Israel's response to the U.N.

[OriZ 3,157]

Wow! Something we agree on. I'm not voting for Bibi either.

I'm sure there's more than that we can agree on. I'm going to vote either for Lapid or Livni, haven't decided yet. The main reason I'm not gonna vote Avoda is their social/economic policy moreso than the political one.

The road Netanyahu is on eventually leads to one state with equal rights for all :dance:

You and I both know that's never going to happen nor should it. Eventually there will be two states. When? Not in the next 4 years lol

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

I'm sure there's more than that we can agree on. I'm going to vote either for Lapid or Livni, haven't decided yet. The main reason I'm not gonna vote Avoda is their social/economic policy moreso than the political one.

You and I both know that's never going to happen nor should it. Eventually there will be two states. When? Not in the next 4 years lol

What you and I both know is that the policy of successive Israeli governments has been and continues to be: do everything they can to prevent a Palestinian state, while confiscating more and more Palestinian land and building illegal settlements as quickly as possible - with the intention to make the creation of a viable Palestinian state impossible (or at least impossible in Palestine.)

The difference is: previous Israeli governments were willing to at least pay lip service to the US and Europe about being serious about the so-called Peace Process for a 2-State Solution. This was used as a fig leaf to cover Israel's true plan which is the Piece Process - stall on final negotiations while continuing to steal the rest of Palestine piece by piece. Netanyahu is dropping all pretensions of the first, and openly trying to strangle the 2-state solution once and for all. To paraphrase Alon Pinkas, it's about time everyone figured this out:

(I will assume that you know who Alon Pinkas is or can quickly Google to find out.)

So Netanyahu has made the choice: full steam ahead to a single state. Of course the land of historic Palestine is already a de facto single state - Israel is in full control of the whole area.

But it's doubtful that Israel can achieve another round of ethnic cleansing sufficient enough to change the demographic reality - non-Jews already (slightly) outnumber Jews between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, and that lead will continue to grow. I saw a prediction of 60% Arab/40% Jewish by 2025.

So the real question is: how long does Netanyahu (or any of the other bozos Israelis keep electing) think Israel can rule over what is now the majority of the population without giving them their rights ?

[OriZ 3,157]

What you and I both know is that the policy of successive Israeli governments has been and continues to be: do everything they can to prevent a Palestinian state, while confiscating more and more Palestinian land and building illegal settlements as quickly as possible - with the intention to make the creation of a viable Palestinian state impossible (or at least impossible in Palestine.)

The difference is: previous Israeli governments were willing to at least pay lip service to the US and Europe about being serious about the so-called Peace Process for a 2-State Solution. This was used as a fig leaf to cover Israel's true plan which is the Piece Process - stall on final negotiations while continuing to steal the rest of Palestine piece by piece. Netanyahu is dropping all pretensions of the first, and openly trying to strangle the 2-state solution once and for all. To paraphrase Alon Pinkas, it's about time everyone figured this out:

(I will assume that you know who Alon Pinkas is or can quickly Google to find out.)

So Netanyahu has made the choice: full steam ahead to a single state. Of course the land of historic Palestine is already a de facto single state - Israel is in full control of the whole area.

But it's doubtful that Israel can achieve another round of ethnic cleansing sufficient enough to change the demographic reality - non-Jews already (slightly) outnumber Jews between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean, and that lead will continue to grow. I saw a prediction of 60% Arab/40% Jewish by 2025.

So the real question is: how long does Netanyahu (or any of the other bozos Israelis keep electing) think Israel can rule over what is now the majority of the population without giving them their rights ?

I don't think Rabin, Barak or Olmert were not serious about a two state solution. They just didn't get to stay in power long enough to make it happen. How long does Netanyahu think it can happen? I have no idea I am not in his head but I will tell you this...call me optimistic but I think after the next 4 years at the latest things will resume full speed ahead...will a state come out of it right away? I don't know...but there will be some serious discussions again, a la barak, olmert and Rabin.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

I don't think Rabin, Barak or Olmert were not serious about a two state solution. They just didn't get to stay in power long enough to make it happen. How long does Netanyahu think it can happen? I have no idea I am not in his head but I will tell you this...call me optimistic but I think after the next 4 years at the latest things will resume full speed ahead...will a state come out of it right away? I don't know...but there will be some serious discussions again, a la barak, olmert and Rabin.

The illegal settlements are the main impediments to a 2-state solution. They are not only built on confiscated Palestinian land, but they are strategically placed to prevent a contiguous Palestinian state. They have continued through all those administrations, and actually increased in pace since the "Peace Process" began.

Or as you can see here:

All those previous Israeli governments have offered essentially the same deal: Bantustans around the Palestinian urban areas, with Israel keeping all of the main settlement blocs, the entire Jordan Valley, and all the rest of the so-called security areas and military zones and buffer zones and bypass roads. Map #4 in my siggy shows what Israel is willing to consider the "Palestinian state" - just a bunch of open-air cages to keep the natives penned up, totally dependent on Israel for permission to travel to another part of their "country," or even to have visitors or merchandise go in or out.

And Map #4 shows what was still left in 2007. At the rate Israel is going, what do you think will be left for the Palestinians in 4 years ? (Answer: Gaza.)

Netanyahu has moved his party further to the extreme right. There is no way Beebs will accept any viable Palestinian state - he is personally opposed to it, his party is opposed to it, and his political existence depends on him continuing on this track. And yet (maybe even due to this) he is still wildly popular in Israel. Most of the Israeli public - even the ones who still mouth the words about 2 states side by side - they still believe in the lie they've been told: that in the end, they're entitled to YESHA. And they won't elect a leader who is willing to give up the settlements.

So I think you are right - the way it looks now, Nutty will probably get re-elected. This is Israel's choice - and it means continuing to control all the land. Its dilemma is: what to do with all those Palestinians. Apartheid, ethnic cleansing, or one state with equal rights for all ?

Edited December 4, 2012 by wife_of_mahmoud

[OriZ 3,157]

Yes but it's called negotiating...you can't expect their starting point to be here just take it all...I do believe those 3 were serious and unfortunately negotiations broke down/Rabin was killed/Barak lost/Olmert had to leave office. Don't forget some(but obviously not all) of the growth in the settlement is natural growth. Even in a peace process, if families have children and need more houses or schools you need to build them. Btw, personally as someone who thinks that in the end there will be a two state solution and many of the settlements WILL be evacuated(Israel has done it before - in Sinai and in Gaza so the mere fact it's building doesn't mean that obstacle will last forever) I see alot of it as a waste of money. Take that money now and put it towards the poor and the needy within the green line, like I said except for natural growth. Why spend it there just to tear it down later.

Don't forget that due to the parliamentary system in Israel just because you are prime minister doesn't mean most people actually like you. I think I know more people that dislike him or even hate him than people who do. If like the current polls suggest his party wins 37 mandates out of 120, that's only actually 30% of the votes. Most coalitions in Israel in recent times have hardly scratched the 60-70 mandates needed, so basically it's divided about half-half, sort of like the states.

Edited December 4, 2012 by OriZ

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Yes but it's called negotiating...you can't expect their starting point to be here just take it all...I do believe those 3 were serious and unfortunately negotiations broke down/Rabin was killed/Barak lost/Olmert had to leave office. Don't forget some(but obviously not all) of the growth in the settlement is natural growth. Even in a peace process, if families have children and need more houses or schools you need to build them. Btw, personally as someone who thinks that in the end there will be a two state solution and many of the settlements WILL be evacuated(Israel has done it before - in Sinai and in Gaza so the mere fact it's building doesn't mean that obstacle will last forever) I see alot of it as a waste of money. Take that money now and put it towards the poor and the needy within the green line, like I said except for natural growth. Why spend it there just to tear it down later.

Don't forget that due to the parliamentary system in Israel just because you are prime minister doesn't mean most people actually like you. I think I know more people that dislike him or even hate him than people who do. If like the current polls suggest his party wins 37 mandates out of 120, that's only actually 30% of the votes. Most coalitions in Israel in recent times have hardly scratched the 60-70 mandates needed, so basically it's divided about half-half, sort of like the states.

Please provide a map marking which areas you think Israel is willing to relinquish control of.

The word “negotiating” indicates a give-and-take process. This is not what Israel is doing. It’s still eating the pizza while it “negotiates” over how much of the pizza it will eat.

The Palestinians have modified their offers and made concessions; the Israelis have not - refusing every single Palestinian offer based on the 1967 armistice lines, including the Arab Peace Initiative.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/23/palestinians-israel-biggest-jerusalem-history

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/23/palestine-papers-expose-peace-concession

Instead, Israel continues to offer the same Bantustan plan it’s been offering for decades. Israel insists on the same things every time - that it keep all of the main illegal settlement blocs, keep complete control of the Jordan Valley and East Jerusalem (they actually proposed that Abu Dis have its name officially changed to the "new" East Jerusalem and then it could suffice as the Palestinian capital !) keep the bypass roads and "security areas," and keep complete control of Palestinian airspace, sea coast, borders, and water resources. Not to mention nothing for the refugees.

Would this seem like a state to you if it were Jews being asked to accept it ?

As far as “natural growth” - oh please ! We are talking about illegal settlements, built in violation of international law, by successive Israeli governments that were well aware of international law and the condemnation of these actions, but chose to do it anyway. Those settlers have no right to be there in the first place; they certainly have no right to expand their criminal operation. Israel has all of Israel to build in for its "natural growth;" instead, it’s putting its main efforts into Illegal Project YESHA.

The settlement enterprise in the West Bank cannot be compared to Gaza or the Sinai. Israel had just 6000 settlers in Gaza; in Sinai, only about 7000. Those numbers are a tiny fraction of the more than 650,000 illegal settlers that Israel currently has in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

And the settlers have far more political power today than during the 1970s. No Israeli government is willing to confront them about evacuating any major settlement bloc - it would be political suicide. Those nutjobs will price tag Tel Aviv, maybe assassinate another Prime Minister. The current government of Israel is certainly not going to be the one to do it - the Likud charter specifically states it is categorically opposed to a Palestinian state west of the Jordan River, and will do everything it can to prevent it.

I think it is looking increasingly unlikely that Israel will turn back from the disastrous course it has set for itself. And that road doesn’t end well for the Jewish Democratic State.

[OriZ 3,157]

here's a couple links with maps

http://cifwatch.com/2011/08/14/harriet-sherwoods-truncated-history-of-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict/

http://cifwatch.com/2012/10/31/rachel-shabi-has-fresh-hope-that-the-jewish-state-may-cease-to-exist/

Also, like I said myself, I personally consider it a waste of money. However, they are there, and that's a fact, whether we think they should have been in the first place or not is irrelevant, when there's natural growth you can't just ignore it...

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

here's a couple links with maps

http://cifwatch.com/2011/08/14/harriet-sherwoods-truncated-history-of-the-israeli-palestinian-conflict/

http://cifwatch.com/2012/10/31/rachel-shabi-has-fresh-hope-that-the-jewish-state-may-cease-to-exist/

Also, like I said myself, I personally consider it a waste of money. However, they are there, and that's a fact, whether we think they should have been in the first place or not is irrelevant, when there's natural growth you can't just ignore it...

First of all, CIFWatch is an arm of CAMERA, which is a Zionist propaganda organization that tries to rewrite history in Israel’s favor. The maps it presents were never introduced at the Olmert-Abbas discussions. Olmert did not propose to relinquish control of the Jordan Valley, which by itself is about 40% of the West Bank, nor control of East Jerusalem (nor to even share control.)

However, it's true that Olmert went much further than Netanyahu. He and Abbas were talking and discussing and each was making counter-proposals, rather than just issuing demands and then walking away from the table. According to Olmert, Abbas did not turn down the plan: “He never said no.“ According to Abbas, they came very close to an agreement. Two months later, they were still talking when Olmert’s administration was flushed down the tubes.

And don't forget: according to Olmert, it was in fact extreme right-wing Jewish donors in the US who derailed his peace plan, by funding the legal cases that forced him to resign.... only to be replaced by.... Netanyahu.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4224851,00.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/14/us-palestinians-israel-abbas-olmert-idUSBRE89D0G420121014

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Merkel to warn Netanyahu: Promote peace process or face world seclusion

Prime minister to meet German chancellor in Berlin on Wednesday evening.

With Israel and European Union states embroiled in a diplomatic crisis, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to meet with German Chancellor Angela Merkel Wednesday night in Berlin.

Merkel, who has had a rocky relationship with Netanyahu over the past four years, is expected to stress that the Israeli leader must choose between promoting the peace process, including establishing a Palestinian state, or facing international seclusion.

...

Netanyahu arrives in Berlin less than one week after the United Nations General Assembly recognized Palestine as an observer state. In contrast to recent years, Germany refrained from assisting Israel's diplomatic efforts at the UN. The chancellor was raging at Netanyahu's conduct and decided, at the last moment, to abstain instead of voting against the resolution. Netanyahu reacted angrily to Germany's vote, and his national security adviser, Yaakov Amidror, had a heated phone call with Merkel's senior adviser, Christoph Heusgen.

Merkel reversed course on the UN vote for at least two reasons. First, for four years she has repeatedly requested gestures of goodwill from Netanyahu on the settlement issue - but he has refused. Second, Merkel apparently felt her support was being taken for granted and used as a tool to manipulate other European states on the Palestinian issue.

Der Speigel reported on Monday another possible reason. On the eve of the vote, she received a phone call from Israeli conductor Daniel Barenboim, musical director of the Berlin Opera. Barenboim, known for his severe criticism of Israel's policies in the Palestinian territories, requested that the chancellor not oppose the Palestinian move, and noted that the resolution mentions the two-state solution and Israel's right to exist.

...

In contrast to France and Britain, Germany did not summon the Israeli ambassador; Merkel apparently prefers to hold a tough discussion directly with Netanyahu. The chancellor is expected to demand that Netanyahu cancel the settlement decision, or at least commit to freezing its implementation immediately after the elections in Israel.

Merkel is expected to tell Netanyahu that he must choose between promoting the peace process and establishing a Palestinian state, a move that would secure the existence of Israel as a Jewish democratic state, or continue expanding settlements, thus leading to the transformation of Israel into an apartheid state that is isolated internationally.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/merkel-to-warn-netanyahu-promote-peace-process-or-face-world-seclusion-1.482465

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Britain to Israel: Reverse settlement expansion or Europe will consider further steps

British Foreign Secretary William Hague said on Tuesday that European sanctions against Israel in response to its latest plans to build more settlements on disputed land were not an option, but said further steps would need to be considered if the expansion plans were not rescinded.

Hague told parliament that he was in talks with other European foreign ministers about formulating "incentives and disincentives" to support U.S. efforts to bring Israel and the Palestinians back to the negotiating table.

...

"Nevertheless, if there is no reversal of the decision that has been announced, we will want to consider what further steps European countries should take," he said.

...

Britain, France, Sweden, Denmark, Spain on Monday summoned the Israeli ambassadors to their countries to express their condemnation of Netanyahu's decision, and on Tuesday, Australia, Brazil, Ireland, Finland and Egypt followed suit. Russia also issued a statement on Monday urging Israel to refrain from expanding settlements.

The Dutch ambassador, whose country abstained in Thursday’s UN vote on Palestinian nonmember state status, told Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman that if the E-1 construction went forward, his country could not support Israel in future UN votes. The German deputy ambassador conveyed a similar message.

Haaretz reported earlier Monday that both Britain and France were poised to take action over the matter − possibly including the unprecedented step of recalling their ambassadors, according to senior European diplomats.

...

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/britain-to-israel-reverse-settlement-expansion-or-europe-will-consider-further-steps-1.482399

[mawilson 2,133]

They had to say it. The question is, will they follow through with sanctions? I doubt it.

[^_^ 5,021]

... when there's natural growth you can't just ignore it...

She can. Much of the world, seduced by images of hapless rock throwers and prejudiced by centuries of anti-Semitic propaganda, can ignore it as well.

But Israel won't and the United States won't. In the end, nothing else will matter.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

The entire world has condemned the illegal settlements, including the U.S. government. The attempt to smear critics of Israel with the slur of anti-Semite is a hackneyed and transparent Zionist tactic that fools no one but a fool.

[OriZ 3,157]

First of all, CIFWatch is an arm of CAMERA, which is a Zionist propaganda organization that tries to rewrite history in Israel’s favor. The maps it presents were never introduced at the Olmert-Abbas discussions. Olmert did not propose to relinquish control of the Jordan Valley, which by itself is about 40% of the West Bank, nor control of East Jerusalem (nor to even share control.)

However, it's true that Olmert went much further than Netanyahu. He and Abbas were talking and discussing and each was making counter-proposals, rather than just issuing demands and then walking away from the table. According to Olmert, Abbas did not turn down the plan: “He never said no.“ According to Abbas, they came very close to an agreement. Two months later, they were still talking when Olmert’s administration was flushed down the tubes.

And don't forget: according to Olmert, it was in fact extreme right-wing Jewish donors in the US who derailed his peace plan, by funding the legal cases that forced him to resign.... only to be replaced by.... Netanyahu.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4224851,00.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/14/us-palestinians-israel-abbas-olmert-idUSBRE89D0G420121014

You have said the Palestinians have modified their offers and the Israelis have not...but now you admit that Olmert was serious about things, and I mean even his first offer has come a long way from the offers before him, and before, and before, so there was definitely negotiations going on, give and take, which is how it should be. And even the latest map, like I said is not a done deal.

Olmert in fact did offer shared control over the holy sites, with the Arab neighborhoods being the Palestinian capital. I thought those two links were appropriate being they talk about the bias on the guardian, which is where you posted your links from, and they also happened to have a map. Doesn't mean I always agree with everything they write but in some cases I do.

And yes, they did come very close to an agreement...which is why I believe the next center-left government has a chance to reach an agreement, but only after another 4 years of Netanyahu.

Right now it seems like the right wing+religious bloc is going to win 69 mandates(57.5%), and the center-left+arab bloc will have 51(42.5%), so it's close but no cigar.

[N-o-l-a 7,168]

The entire world has condemned the illegal settlements, including the U.S. government. The attempt to smear critics of Israel with the slur of anti-Semite is a hackneyed and transparent Zionist tactic that fools no one but a fool.

Especially countries that have been historically very helpful to the Jews. In case history has forgotten, Denmark smuggled Jews to safety under the nose of the Nazis and 99% of Jews who had resided in Denmark survived the Holocaust. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_of_the_Danish_Jews

Denmark has been active in trying to secure rights for Palestinians and there are quite a few who live here and I would say that they are one of the most Jew friendly countries in the world. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denmark%E2%80%93Palestine_relations

You'd be hard pressed to find someone who hold prejudices against Jews here, but those who hold prejudices against Muslims are more common, yet still they defend the Palestinians' rights to their land, justice for their people, and self governance.

To equate Israel with Judaism is a complete and utter mistake. Since the Jewish Diaspora up until 1947 there has been no sizeable Jewish presence in "Israel". Modern Judaism is, if anything, a Europeanized religion and most Jews are of European ancestry. In my opinion, the Jews much more belong in Europe then they do in the modern Middle East. To hate that a select group of Israelis has decided to pursue immoral and unjust actions against the Palestinians is not a statement against Jews, it is a statement against Israeli hardliners who refuse to respect the human rights of another group of people. What makes it even more atrocious is that not long ago, there was a government that refused to respect the human rights of the Jews, moved them off of their land and out of their homes, and thought of their resistance as terrorism as well.

The term anti-Semitism is a little misleading as technically the Palestinians are also a Semitic people. I'd almost argue that most Jews are no longer Semitic, but that is a different conversation.

Edited December 5, 2012 by Nola123