Lets agree to live at peace with our jewish brothers, immediately stop the slaughter of innocents on buses and in bars, and all we will ask for is, not even our own state but just the vote.
Now if Palastinians did this, I'm sure for a start Israel would stop the incursions and hassles and assassinations etc... and if Israel did deny the right of these people who reside in the land of Israel the vote how could this be possible justified by anyone? even the US??
It's just an idea, because the only thing being gained at the moment is more death on both sides and it continues, and will continue.
I understand the Jewish peoples fight to protect themselves and the homeland they fought so hard and long to get and I understand the Palastinians wanting to live where there ansestors have lived for generations as well. The only way that both sides will be able to start the process of healing and forgiveness and live in peace is when and only when the killing stops.
The present policy isn't and hasn't and won't work, it's time for another way.

Your perspective sounds lovely and perhaps even wiser, at least wiser then what’s mostly placed on the table.

However, and once again, learning from experiences on Jews across history and Jewish culture. It is inevitable
to realized that what the Jews have been doing in Palestinia, they couldn’t have done it elsewhere and getaway with it.
To the Palestinians, it isn’t just occupation of their land or violations of their most basic rights. After several
generations, it is personal. The abusive way in which the Jew attitude and character conducts itself, it is really beyond
giving back some of the land.

The Jews have been downloading on the Palestinian the accumulated anger of been expulsed from dozens and dozens of other
countries around the globe, generation after generation. Palestinians was the willing victim thanks to the British and later the US.

Jews have nothing to do with this; Jews have not dictated this Zionist state. It is a mischaracterization to state the Jewry has done this to Pals. Jews worldwide, even in my city have been terrorized for no good reason. Jewry worldwide reject that state of Israel, what Israel is, is a Zionist machination. The whole point of Israel and Zionism is to create a state among states, like the South Africans they dictate that God has promised that land. But he hasn't, even Herzl says that the old ways are not wanted anymore total and complete rejection of what one member of the sci community calls “monkeys”. The indigenous inhabitants of that land are nothing more then mere impediments. The Zionists even turned against their own to create this state:

After the war, a Zionist “religious” leader, Rabbi Klaussner, who was in charge of displaced persons presented a report before the Jewish American Conference on May 2nd, 1948 :

"I am convinced people must be forced to go to Palestine...For them, an American dollar appears as the highest of goals. By the word "force", I am suggesting a programme. It served for the evacuation of the Jews in Poland, and in the history of the 'Exodus'... To apply this programme we must, instead of providing 'displaced persons' with comfort, create the greatest possible discomfort for them...At a second stage, a procedure calling upon the Haganah to harass the Jews."


Is that what you would consider Jewish? Israel exists out of sin (if you are religious) and out of a mish mash of lies, indoctrination, and propaganda. It's not very complex when you look at it holistically. A state who has to employ the vast majority of it’s population to defense, something is wrong.

The Pals are not innocent either; they have a right to their land. But the thing like Zionist Israel is that neither existed. They are claiming rights to a land that they never really had a claim too. Both Israel and Palestine were created in 1948; both are based on lies, and hate. They both have to fade from history. The real solution is one state under one secular flag, under a banner of peace and hope for all the inhabitants. The Zionist ideology would have died, along with Pal terrorist groups (this is why you address the cause not the effect), and the moderate majority will finally silence the insane minority. I don't want to see anymore ppl die in that region for no reason other then nationalism, and sick ideologies. I have no problems with a Jew living in the West Bank as long as the West Bank politically no longer exists.

Many good ideas here. Practical zionists understand that only through perpetual conflict is a zionist state sustainable, and with this understanding, seemingly irrational Israeli policies have clear if heartless motivation. Only through endless violence, and threat of violence, can normal people be segregated on the basis of ethnicity.

So, the institutional and so far successful strategy zionists employ is the incitement of a manageable level of violence and hate. Successful violent resistance to this policy is absolutely impossible, and counterproductive, under the present balance of power.

As has already been stated here and elsewhere, should a Palestinian Ghandi or Mandela appear, Jews and Arabs would immediately be decisively on their way again to coexistence, as has been the norm through most of Arab/Jewish (semite) history.

Israelis and Palestinians willing to conspicuously oppose zionism through courageous non-violence would have ready access to decisive world support. Zionists would find their support drastically eroded.

Concerted non-violent resistance would require great sacrifice to contrast legitimate resistance from the violent segregationist heart of zionism, especially in early stages. This sacrifice, if well-coordinated, could reasonably be expected to be much smaller than the present bloodshed, which is in fact accomplishing nothing meaningful.

The sacrifice would involve accepting violence at the hands of extremists from both sides, because not only zionists but also militant Palestinians would be greatly threatened by concerted non-violence. But inevitably, once popular organized non-violent resistance took a firm hold on collective consciousness, a lasting peaceful solution would rapidly become apparent. As a contrast between killers and victims is enhanced under the scrutiny of modern media, international support for the killers, which is presently massive, would rapidly become indefensible and unsustainable.

This is no pipe-dream. It has been done before. In the context of present Israel/Palestine, where the eyes of the world are already fixed nervously, the effect could be more rapid than what manifested in India and South Africa.

Next Year in Jerusalem, Inshallah.

i am still at a loss to understand how this situation has managed to go on for this long. My understanding ofthe events that lead to the establishment of Israel are cloudy at the best, but i will attempt to sum up my understanding in a metaphore...

Someone walks into your house and says, ' my ancestors used to live here years ago, so now I have pressured the council to allow me into your house, i will live in the living room, the kitchen etc and hold you at gun point, shooting if you attempt to stop me'...

please tell me if this makes any sense and if so why it has been allowed to go on for so long??? i do not understand why people are so interestd in attempting to fix the current situation rather than finding the root of the problem and then removing it.

I think it's a fairly good analogy. How we got here largely involved the world's - and most decisively - the US' heartfelt response to the horror of the Holocaust. Zionism predated the Holocaust, but post WW2 sympathy, political cover, and access to surplus weaponry propelled zionism into an unusually rapid and idealistic birth of a nation.

I think your analogy would be improved with more characters, like an outside enforcer who maintains the advantage for the "returning" intruder and many of his close and distant kin. Additional cast might include close (in proximity but not in genuine empathy) neighbors who react in ways that endanger the entire neighborhood.

In a logical world, all that would be necessary would be for Israel to increase the standard of living for Palestinians. Hopefully, the Palestinians would start thinking of themselves as just Muslim Israelis. Once absorption is complete, this problem would cease to exist.

Alas, this is unlikely to ever occur as this is definitly not a logical world. Both sides want the same piece of land and large chunks of either party want all of it. Neither seems particularly willing to live in the same apartment or neighborhood with the other. Segragation, and escalating violence because of it, seems inevitable.

Lamtarh, the reason they are walking into your house is because the rest of the neighbors allowed their house to get torched by a bunch of Nazis. Last time I checked the Jews were not putting Arabs in ovens.....

Lamtarh, your analogy is bad

the Muslim arabs from Palestine are immigrants there, just as the Europeans and the Arab Jews.

it is not their house
it never was
there was a limited number of Arabs there before the immigration started in 1860, but so were Jews. (for example, Hebron, Jerusalem and other holy places had uninterrupted Jewish presence for centuries)

both started immigrating, their numbers grew (the Arabs at a faster rate), the "house" was allocated to a full Jewish state, including where Jordan is now (1917 Balfour declaration).
but because the British administration flipflopped with its promisses it kept increasing the Arab immigration, and tightening the Jewish one for some reason

regardless, they were going to create a "Jewish homeland" as promised

but the promissed territory for the Jewish state was cut into 22%-78% (the latter is now Jordan), with the non Jews living in the %78 part

then the remaining 22% (1947 UN partition) was cut even further, almost in half, with a half going for the Jewish population, and the other half going to the other population

and that was rejected by the non Jews.
they wanted everything

...
it is not their house
it WAS not their house
even the tiny populations (Jews, Muslims, Christians and others) who lived in Palestine before 1860 lived under some other power - it was never THEIR state.

a more accurate analogy was that they (ppl of all faiths, not just Muslims as they'd have you believe) were squating in an abandoned shitty shack that nobody gave 2 shits about.
then new people, Muslims and Jews came, Jews installed electricity, water, fixed the roof, put a lawn. during the process, the Muslim arabs kept messing up the work, stealing screwdrivers, stealing the lunch, etc.
then it was decided to split the house. but the Muslim arabs said "no, we want the whole house"
all the neighbourhood decided to run into the house and kick the Jews out.

how's that for an analogy?

here (http://www.jafi.org.il/education/100/maps/ottoman.html) are some maps from the Ottoman period to today, through all the wars

"Last time I checked the Jews were not putting Arabs in ovens..... "

So, I take it so long as zionists only imitate the Warsaw Ghetto for those insufferable Palestinians, but stop short of recreating Aushwitz, then nobody should complain to Israel for imposing a not-quite-Final Solution.

Please understand, victims and their descendants must abide by the same social and political codes as everyone else. The world, and Palestinians, do not owe zionists ethnic exclusivity. If Israel were an equal-opportunity democracy, she would not be embattled. I realize that change must be gradual, but supporters of Israel should not expect anything to improve until they are willing to relinquish, at least initially in concept, ethnic exceptionalism.

It seems to me that the problem here is neither side is really looking for peace. Whenever there is a peace solution put on the table, the leaders of each group look more like they are just playing at peace so those that are truly tired of killing are appeased. Then they simply go back to killing again. At this point I think it has changed from a dispute of land to a feud. Should one side give up and leave (like that will ever happen) then the other would likely chase them to the end of the earth for "retribution."

As to who is is correct, neither group is totally in the right. There is no reasonable argument that would give the Jews or the Palestinians a right to evict the other. They are going to have to learn to live with one another peacefully or destroy each other entirely.

"They are going to have to learn to live with one another peacefully..."
....is what it really all boils down to.

Lamtarh, the reason they are walking into your house is because the rest of the neighbors allowed their house to get torched by a bunch of Nazis. Last time I checked the Jews were not putting Arabs in ovens.....

Then using that logic, shouldn't the Germans be paying the Jews back with a homeland in Berlin? It is not the fault of the Arabs that Jewry was being burned and gassed in Auschwitz. Why should Arabs pay the price for European malevolence?

there was a limited number of Arabs there before the immigration started in 1860, but so were Jews. (for example, Hebron, Jerusalem and other holy places had uninterrupted Jewish presence for centuries)

In 1948 only Tel-Aviv/Yafo had a majority Jewish community. That was only 67% or so, the rest of the country was overwhelmingly Arabic.

both started immigrating, their numbers grew (the Arabs at a faster rate), the "house" was allocated to a full Jewish state, including where Jordan is now (1917 Balfour declaration).

This was rescinded in the 1939 white paper, Zionists then had no claim. The Arabs then at that time were promised their own land.

it is not their house
it WAS not their house
even the tiny populations (Jews, Muslims, Christians and others) who lived in Palestine before 1860 lived under some other power - it was never THEIR state.

It is not the house of the Zionists; Israel was imposed on that land. Palestine was a province of the Ottoman Empire. So the land did exist before as a separate entity before any Balfour... The only claim you have to that land is religiously and that even states that you are live in exile until the coming of the Messiah Elijah. Otherwise you have no verifiable reason for being there.

a more accurate analogy was that they (ppl of all faiths, not just Muslims as they'd have you believe) were squating in an abandoned shitty shack that nobody gave 2 shits about.

So? What relevance does this have (even if it were true). That gives you the right to establish a state there against the majority population.

then it was decided to split the house. but the Muslim arabs said "no, we want the whole house"
all the neighbourhood decided to run into the house and kick the Jews out.

Is that unreasonable? These immigrants come to your land (in which they had no land claim), kicked you out of your house and then establish a state there? Or you are being terrorized by Zionist gangs, it is unreasonable?

how's that for an analogy?

Racist, and ignorant.

Like some one in this forum mentioned *Right to Vote for Palestanians in Israel, and Israel will become a true democracy and all the zionist can go kiss Sharon's ass.

arab Israelis vote. 'palestinian' arabs, who are not Israelis, don't vote.

arab Israelis vote. 'palestinian' arabs, who are not Israelis, don't vote.
Correction: Palestinian arabs did vote for the Palestinian Authorities.
Arab Israelis vote and also have parlament members in the Knesset.
BTW, the first arab minister was in Sharon's government

b..b..b..but i thought he was a nazi!

I am still at a loss to understand how this situation has managed to go on for this long.I don't know where you are, but most Americans have the same reaction to this. We simply don't understand how grudges can be held for so long. This is the history of the entire Mideast. There are hatreds there that have been in existence for centuries, even millennia. The Sunni/Shia thing goes back almost to the founding of Islam. The Jewish/Gentile thing goes back even further than that.

What is so sad is that the Jewish/Muslim thing is much more recent. The Jews were not exactly treated like beloved brethren within the borders of Muslim civilization, but they were treated better than they have ever been treated by anyone since the Romans. Only the Chinese and the Americans have given them a better deal than they had under the Ottomans. In the Chinese case the result was total assimilation, which a lot of Jews think is almost as bad as the Holocaust. In our case the same thing is happening, just more slowly. Most Jews in America are not Orthodox, to say the least, and many of them are not religious at all. My veins have a bit of blood from ancestors who would have been labelled Jewish at the time, but who felt that maybe America was the "promised land" they were looking for, so the decided to live among Americans as Americans and not carry around a hyphen. You get to do that in America and a lot of the more pious Jews think that is pretty bad too.

Anyway, when you look at what's going on throughout the Mideast, the Israel/Palestine situation looks like just one more ethnic/religious conflict that will go on forever. We don't understand that stuff. Anything that goes back further than the lives of our parents is considered irrelevant. Even the North/South enmity from the Civil War is rapidly becoming about as tepid as the quarrel between the fans of two football teams.

If we had to consider who the "rightful, historical" owner of a piece of land was, we'd have to give Arizona back to either Mexico, Spain, or the Navajos. Or whichever tribe they stole it from 2,000 years ago. There is no reasoning that would result in giving it to us. So we ought to just quietly back out of Mideastern quarrels. We are peculiarly unqualified to participate in their resolution, having no sense of history whatsoever.

Bush thinks he can solve the Sunni/Shia conflict in Iraq -- a conflict that was already ancient when the Europeans first occupied America, killed off its native population, and repopulated it with slaves. If he does that, then maybe we should let him solve the Israel/Palestine conflict next.

In other words, my answer is "I don't know, and nobody else over here does either."