Israel & Palestine (v2)

Present situation. Clinton wants peace talks to resume without pre-condition of Israel stopping the building of settlements:

"The Palestinian leadership accused the US of caving in over Israeli settlements after Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, praised Israel for making concessions.

Having failed to force Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, to meet US demands for a total settlement freeze, Mrs Clinton switched tack during a one-day visit to Jerusalem when she called on both sides to resume peace talks.

“What the Prime Minister has offered in specifics of a restraint on the policy of settlements . . . is unprecedented,” Mrs Clinton said."

She did not give details of the concessions but even under the Oslo peace talks in the 1990s Israel never halted the expansion of settlements. The first serious reversal came in 2005 when Ariel Sharon forced thousands to leave the Gaza Strip.

The comments by Mrs Clinton were in contrast to the previous stance of the Obama Administration, which has pressured Israel to halt all settlement construction. In May, after President Obama’s first meeting with Mr Netanyahu, Mrs Clinton said that the US “wants to see a stop to settlements — not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions”.

Mr Netanyahu has been unmovable, saying that the nearly 500,000 settlers in the West Bank and east Jerusalem could not be expected to stop building facilities as their communities expanded. He has however proposed limiting construction to about 3,000 homes that have been approved already by the Israeli authorities in the West Bank. He has not considered any halt in east Jerusalem, which was captured with the West Bank and Gaza by Israel in the Six Day War.

Mrs Clinton claimed yesterday that halting settlement building had never been a pre-condition to resuming talks. Her claim did little to pacify the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, whose leader, Mahmoud Abbas, is struggling to maintain credibility."

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article6898430.ece

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Your dreaming. Most here don't even want to deal with the present!

They are all caught up in the 'fight', in the argument and dispute which pretty much mirrors the reality of affairs; the way that neither the Israeli's nor Palestinians can find common ground as the 'other' is always the 'enemy', the antagonism (as if anyone could come to peace by refusing to drop their hard-line, one sided stance :shrug

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

, the 'who got here first' business or the who did what to whom back in the day or who is 'wrong' and who is 'right'. It leads to nothing but a merry-go-round discussion which yields nothing but yet another 'go around'. Its ironic. The problem of discussion here mirrors the problem of mediation, discussion and resolution in reality.

Its like listening to the UN go on and on about something as the situation goes on and on and they can fool themselves into thinking that they are doing something or making headway or making a difference, which I guess eases their impotence. To deal with the future would take imagination (new strategy), compromise, the ability to see things dispassionately from all perspectives and brainstorming about what can actually bring about peace as opposed to the black and white allegations and demands. Most would prefer to go around in circles as moral indignation is more comfortable and easier even if it doesn't bring about any results or insight, its like everyone is talking to themselves. Look at how both sides silence themselves to opposing perspectives or to what is achievable as opposed to what is demanded. The truth is that discussing history doesn't prevent present nor future atrocity. If it did there would have been no Rwanda, Cambodia, Srebenicia, Congo, Sudan etc. never mind Israel.

The truth is that to look towards the future is difficult and would demand a certain acceptance of what is as opposed to what we believe it should be.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Its easy for fedr808 to tell others to move on while he clings to a 2000 year old mythology and supports an ongoing occupation.

Its easy for any Zionist to tell others to move on, while they build Holocaust memorials by the dozens.

Until I hear such a sentiment about the constant handwringing of Zionists from him, its just rhetoric to aid in his denial of the subversion of Palestinian rights.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So you would cave to the world's shit rather than lets make it better?

 

What will they do when karma catches up with them?

 

typical caving to the Israelis the settlements are expanding do to Israel pushing people to move their

 

A glimpse into the terrible near future:

And a video by Max Blumenthal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwrskVXpOs4

Never again, indeed.

 

...with bombs and missiles.

I love how they always leave that part out. It's hard to look like an innocent victim when you also support terrorism.

There is no such thing.

 

not really. terrorism is a symptom of other things. non desperate people don't use terrorism. What is hard is to look like an innocent victim when you have the power to make peace and choose not to.

 

So we can conclude that charges of state terrorism directed at, say, the United States must be false, then.

Glad that's settled.

 

State terrorism is in function and practice different than the terrorism of alqadia or the "terrorism" of the palestinians. It is not as dependent on killing to generate fear but it does exist.

 

Its not a question of caving in its more a question of how to make it better, using what means and method. When one way isn't working its best to stop, re-group and change tactics.

 

There is no way to make injustice "better". Look at the Americans, English and French falling all over each other to suppress the Goldstone report.

Who can make anything better with this kind of intellectual and moral depravity?

 

Well now you are caving in. I mean is it really up to the French, British or Americans? Why is it the Americans who are always mediating on this issue? Why don't the Palestinians ask for a different mediator like the Norwegians for example? Its obvious that the US has too much invested in Israel to have a balanced view on the issue. At the end of the day its the Palestinians who have to change tactics in regard to Israel, its important for them not to look like aggressors so yeah I do think that one can make things better but not by using the same old tactics.

 

I think the Palestinians would be very happy if each and every European left Palestine alone. As well as Americans. Unfortunately thats part of the reality they have to face, its not gonna happen.

Since the alternative suggested by intellectual giants is "get used to it" or "compromise with apartheid", its really quite pointless to engage in any sort of dialogue at all.

To whom? Who gives a shit if they all die today? The fact that anyone can see them as aggressors is a laughable enterprise. Apparently even if they lie down in front of bulldozers, they are asking for it.

This is the reality of occupation:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-coval/why-i-am-not-a-zionist_b_343797.html

 

Not much of a wall between the US and Canada, is there? That's because the Canadians are a peaceful people who are no threat to us.

 

and your explaination for Mexico?

 

At last!

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1125875.html


Finally, getting on track.

 

what about it?

 

Mexico is peaceful and their is a wall.