Israeli right winger endorses one state solution!

Ahh. We don't have that where I'm from. We're essentially highly dependent.
 
Please forgive my previous misunderstandings. Upon further research, it appears a one-state solution is being seriously considered. Paradoxically, the settlers in the West Bank might have made the separation of Arab and Jew more difficult if not impossible. However, there is a huge difference between the one-state solution as envisioned by Hamas (conquering all of Israel), and that of people with more humanitarian concerns.
 
spidergoat said:
Please forgive my previous misunderstandings. Upon further research, it appears a one-state solution is being seriously considered. Paradoxically, the settlers in the West Bank might have made the separation of Arab and Jew more difficult if not impossible. However, there is a huge difference between the one-state solution as envisioned by Hamas (conquering all of Israel), and that of people with more humanitarian concerns.
Click to expand...

So your saying hamas would rather continue to struggle and fight even if they were offered semi political control over all of palestine? sorry but really are you really that much of a hack to the Israeli line to believe that. they wouldn't fight if palestinians were returned to there land and had equal rights
 
.

just two questions
Cause sometimes when my dad watching a news channel, when theirs a conversation between a reporter and a jew minister or something, the reporter keeps askling him, but the jew keep saying and yelling "no it's our land since thousands of years, no it's our lands, bla bla blabla..." so, anyway, why did they choosed palastine exactly? why couldn't they just go live with them, and their is an uprising democracy, if the jews are more than the muslims and christians, then the country is a jew, if the muslim, then it is muslim, if christians, then it is christian, simple, why couldn't they just go their, by homes, start buisness, and start growign legally, and live with muslims and christians of palastinians side by side, like in lebanon and syria, muslims and christians live together, like in Djerba, jews and muslims live together, jews have their right, and have their temples of whatever, and muslims have the same rights and have their mosques, nothing different between them but relegion, why can't things be peacefull, and no wars and ethic cleaning? or maybe, why not start their own community for example in u.s.a., it's big, they can start a town, then a bigger town, and and and ... then a city, their are soem families here, that used to live in a country side, but that side of the country side, started to grow to be a town by that family, the hall family, then it became a big town(but not just that family), then a city, it's like, you're going to build a house, and start expanding it, like a progect, or maybe they could just make some artificial islands, or a big project, a hall city, the money that they spent on wars, could've make them a luxury city!
 
Maybe you should read a history book or something. They did want to live alongside the natives, and did so for a long time until WWII happened. Then, the great number of refugees, combined with increasing Jewish political power and discriminatory labor policies (they wanted to give Jews priority for jobs), created animosity among Arabs, particularly the nationalist ones who desired a state for themselves in the same way the Jews did. There were attacks and massacres on both sides, leading to the establishment of Israel. Then, 5 Arab nations attacked the new state, and many Palestinians fled, never to be welcomed back.
 
spidergoat said:
I do think the military wing of Hamas would find it difficult to give up their quest for revenge.
Click to expand...

Except its not a quest for revenge its a quest to that which was stolen from them returned. you return it and the whole purpose for violence goes poof.
 
spidergoat said:
Maybe you should read a history book or something. They did want to live alongside the natives, and did so for a long time until WWII happened. Then, the great number of refugees, combined with increasing Jewish political power and discriminatory labor policies (they wanted to give Jews priority for jobs), created animosity among Arabs, particularly the nationalist ones who desired a state for themselves in the same way the Jews did. There were attacks and massacres on both sides, leading to the establishment of Israel. Then, 5 Arab nations attacked the new state, and many Palestinians fled, never to be welcomed back.
Click to expand...

I have only one problem with that; the whole 5 arab states attacked(and for the record I believe it was 7) which implies and acts as if Israel was minding its own business and than bam they invaded which is nowhere near what happened which was the attack happened at a time when the Jewish/zionist/Israeli?(don't know if it was Israel at this point) had already moved well beyond a defensive stand point in moved well outside of the jewish area of partitian and had been decimating arab villages. to pretend such actions couldn't have ended up resulting in Israeli invasions of other arab countries and did end up with pushing the burdin of those refugees onto the surrounding states which would have serious impact on their economies and to ignore that these are real concerns that played a part in the bringing of those armies to bear a disingenuous portrayal of history.
 
pjdude1219 said:
Except its not a quest for revenge its a quest to that which was stolen from them returned. you return it and the whole purpose for violence goes poof.
Click to expand...

And then what about the people there, where are they suppose to go, playing musical chairs isn't going to solve the problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top