The "Viability Argument" is a myth

[MGB8]

The big lefty/pal Arab point recently is that a Pal Arab state must be "viable."

To be viable, they say, you must give the Arabs 100% of what they want.

Now, that sounds good, until you (as always) start adding context.

The Partition Plan did for ISRAEL had contiguity issues along with many of the problems the lefties claim make such and such plan "unviable."

The Vatican is completely landlocked and surrounded by one state (Gaza, OTOH, has the sea), and other states have similar issues ... I believe there is one within South Africa or one of the other southern African nations, and other small states that have sea borders but just one nation behind them (Monacco, etc.) You even have the example of Luxemburgh, which has two states, but is land locked.

The point being, when someone shouts "viability", ask them first, what makes the plan that they are protesting not viable (are they assuming Israel will control the Jordan Valley (unlikely) or the Philadelphia corridor (for how long?) How is this different from other landlocked nations where the surrounding nation controls half the border?

[Sumud]

The "Roadmap" explivictly states this. But then Israel never really signed up for it.

It's curious how viability is no issue for a Palestinian state, but it's an all consuming issue for Israel, or at least for the usual suspects. Just look at some of the threads around at the moment. Talk of a contiguous Palestinian state is the 'Rape of Israel'. Another thread is 'Palestinians not following the road map'. :rolleyes:

Viability is a one way street for some.

[MGB8]

Indeed, Viability seems to be only an issue which the Arabs are allowed to avail themselves of, and even then, its about the DEFINITION of viability. Its not an issue of actual viability.

Partition Israel had contiguity problems and border problems, but, given that its creation was endorsed by the UN, we must assume that IT WAS VIABLE. There are several nations engulfed completely within one other nation, as well as nations with engulfed between another nation and water, or between two nations. As these nations exist fine, THEY MUST BE VIABLE. There are also nations with contiguity problems, and they also exist without major issue.... THEY MUST BE VIABLE.

That is not to say that "viability" isn't an issue. But the way it is applied is a myth. Viability clearly does not mean what the Arabs say it does mean, and world examples prove that out. What do you have to the contrary?

[Womble]

Something I've written in reply to a certain blog entry a while ago:

The "territorial contigency" argument is fallacious. Territorial factors generally cannot preclude the viability of a state. The US has no territorial link to Alaska or Hawaii, yet runs them effectively enough. Hell, if the British could run India and New Zealand, the Palestinian leaders from Ramallah could just as easily run any number of "enclaves", if Israel was to really divide them into ones (which I seriously doubt). Even being completely enveloped by a bigger state and having no borders with any other country cannot preclude a state from being viable (examples: Vatican, Swaziland, West Berlin). A state is always as viable as the citizens want it to be.

The obvious conclusion is, of course, that the whole big outcry over East Jerusalem boils down to no more than symbol chasing. The Palestinians want East Jerusalem for its symbolic value- if they get it, they become the keepers of the Al-Aksa mosque, which makes them second only to the Saudis in religious influence on the Islamic world. The claim about "the end of a viable Palestinian state" is simply a trick aimed to make the East Jerusalem demand non-negotiable- just like any other Palestinian demand seems to be.

[MGB8]

Yup. And I think the example of smaller countries, engulfed countries, and surrounded countries (as you do above) makes the argument much more effectively than bringing up the US or UK. Or, for that matter, bringing up Partition Israel.

[Sumud]

Indeed, Viability seems to be only an issue which the Arabs are allowed to avail themselves of, and even then, its about the DEFINITION of viability. Its not an issue of actual viability.

Partition Israel had contiguity problems and border problems, but, given that its creation was endorsed by the UN, we must assume that IT WAS VIABLE. There are several nations engulfed completely within one other nation, as well as nations with engulfed between another nation and water, or between two nations. As these nations exist fine, THEY MUST BE VIABLE. There are also nations with contiguity problems, and they also exist without major issue.... THEY MUST BE VIABLE.

That is not to say that "viability" isn't an issue. But the way it is applied is a myth. Viability clearly does not mean what the Arabs say it does mean, and world examples prove that out. What do you have to the contrary?

Viability doesn't just mean territorial contiguity, and I certainly don't think that contiguity is a synonym for viability. You argue the same, so a land corridor between GS and WB wouldn't be a problem for Israel?

The issue of viability is much more around freedom of movement, control of borders and water resources. The current situation of numerous roadblocks and checkpoints between towns and villages is economicaly crippling (as it is meant to be).

If a future Palestinans state is made up of 2 or 3 cantons, seperated from East Jerusulam with exit and entry controlled by Israel, this will continue to choke the economy and undermine real Palestinian control (as it is meant to).

The problem seems to be that some people can only view the situation as a zero sum game.

[Sumud]

Something I've written in reply to a certain blog entry a while ago:

The "territorial contigency" argument is fallacious. Territorial factors generally cannot preclude the viability of a state. The US has no territorial link to Alaska or Hawaii, yet runs them effectively enough. Hell, if the British could run India and New Zealand, the Palestinian leaders from Ramallah could just as easily run any number of "enclaves", if Israel was to really divide them into ones (which I seriously doubt). Even being completely enveloped by a bigger state and having no borders with any other country cannot preclude a state from being viable (examples: Vatican, Swaziland, West Berlin). A state is always as viable as the citizens want it to be.

.
How about if control of the entry and exit of goods and people to and from Hawaii was controlled by China. How long would 'effective control' remain do you think?

[MGB8]

In Swaziland, the control is effectively governmed by South Africa, no? In Luxemburgh there are two nations.

In the territories, it really depends on the plan. If the plan calls for "cantons", then sure, there is a viability issue. If there is internal mobility, maybe two or three checkpoints - to E.Jerusalem, to Gaza and back, etc... and, if, in the short term security at ports and airports is "outsourced" to a 3rd party, not directly in Pal Arab hands, but to be theres eventually... then that is certainly "viable."

However, recently, people have argued that the Ma'eh Adulim proposal would eliminate "viability." That is nonesense, more of the all or nothing logic that the Arab world is famous for.

Moreover, to be economically viable does not require access to Israel, a federation with Jordan could also be an option, etc. etc.

Any time the arabs think they aren't going to get %100 what they want, they cry "viability!" That is a farce, a mythical argument.

[Sumud]

Ma'ale Adumim poses a problem as Israel hope is to keep control of all the land to it's east which cuts the WB in two, and seperates EJ from all of the rest of the WB.

I guess, that in the spirit of compromise you'd see no problem in the reverse. That is, for the Palestinians to have a cordon of settlements around West Jerusalem, with all entry and exit controlled by Palestinians?

Works in Swaziland, no?

[MGB8]

Wrong facts. Try again. Either Ma'eh Adulim is cut off, or East Jerusalem is cut off. Since we don't even know whether E. Jerusalem, or what part, will be gifted to the Pal Arabs...

As for your claims about cutting the WB in half... just false. Nice try at the old Arab "lie, exagerate, dramatize" tactic. You have learned it well.

Oh, and please, come to the realization that it is the Pal Arabs who are ASKING for something, getting something, by getting anything. All your hypotheticals are meaningless because they don't take into account reality.

Reality is that the Pal Arabs HAVE NO RIGHT to a state. Not even under the UN - they REJECTED the partition plan, the PLO (the representatives, no?) REJECTED wanting the WB and Gaza (they did so during the time Jordan and Egypt controlled them). The only basis they have for any "rights" is UN R 242.

[MGB8]

Lets also recall that the Ma'ale Adulim expansion exists from Barak's time, and as Barak has put it, it was understood that Ma'ale Adulim would remain Israeli. We know what Barak's offer was, vai Dennis Ross' maps, among other things, although revisionists (Liars) who I am sure you would ascribe to have revised it to be "cantons."

The end result will be an offer somewhere around cam david (Taba will never again be offered), 90-91% of the WB, 100% of Gaza, and a part of Israel proper in addition for the Pals. And that is essentially the Israeli "red line." If the Pal Arabs can't accept, and want war, so be it. Deal with the consequences.

[Mediocrates]

Maaleh Adumim is about 5 miles from East Jerusalem. Contiguity with East Jerusalem would consist of little more than a road.Quite a bit less distance that whatever would be required to 'join' the West Bank to Gaza.

[Womble]

How about if control of the entry and exit of goods and people to and from Hawaii was controlled by China. How long would 'effective control' remain do you think?
That would depend. But what does it have to do with the state's viability?

[Mediocrates]

Ask them if they'd permit a Jewish ghetto with entry and exit from the ghetto controlled by armed Palestinian guards. Or did they think that wouldn't occur to us what they are trying to do?

[MGB8]

There is a difference, of course, Medio. The reason that the Jews can't leave behind settlers in Gaza is because they'd be massacred. Otherwise Sharon could simply say "okay, we're giving this to them, you stay if you want" instead of the contentious "disengagment/transfer."

If you were to analogize a "cut off" Pal Arab East Jerusalem to a ghetto, at least it would be a safe "ghetto," and, of course, have Pal Arab security inside of it as well. It would be similar to West Berlin. In fact, it would be similar in many ways to what Jewish controlled Jerusalem was vis-a-vis Jordan pre-67.

[Sumud]

Wrong facts. Try again. Either Ma'eh Adulim is cut off, or East Jerusalem is cut off. Since we don't even know whether E. Jerusalem, or what part, will be gifted to the Pal Arabs...

As for your claims about cutting the WB in half... just false. Nice try at the old Arab "lie, exagerate, dramatize" tactic. You have learned it well.


You need to look at a map sometime.

Settlements already ring EJ, Ma'ale Adumim is just one of many. The large area of land to the east of MA is under Israeli control. This area extends to the border with Jordan and contains several small settlements. It's likely that Israel plans to keep this area, and so cutting the WB in half.

Get a clue.

[Womble]

Get a clue.
Get one yourself.

http://www.mideastweb.org/fmep_israel_settlements_map1.gif
This is the map of the West Bank with the settlements. The inclusion of Maale Adumim will not cut the West Bank into separate parts. There is no "large area of land to the east of MA that is is under Israeli control and extends to the border with Jordan".

[MGB8]

I just read it on an Arabist conspiracy site, so it must be true.

[Sumud]

Get one yourself.

http://www.mideastweb.org/fmep_israel_settlements_map1.gif
This is the map of the West Bank with the settlements. The inclusion of Maale Adumim will not cut the West Bank into separate parts. There is no "large area of land to the east of MA that is is under Israeli control and extends to the border with Jordan".

You really don't have a clue do you?

The map you link to above shows exactly what I said. Have another look. See those large white areas to the east of MA - that is Israeli controlled territory. :rolleyes:

The maps generally show the extent of the built-up areas of the settlements. These areas are surrounded by large expenses of land. Settlements typically occupy only a fraction of the land within their boundaries. This is to allow for the infamous 'natural growth' we are always hearing about. Add to this space for 'security zones', and 'Jews only' roads and the West Bank is cut in two.

[Womble]

You really don't have a clue do you?

The map you link to above shows exactly what I said. Have another look. See those large white areas to the east of MA - that is Israeli controlled territory. :rolleyes:
At present. But these large white areas do not have a string of settlements that could cut the West Bank in two as it is commonly believed. There is exactly two tiny settlements to the east of Maale Adumim, and neither of them is on the list of settlements Israel wants to keep under the final agreement. When the Palestinians are given control of this territory, these settlements will find themselves isolated, and I have no doubt whatsoever that they will be removed.


The maps generally show the extent of the built-up areas of the settlements. These areas are surrounded by large expenses of land. Settlements typically occupy only a fraction of the land within their boundaries. This is to allow for the infamous 'natural growth' we are always hearing about. Add to this space for 'security zones', and 'Jews only' roads and the West Bank is cut in two.
Fairy tales. The settlements do not incorporate large swathes of land as it would make them difficult to defend (longer patrol routes, more soldiers needed). To expand because of natural growth, they usually go BEYOND their established municipal borders- which is why the pro-Palestinian crowd yells "theft" every time it's done- if that land would already be part of the settlements, building on it wouldn't qualify as an additional "theft", now would it?

On second thought, the pro-Palestinian crowd can be accused of anything but logic based thinking).

"Security zones" are only there for as long as the army is there, the same goes for the restricted roads. If we're talking about the scenario of Israeli withdrawal while keeping the settlements, the need for security zones and roads would be substantially reduced. The only place where the settlement chain could realistically come close to cutting the West Bank into two is near Maale Ephraim (something even the Palestinian supporters don't seem to believe in, since the name of this settlement is yet to come up in their propaganda)- but certainly not near Maale Adumim, to the east of which there's virtually no built-up Israeli areas.

[MGB8]

There may be some difficulties keeping some of the settlements - Kiryat Arba, for example, or at least routing the border around so that the land is contiguous on both sides. The issue with Ma'ale Adumim is that the Pals think it is part of a "Greater Jerusalem" "plot", which it may be, strategically, and strengthen the Israeli hold on all of Jerusalem, as opposed to giving them Arab East Jerusalem.

Also, while there would be a contiguous route to the south in terms of arab territory from A.E.J., they would have to go a longer route to get to Rammallah, as there would be a Jewish swath of land in between. It wouldn't be cut off, but it wouldn't be the most direct route, either.

[Sumud]

At present. But these large white areas do not have a string of settlements that could cut the West Bank in two as it is commonly believed. There is exactly two tiny settlements to the east of Maale Adumim, and neither of them is on the list of settlements Israel wants to keep under the final agreement. When the Palestinians are given control of this territory, these settlements will find themselves isolated, and I have no doubt whatsoever that they will be removed.
There is a string of settlements that runs south of Jericho, eastwards towards the border. And it's about 8, not including 'outposts'.

And several of them are not on the list to be evacuted. In which case we'd have to assume their is no plan to evacute them and Israel plans to keep them. Given that there is already a road running east-west from MA to the border it would be logical to keep this road, and therefore this would cut the WB in two.

Have a look at the map http://www.fmep.org/maps/ ('Israeli Disengagment Options, 2004' is the clearest map).
It's from the same source as MGB8 used in his failed attempt to make his point, so I'll assume MGB8 at least thinks it an accurate source.
.




Fairy tales. The settlements do not incorporate large swathes of land as it would make them difficult to defend (longer patrol routes, more soldiers needed). To expand because of natural growth, they usually go BEYOND their established municipal borders- which is why the pro-Palestinian crowd yells "theft" every time it's done- if that land would already be part of the settlements, building on it wouldn't qualify as an additional "theft", now would it?


Look at the map above.
Despite the generous 'municipal boundaries' enjoyed by the settlements they still find regular need of expanding them, hence the additional incidents of theft that you rightly bring up.

[MGB8]

(a) it was womble's link, not mine. G-d you are a liar. Your assumption that I accept that site, given its goals and bias (far left site)... wow. If you are Arab, you feed right into the stereotypes that Arabs cannot be trusted, have no regard for the truth, etc. Your assumption is faulty in that oftentimes one cites a statement by an adversary as essentially an opponent party admission. I really can't believe HOW DISHONEST you are.

(b) your assumption, that since it is not on the list of 4 to be removed, it will stay, is Hilarious for its invalidity and illogic. Talk about someone with no clue.

Here's the bottom line. Right now, the barrier is going to be the "de-facto" border and pretty much indicates what Israel wants to keep, and what its willing to give up on. The barrier may be modified pursuant to subsequent negotiations, but those will likely be further Israeli concessions - it is difficult to believe that the barrier will be pushed further into the WB. The Barrier, as it is now planned, according to that lefty sites maps, has about 9-10% of the WB east of the barrier. This is about right for what is predicted to be the final Israeli offer - which is about 91% of the WB, 100% of Gaza, and some land from Israel proper to help grease the deal.

[Sumud]

(a) it was womble's link, not mine. G-d you are a liar. Your assumption that I accept that site, given its goals and bias (far left site)... wow. If you are Arab, you feed right into the stereotypes that Arabs cannot be trusted, have no regard for the truth, etc. Your assumption is faulty in that oftentimes one cites a statement by an adversary as essentially an opponent party admission. I really can't believe HOW DISHONEST you are.
Humble apologies. Honest mistake, it indeed was not you.

Correction: At least Womble will see the map as a reasonable source as he/she first referred to the source.




(b) your assumption, that since it is not on the list of 4 to be removed, it will stay, is Hilarious for its invalidity and illogic. Talk about someone with no clue.
It's quite simple - there are 8 in the area. Only some are listed to be removed.

Does logic suggest the ones not listed to be removed will stay, or that they will also be removed?

I'll leave you to ponder this momentous philosophical question.





Here's the bottom line. Right now, the barrier is going to be the "de-facto" border and pretty much indicates what Israel wants to keep, and what its willing to give up on. The barrier may be modified pursuant to subsequent negotiations, but those will likely be further Israeli concessions - it is difficult to believe that the barrier will be pushed further into the WB. The Barrier, as it is now planned, according to that lefty sites maps, has about 9-10% of the WB east of the barrier. This is about right for what is predicted to be the final Israeli offer - which is about 91% of the WB, 100% of Gaza, and some land from Israel proper to help grease the deal.

91% doesn't include the area already annexed around EJ. Nor does it take into account the settlements along the Jordan Valley, including those to the east of Ma'ale Adumim. Include these, and the percentage of land in the WB that Israel intends to keep is around 40%.

[MGB8]

To assume that something that isn't slated for removal NOW will not be removed, or abandoned, LATER, is terribly illogical.

If indeed Israel is doing what you say - planning on keeping the Jordan valley and all settlements not slated for immediate removal via the disengagement plan as part of Israel - sure, Israel is not offering a viable state.

However, the Camp David plan, Barak's statements, and even of Olmert etc. under Sharon, not to mention the route of the barrier, all work contrary to that assumption. Even Sharon's own statements work against that effect.

[Sumud]

If you're correct then I'll be pleasantly surprised.

But I think it's a little naive to trust in the constancy of Ariel Sharon's statements. He also publicly disavowed the Road Map. Which leaves you wondering just what is Israel's position on this?

[Womble]

There is a string of settlements that runs south of Jericho, eastwards towards the border. And it's about 8, not including 'outposts'.
The outposts shouldn't be included. Israel itself doesn't want them to be there. This map shows no such "string of settlements" that I can see though.


And several of them are not on the list to be evacuted.
At present under the disengagement plan or at all? Which list? Which settlements?


Have a look at the map http://www.fmep.org/maps/ ('Israeli Disengagment Options, 2004' is the clearest map).
Won't do. It requires downloading, and I won't download a byte off the Net until I am 200% sure it is safe.


It's from the same source as MGB8 used in his failed attempt to make his point, so I'll assume MGB8 at least thinks it an accurate source.
It was me who posted the link to this map. The source sucks, but this particular map seems to me to be fairly accurate. I wouldn't recommend trusting their other stuff though, especially maps that involve "projections".

[Sumud]

The outposts shouldn't be included. Israel itself doesn't want them to be there. This map shows no such "string of settlements" that I can see though.


At present under the disengagement plan or at all? Which list? Which settlements?


Won't do. It requires downloading, and I won't download a byte off the Net until I am 200% sure it is safe.



It's not possible to see much on the map link you provided, it's very low quality.

The link I suggested is just a PDF. Nothing too scary.

[Womble]

It's not possible to see much on the map link you provided, it's very low quality.

The link I suggested is just a PDF. Nothing too scary.
Last thing I downloaded because it wasn't too scary brought me a piece of spyware that made me reinstall Windows to get rid of it. :mad:

[Ophra]

Here is a link to a map for you Womble :

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/israel/map/

"Showing new settler outposts built between 1996 and Jan. 2005. The Israeli government-sponsored investigation, "Opinion Concerning Unauthorized Outposts." (March 2005) states: "The expansion of the unauthorized outposts phenomenon began in the mid-nineties, after the building in Judea and Samaria and Gaza was frozen by the Rabin government in 1993." This map includes settler outposts featured in FRONTLINE's report -- "Hilltop 26" (#107) and "Bat Ayin" #(27 and #31)."

Lots of info @ this link to ;) :

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/israel/

[Womble]

Here is a link to a map for you Womble :

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/israel/map/
Confirms what I said, pretty much- although there are some odd points in this map that make me doubt its accuracy.

[MGB8]

At the bottom of the map:

Note: The source of this data is Peace Now. Numbers on illegal outposts in the West Bank and Gaza vary somewhat in the tracking done by Peace Now, the government of Israel, and most recently,the 2005 government-sponsored investigation, "Opinion Concerning Unauthorized Outposts."

Meanwhile, it doesnt' distinguish between a "settlement" and an "outpost", many of which are a trailer and a flag. Most of the new "settlements" are just that. Most of the things that were "dismantled" are also just that. Its hysteria based on nothing. The trailers can't be moved and the flags taken down?

[Sumud]

Well, they're all still there so the answer seems to be - no.

[Sumud]

Confirms what I said, pretty much- .
Not at all in fact.

Did you read the map title? It only shows new outposts establised since '96.

Therefore it shows none of the settlements established in the early 1990's.

[Womble]

Not at all in fact.

Did you read the map title? It only shows new outposts establised since '96.

Therefore it shows none of the settlements established in the early 1990's.
Wrong, my friend, very wrong. This map focuses on outposts- but scroll down to the map's "legend", which describes which is which. It shows ALL BUILT UP AREAS, both Palestinian and Israeli. I could venture a guess that it includes even the army bases.

[Sumud]

Wrong, my friend, very wrong. This map focuses on outposts- but scroll down to the map's "legend", which describes which is which. It shows ALL BUILT UP AREAS, both Palestinian and Israeli. I could venture a guess that it includes even the army bases.

You are right about it showing built up areas. I missed them because they are in pale blue.

But guess what? It shows the settlements to the east of Ma'ale Adumim, just as I said they were, and as the other FMEP map shows.

They should be removed, but there is no current plan to do so. And given that Sharon has been a long time supporter of the Allon plan, I'm not very confident that there will be.

[Sumud]

So that settles that - there are settlements in the area east of MA stretching towards the border and there is no current plan to remove them.


What some are suggesting is that these settlements will be removed some time in the future. While this is possible, there seem to be several factors mitigating against this.

One is that the focus of Israeli activities in the WB has been to stifle ecomonic development and to maintain as much control over the Palestinian population as possible and limit future Palestinian options. Cutting the WB in two would mean that Israeli would control all traffic between the 2 halves, with the resultant economic impacts.

The other is that the issue of settlements isn't a practical or pragmatic one. The number of people in these few settlements can easily be absorbed within Israel itself, it's not as though the Negev or Galilee are already bursting at the seams. The settlements are ideological adventures and are therefore immune from common sense. So, to say that they can be easily removed is entirely beside the point.

[minusthejihad]

And what does Israel get for sacrificing Gaza? Peace? LOL!

You give and you take. Rules of the world.

Soem of these things you call "settlements" are actually large self contained suburban centers like Scottsdale, Arizona. Maybe all those people should move too because Mexicans are jealous of what was accomplished on their land that they also lost in war or sold?

[MGB8]

Notice how Sumud equates "no current plan to remove" with "will not be removed." Sharon has recently repeated that, after the Gaza/ Northern WB withdrawal, there will be no further UNILATERAL moves by Israel. Note that on the one hand the Arabs scream about Israeli "unilateral" actions, but now Sumud, and others like him (including Arab officials, etc.) scream about how Israel is not taking enough UNILATERAL movement.

Sharon also said this non-removal was conditioned on the Pal Arabs not disarming and destroying the terrorist organizations.

Of course, they have absolutely no intention of giving up terrorism, and, as Sumud has repeatedly shown, no ability to compromise or give up anything, unilateral or otherwise (even this current hudna was made on the condition that ISRAEL stop its track and kill....essentially it is Israel that is restraining itself, from hunting down the terrorists, more than the terrorists themselves - and the violence is on the upswing - from 15 year olds strapped with bombs, to other teenagers being instructed to cross into no-go territory (NOT "playing soccer" as the Pal Arabs subsequently detained the survivors) increased weapons smuggling, several other incidents and attacks.....)

Given that, all of this talk is pretext. The Arabs don't want a realistic peace with a viable Israel. So give them war.

[Sumud]

" now Sumud, and others like him (including Arab officials, etc.) scream about how Israel is not taking enough UNILATERAL movement"

I know it's only a minor factual point, a mere trifle to you, but I've not mentioned anything about 'unilateral moves'.

But since you ask so politely - I don't agree with any unilateral moves. But that is the Israeli preference, and always has been. Israeli diplomacy has 2 prime tenets, one is that only it's plans are acceptable and second that there should always be some diplomatic/political initiative in the pipeline (no matter how vague), on the principle that nature abhors a vacuum.

Future plans should be a matter of negotiation.

The theatre over the Gaza pullout is primarily to divert attention from the continuing appropriation of Palestinian land for the constrction of the Great Wall. Therefore, the pull out will be delayed possibly more than it already has been.

[Mediocrates]

Well in either case the plan to begin the expulsion from Gaza only 3 days after the stated date of elections in the PA seemed to be a mistake originally. A few days here or there aren't going to make much difference. Especially since the political takeover by Hamas in those elections will be so interesting to see. See also:

http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200504141206.asp









At his press briefing Wednesday, President Bush’s spokesman was asked about the very real possibility that Hamas could come to dominate what will pass for the “legislature” of the Palestinian Authority (PA). There followed this stunning exchange (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/04/20050413-1.html#12):Question: In the event that Hamas, a terrorist organization not yet disarmed by the PA, wins a majority in the legislative PA, will the Bush administration still send $350 million U.S. taxpayer dollars to the PA, or not?

McCLELLAN: It's — the one thing that you see when people have elections that are free and fair is that they tend to choose people who are committed to improving their livelihood, not people who are committed to terrorist acts. And I think if you look back at the previous Palestinian elections, the people that were elected, while they might have been members of Hamas, they were business professionals. They were people that ran on talking about improving the quality of life for the Palestinian people and addressing their economic needs and addressing other needs that are important to them — not terrorists. [Emphasis added.]











I for one would like to welcome our theocratic murdering overlords.

[Mediocrates]

So it probably makes rational sense to take more than 3 days, have a wait and see attitude and figure out how best to respond to the Shiny Happy Free Democratic Islamic People's Republic of Gaza. We should at least wait for the EU to complete the construction of its new embassy and cultural center there.

[MGB8]

If Sumud's allegations were correct, then Israelis would not be leaving Gaza, and Pals might be. The wall would encompas 40% of the WB and the "eastern side" would actually have gained traction. There would be no two state solution, only autonomy plus, and if the Pals didn't like it, it would be enforced.

But why would Sumud allow a little thing like facts to get in the way of his whining and conspiracy theories?

[Sumud]

The eastern wall is indeed 'gaining traction'. And my 'allegation' is that leaving Gaza is vital to the overall plan, and so we will see the settlements evacuated (as long as the settler fanatics don't kill Sharon first). But preferably not until most of the western extent of the wall is completed.

The other vital aspect of the Disengagment plan (which, as MGB8 points out, is actually the Allon Plus plan) is to expand Ma'aleh Adumim and surround East Jerusalem. The E1 plan is progressing despite public statments to the contrary. This is cut EJ off from most of the surrounding hinterland, and combined with a maze of walls and checkpoints, will completely control Palestinian movement into and out of EJ and surrounding areas.

When most of this is complete, the Israeli Govt will be only too pleased to acquiesce to a Palestinian 'state'.

[MGB8]

Note that sumud has no proof that the eastern wall is (or has) gained any traction. Because it hasn't. Nor would East Jerusalem be cut off from other Pal Arab territory - it would be contiguous. You would just have to go around some Israeli territory to get to Ramallah - which is the real issue.

All of this conspiracy theory thinking on Sumud (and other Arabs') part is simply an excuse to not make peace, and to continue violence. Its an excuse to NOT have a state, to NOT take responsibility for themselves.... and example of how the Arab world, in general, needs to grow up.

[Sumud]

I take it then, that you don't understand what the E1 project is?

When (or if - you never know when sanity may prevail)) all the walls and checkpoints are in place, there will be no going 'around' Israeli territory, Palestinians will have to travel through it, which is the whole idea.

The Israeli Govt is already in the process of instituting a permit system for EJ residents who want to travel to Ramallah.
So MGB8's point that Palestinians "would just have to go around some Israeli territory to get to Ramallah - which is the real issue.", shows just how little he knows.

And if, as MGB8 claims, this is the "real point", he's just undermined his whole argument against my "conspiracy theory".

Thanks for demonstrating that the 'viability argument' is no myth MGB8. :D

[MGB8]

And sumud continues (1) to not provide any shred of proof for his allegations, and (2) any (undescribed) system that is put in place down really has very little to do with what happens IF E.Jerusalem becomes part of a Palestinian state. In fact, we may be talking about different definitions of what constitutes E.Jerusalem - lands Israel annexed following the 67 war, IMO, don't necessarily count.

The only thing we have to go on now is the route of the barrier. Everything else is conspiracy theory and speculation.

[Mediocrates]

And all of this falls into "Gee it just sucks being you on the lousy end of history" bucket, doesn't it? I mean it's pretty binary, either-or. Either the Phillistines get contiguous lands joining East Egypt and West Jordan, -OR- the legal entity called Israel which in fact WAS a legal entity WAY WAY WAY before any crack fueled fantasy called The Peace Process was cooked up gets to STAY contiguous just like it's always been. It's really that simple. So all the Phillistines should sit down and think of a way to either deal with it or cry.

[Sumud]

The usual nothing from Mediocrates.

[Mediocrates]

Typical retarded navel gazing from you. Oh let me whine and complain that the earth is round the sky is blue. Let me petition the oceans to turn their currents the other way. Let me sit in the dust banging my borrowed silver bowl screaming that the world owes me something.

[Sumud]

And sumud continues (1) to not provide any shred of proof for his allegations, and (2) any (undescribed) system that is put in place down really has very little to do with what happens IF E.Jerusalem becomes part of a Palestinian state. In fact, we may be talking about different definitions of what constitutes E.Jerusalem - lands Israel annexed following the 67 war, IMO, don't necessarily count.

The only thing we have to go on now is the route of the barrier. Everything else is conspiracy theory and speculation.
Only for those with their heads stuck in the sand.

"The Housing Ministry's Jerusalem branch is continuing to work on the controversial construction plan for the area between Ma'aleh Adumim and Jerusalem
This is contrary to Housing Minister Isaac Herzog's statement that building in the area, dubbed E-1, is not included in the ministry's plan for 2005
….
In February, the subcommittee for settlements of the civil administration's supervisory council submitted a detailed construction plan for the E-1 region. The construction in this area has raised an international controversy, as it severs the south of the West Bank from the north, preventing the Palestinian contiguity …..
The plan consists of 3,500 housing units. The subcommittee demanded technical alterations, which are being made by Jerusalem architecture firms Yoram Fogel and Amatzia Aharonson. Fogel said last week that work on the plan is proceeding as usual, and that the Housing Ministry staff in the Jerusalem district, who ordered the work, are still asking for its completion.
Jerusalem District head Moshe Merhavia said that as no instructions to the contrary had come from the housing minister, the work was indeed progressing.
Ma'aleh Adumim Mayor Benny Kashriel, within whose jurisdiction E-1 falls, said the alterations pertain to access roads, parking lots, etc. He said there is no doubt the construction in E-1 will be approved" - Ha’aretz. April 27, 2005.


"The situation will change on the completion of the wall and fence in the Jerusalem area, and the installation of the 11 gates and crossing points. Haaretz learned some two months ago that as of July 2005, East Jerusalem residents will be allowed access to the Ramallah area only with special permits. Military sources have confirmed that as of July, the military order will be enforced at all checkpoints." – Ha’aretz. 29/3/05


This won't matter to MGB8 one bit - ideology is immune to facts.

[Mil]

so when is Jewish property in Cairo coming back to its previous owners?

[Sumud]

Typical retarded navel gazing from you. Oh let me whine and complain that the earth is round the sky is blue. Let me petition the oceans to turn their currents the other way. Let me sit in the dust banging my borrowed silver bowl screaming that the world owes me something.
Nothing ad nasuem.

[minusthejihad]

Actually, I think Medio's comments are right on and except for whine and moan about how sad your life and the sad state of the Arab World is, what more do you have to offer?

[Sumud]

Something that you can't comprehend - facts.

[Sumud]

A special thankyou to MGB8 for helping to demonstrate that his own thread is wrong.

The current Israeli plans for the West Bank do cut off East Jerusalem and will cut the West Bank in two, which will affect the viability of any Palestinian 'sate' - as intended.

The solution is to stop all building in the settlements, to remove most of them and stop building the new Great Wall.

[MGB8]

Sumud is trying, again and not convincingly, the "I say it so, and repeat it a lot, so it must be true" argument.

Thing is, sumud, no one here is as dumb as you think they are. People see through your lies, your distortions, your lack of evidence, and your conspiracy theories.

More importantly, they can discern WHY you lie, distort, make baseless allegations and paranoid accusations. They see what consequences such dishonesty allows you to really support - the justification of Islamist Imperialism, attempted ethnic cleansing, if not genocide, and succesful as well as attempted mass murder.

What has been demonstrated is that Israel is building a separation wall which will mark the de-facto border between Israel and any "Palestine." The wall does not include a portion on the Jordan Valley. The wall EXCLUDES the vast majority of the settlements that you complain show that Israel will not allow a viable Pal Arab state, even though Israel has and is removing settlements, and many of these "settlements" are a trailer or two on a hilltop.

The issue of East Jerusalem, which will be the subject of negotiations, is far from decided, and the E1 project only cuts off E.Jerusalem from direct access to Ramallah, by linking Ma'ale Adumim with West Jerusalem, north of East Jerusalem. There still could well be a SOUTHERN contiguity from E.Jerusalem to other lands gifted to the Pal Arabs.

But what Sumud shows is that the Arabs will not accept anything less than %100 of their demands - or its an excuse to war. So give them what they want. War. Let them bear the consequences of their choices. No more Israeli/Western bailouts.

[minusthejihad]

Something that you can't comprehend - facts.

Poor Sumud (http://simplythebest.net/sounds/WAV/sound_effects_WAV/sound_effect_WAV_files/baby_cry.wav)

[Sumud]

Thing is, sumud, no one here is as dumb as you think they are. People see through your lies, your distortions, your lack of evidence, and your conspiracy theories.
You're right - they just might be dumber. Your last few posts show that I've way overestimated you.




More importantly, they can discern WHY you lie, distort, make baseless allegations and paranoid accusations. They see what consequences such dishonesty allows you to really support - the justification of Islamist Imperialism, attempted ethnic cleansing, if not genocide, and succesful as well as attempted mass murder.
MGB8's favorite 'dead horse' that he drags out to flog when has no logical argument, or no clue.





The wall does not include a portion on the Jordan Valley
The original IDF recommendation was for an Eastern Barrier that includes the Jordan Valley.






The wall EXCLUDES the vast majority of the settlements that you complain show that Israel will not allow a viable Pal Arab state, even though Israel has and is removing settlements, and many of these "settlements" are a trailer or two on a hilltop.
Nice try. I guess if you count every one of those hill-top caravans, you might almost have a point.

A more reasonable version of the same question is - what percentage of West Bank settlers will be living west of the wall?

Answer - the vast majority.

An aside - how many of those settlements, or even 'outposts' have been removed so far? ( A clue - it's a number less than one)





The issue of East Jerusalem, which will be the subject of negotiations, is far from decided, and the E1 project only cuts off E.Jerusalem from direct access to Ramallah, by linking Ma'ale Adumim with West Jerusalem, north of East Jerusalem. There still could well be a SOUTHERN contiguity from E.Jerusalem to other lands gifted to the Pal Arabs.
The wall runs south of EJ and cuts EJ off even from Bethlehem. Where the hell does your "sothern contiguity" come from?

There are a number of smaller Palestinian areas within this area. Most will be controlled by roadblocks and checkpoints. But for several lucky villages, they will be encircled by their very own wall. So, they will be cut off from the WB, not by one wall, but by two.
Best of all, they are provided with this wonderful service by the Israeli Govt. at no charge. How lucky can you get?

[MGB8]

My G-d you are a shameless liar, Sumud.

Your "points", and I use them loosely, are BS.

Your argument now is "how many settlers will be on the West side of the Wall - the vast majority" made to support the case that Israel will not allow a viable Pal Arab state. But, the fact is that the 80% of the settlers that will be on the western side of the wall will be on about 8% of the WB, total. So that leaves 92% of the WB for the puropses of Viablity.

in short, your point is, as usual, dishonest.

As for East Jerusalem, as I stated above, btw, its a question of what is defined as East Jerusalem.

There is a good map of the route of the fence at:

http://www.mideastweb.org/thefence.htm

As anyone can see, there is an Area East of what is enclosed as Jerusalem but South and West of Ma'ale Edumim. These are KNOWN as parts of East Jerusalem that Israel has not annexed, just to pre-empt the likely subsequent lie by Sumud that these areas are not East Jerusalem, see Olmert's statement - "There are parts of Jerusalem that are not parts of Israel."

(Note - I unfortunately linked to an OPINION piece by a long time lefty (Sarah Kreimer, you can look her up) who has many of the same opinions as Sumud, which are based on conjectures about intention and the FALSE claim that the route of the fence enclosing Ma'ale Edumim bifurcates the WB, as anyone can see by the map.)

Now, Sumud may protest that that wasn't what he was considering as East Jerusalem, that he was talking about territory already annexed by Israel (in 1967), the old municiple borders, maybe he is even talking about the Old City, and thus encompassed by the barrier. However, lets not forget that the Arabs in Jerusalem that was Annexed have had the opportunity (which most have decline, due in part to Arab death threats) to become full Israeli citizens (see, for example, bitterlemons, another peacenik site). So they have sovereignty if they want it through the democratic process, they just aren't the ethnic majority - which Sumud and the Arabs have no problem for any group living in lands they consider theirs - in fact, they won't even offer the vote - they offer dhimmitude and tell you how kind they are being.

if he is protesting that Israel has no plans on turning long annexed portions of Jerusalem, he is right in that the current Israeli administration has no plans to turn over anything west of the fence. This is what my position has consistently been. They Pal Arabs might be able to get a few adjustments in the route of the fence, including getting a part of annexed Jerusalem gifted back...but who knows.

The bottom line is that A CONTINUOUS PALESTINE is possible, UNLESS you take the Arab position that %100 of the Arab demands must be met, and every Arab definintion adopted.

The Arab side still acts like spoiled children without the ability to compromise.

Like I said before - fine, if you want war, you'll get war. But don't complain about the consequeces. If you don't want war, then be prepared to compromise - just as Israel isn't get %100 of what it reasonable wants (Autonomy plus - the Pal Arabs being JORDANIAN citizens with long term residency within Israel that goes from the Jordan to the Sea), the Pal Arabs aren't going to get 100% of what they want, either.

Moreover, since its the pal Arabs who are asking to change the legal status quo, and Israel DOES NOT *have* to do ONE SINGLE THING, Its upon the PALESTINIAN ARABS to convince Israel that its worth giving them what they want - you can try war - and it may get you some positives, along with many negatives (which you shouldn't cry like pathetic spoiled little women about), or you could try offering Israel other incentives, including dissarmament and bringing in the other Arab nations so that the other Arabs make peace with Israel at the same time.

That said, given history, security, and demographic concers, the Arabs cannot reasonably ask for %100 of their demands, because that is asking Israel to commit suicide (the idea of "return") or risking military suicide, given the Arab history of aggression and the massive numbers of Arabs, in polls the majority in all Arab nations, still commited to Israel's destruction.

[Reffo]

The Vatican is completely landlocked and surrounded by one state (Gaza, OTOH, has the sea), and other states have similar issues ... I believe there is one within South Africa or one of the other southern African nations, and other small states that have sea borders but just one nation behind them (Monacco, etc.) You even have the example of Luxemburgh, which has two states, but is land locked.
Sumud

Just to add another couple to the list: - Hungary, a nation of over 10 million people, is completely landlocked and has been so, by and large, through most of it's history even when it was not at peace with it's neighbours. Nevertheless, it has managed to survive. Alaska is another interesting example, like Gaza and the WB, it has no direct connection to the rest of the USA with Canada situated in the middle. So what makes those situations viable ? In two words: "GOOD WILL". My second question is: Is there any reason why the Palestinians should not strive to develop good will with the Israelis? If you ask why, then my reply is so that whatever the final settlement turns out to be, even in the worst case scenario that you seem to envisage, the situation could still be viable.

[Sumud]

My G-d you are a shameless liar, Sumud.
Your "points", and I use them loosely, are BS.
Your argument now is "how many settlers will be on the West side of the Wall - the vast majority" made to support the case that Israel will not allow a viable Pal Arab state. But, the fact is that the 80% of the settlers that will be on the western side of the wall will be on about 8% of the WB, total. So that leaves 92% of the WB for the puropses of Viablity.
in short, your point is, as usual, dishonest.
You were trying to imply that the wall protects few WB settlers by misleadingly referring to the number of settlements. As I said, and as you now acknowledge, the vast majority of settlers are west of the wall.

And it effects viability by carving up the WB into parts and restricting Palestinian movement. Why do the settlements have freeways (for Jews only) that take them quickly into Israel proper? Because the Israeli Govt recognises the need for efficient transport to facilitate economic development and normal life. According to the same principle, Palestinian roads are littered with check-points, road blocks and dirt mounds to achieve exactly the opposite.





As for East Jerusalem, as I stated above, btw, its a question of what is defined as East Jerusalem.
The sophistry of the cheap lawyer.

A philosophical question to baffle the greatest minds - what is East Jerusalem?

An ordinary person might say - it's EJ stupid!

But not the likes of MGB8. EJ is not EJ.
What is it exactly? Maybe MGB8 can enlighten us.

The Israeli version of this game is that it's the village of Abu Dis, which lies to the east of EJ, is the Palestinian EJ. Basically the Israelis propose that the Palestinians can call anything they like EJ.
Heck, they can put a caravan on a hill and call it EJ for all we care, right MGB8?





There is a good map of the route of the fence at:

http://www.mideastweb.org/thefence.htm

As anyone can see, there is an Area East of what is enclosed as Jerusalem but South and West of Ma'ale Edumim. These are KNOWN as parts of East Jerusalem that Israel has not annexed, just to pre-empt the likely subsequent lie by Sumud that these areas are not East Jerusalem, see Olmert's statement - "There are parts of Jerusalem that are not parts of Israel."
And as you can see, the map shows that Bethlehem is cut off from EJ(as I said), unless you share MGB8's fantasy that EJ is not just EJ, it's more than EJ.

And Olmert's statement - well that settles the matter! :rolleyes:

[Sumud]

Sumud

Just to add another couple to the list: - Hungary, a nation of over 10 million people, is completely landlocked and has been so, by and large, through most of it's history even when it was not at peace with it's neighbours. Nevertheless, it has managed to survive. Alaska is another interesting example, like Gaza and the WB, it has no direct connection to the rest of the USA with Canada situated in the middle. So what makes those situations viable ? In two words: "GOOD WILL". My second question is: Is there any reason why the Palestinians should not strive to develop good will with the Israelis? If you ask why, then my reply is so that whatever the final settlement turns out to be, even in the worst case scenario that you seem to envisage, the situation could still be viable.
Funny you should choose Hungary. I just came back from there yesterday.

And the differences are stark, once you think about it for a second.
I don't know about a 'landlocked' Hungary. Haven't you ever heard of the Danube? You can sail from Budapest to Austria, Slovenia or Croatia.

The proposed situation for Palestine is nothing like Hungary. Imagine if it's neigbours controlled all Hungarian airspace, closing down it's airports and controlled it's external borders - every single coming and going of people and freight approved or denied by others. I think the Hungarians would be complaining long and loud.
What makes these other situations viable, is that the countries/regions concerned have control over their borders, coasts, waterways and airspaces.


Good will of course is important. And yes Palestinians should be trying to establish good neighbourly relations. It just seems that the preferred Israeli plans rarely counternence such a thing. Control, not co-operation, is the goal.

And why not ask the same question in return - Is there any reason why the Israelis should not strive to develop good will with the Palestinians?

[MGB8]

Sumud has done a good job of, and I feel for, the conflating of the issues of whether a VIABLE Pal Arab state can be created on the East of the Fence WB and Gaza, as opposed to the issue of WHAT PART of E. Jerusalem may/will be gifted to the the Pal Arabs.

The two are, of course, disting issues.

It is absolutely clear that a Pal Arab state with all the land East of the Fence (about 92% of the WB), as well as Gaza, will be perfectly viable, if there is a reasonable access point between the two (ie. a "shared sovereignty road").

The issue about what part of E.Jerusalem (as defined by the Israeli municipal boundries, not the pre 67 boundaries) is given over...different issue.

That's why the title is THE VIABILITY ARGUMENT is a myth.

Meanwhile, all the complaints about settlements etc. are just more dishonest red-herrings. If Israel gives the land East of the barrier to the Palestinians, then what exact say does Israel have over those settlements or trailers on the hills. Moreover, even Sharon has said only "large population centers" will be kept. The Jordan valley proposal never got any traction - it was just a proposal, one that clearly would never fly - Israeli supreme court, Labour, not to mention international opposition.

The idea that the other 8% of the land on the WB is needed for viability is just a big lie. Which is no surprise, even if it does show great chutzpah, especially given the, using the same standard, "viablity" of the UN partion map of Israel...

[MGB8]

Given terrorism, control of airspace and coastal waters will not likely be immediately relinquised by Israel upon the establishment of a Pal Arab state. Nonetheless, that would not mean that the state wouldn't be viable - you still have borders with Jordan and Egypt and Israel.

Hungary's airspace, and "waterway" ARE controlled by its neighbors, in that if they close off access to use their airspace and waterway, there is nothing hungary can do about it. Take Luxemburg, Swaziland or Monaco and you have even more control by the neighboring, or surrounding, nation. Nu?

Sumud might be complaining that Israel would still have this Palestinian state "by the jewels"... allowing access as it saw fit, but AFTER the Pal Arabs proved that they were capable of not attacking for any extended period of time, the pressure on Israel to allow unfettered access would be enourmous.

[Mediocrates]

All of those things are part of whatever negotiation you engage in. But when the PLO stands and declares that everything is nonnegotiable then that is what you get. It's pretty silly and stupid to proceed from that point then, isn't it?

I mean Jordan has more or less said the same thing - it isn't going to open or relax its borders with 'Palestine' and just like today it will continue to turn away thousands of people from the Allenby bridge crossing. But somehow that doesn't outrage or shock anyone, does it? No of course not because that's what countries do. No, it's only when those nasty stubborn Jews insist on being a country and refuse to lay down that the Arabs rise up and compete with one another to shake their fists at heaven and see who can spout the most flowery and poetic hatespeech.

But if you were to remind them that this is what real negotiations consist of they'd fold their arms refuse to act. It will be very funny to watch the PLO or any of them attempt to pretend to run a country when their view of governance and operating the logistics of a country is like the poor sportsmanship of a child. Oh I'm sure some academic will tell me about the culture of this or that but it's just being retarded and childish. People who are in no recognizable way fit to run a country. Trust me, people will DIE fighting to print their face on the money and no one will remember to pick up the garbage or pave the streets.

[Sumud]

Meanwhile, all the complaints about settlements etc. are just more dishonest red-herrings. If Israel gives the land East of the barrier to the Palestinians, then what exact say does Israel have over those settlements or trailers on the hills. Moreover, even Sharon has said only "large population centers" will be kept. The Jordan valley proposal never got any traction - it was just a proposal, one that clearly would never fly - Israeli supreme court, Labour, not to mention international opposition.

The idea that the other 8% of the land on the WB is needed for viability is just a big lie. Which is no surprise, even if it does show great chutzpah, especially given the, using the same standard, "viablity" of the UN partion map of Israel...

There is no "giving" going on. Israel would be returning land.

So Ariel will be dismantled? I don't think so. It will either be enclosed by the fence (most likely) or be surrounded by road blocks, check points, the IDF and 'security zones'.

All the Jordan Valley settlements will be removed MGB8? I'd like to see that, I just don't have much confidence it will happen.

Here's a question that MGB8 doesn't address. Since it's just 8% of the WB (actually more if you inlcude EJ), why did Israel go to so much trouble to settle these small areas, and why can' they be evacuted. Afterall, MGB8 and others never tire of telling us how little land is involved.

The reason is that it's some of the best watered, most arable land and most suitable for residential housing. It also focusses around EJ for the explicit purpose of cutting EJ off from the rest of the WB and so hopefully consolidating the illegal annexation of EJ.

The fact remains that all the settlements are illegal and should be removed.

[Sumud]

Hungary's airspace, and "waterway" ARE controlled by its neighbors, in that if they close off access to use their airspace and waterway, there is nothing hungary can do about it. Take Luxemburg, Swaziland or Monaco and you have even more control by the neighboring, or surrounding, nation. Nu?

In other words, Austria , Luxemburg etc. control their own airspace and likewise, Hungary controls its own as well. So, they are not controlled by their neighbours, unless by that you mean, like with every border between adjacent states in the world, there are two sides to it. :rolleyes:

Israel wants to retain control of the airspace over Palestine and the water under it. There is no comparison to the relations between Austria and Hungary. The only comparison would be of Hungary between 1956(?) and 1989, and I think that's a comparison you probably don't want to pursue.

[MGB8]

The reasons this 8% of the land was settled (including Ariel and the little strip that will connect it with the rest of Israel) where manyfold - the biggest ones where made for the reason or protecting Jerusalem (like Ma'ale Adumim and other suburbs), not to mention that suburban sprawl is pretty common in industrialized nations. The populations often occurred as a matter of happenstance - ie Ariel (many areas are settled, but only x and y succeed, while a-w stay tiny), but, again, the big ones are really the suburbs of Jerusalem. Then there are a couple religious ones, etc.

As for the "arable lands" argument - another myth. To any extent that one set of lands that is to become Israeli, right next to another set that was more or less "left to the Arabs" - if the Israeli land is more productive, its because Israel pumped more money and technology into that land.

As for control of the Airways and a port - its absolutely clear that eventually a "Palestine" would have such control, although, like Austria, it would be subject to Israel closing its own airspace. However, given terrorism, turning that control over to a Palestine will take some time of confidence building. This is, of course, subject to negotiation _ I'd be very surprised if Israel was even able to prevent full "Palestinian control" over the Gazan seaside or the airways directly over the WB, except maybe an x-mile perimiter outside Jerusalem.

Oh, and Israel IS NOT "giving back" sovereignty over land to Jordan, the LON/the British, or the Turks...so it is ABSOLUTELY GIFTING the land to the Palestinian Arabs. Just like the UN gifted soveriegnty over the land to Israel. But make no mistake, its a gift.

[Reffo]

And the differences are stark, once you think about it for a second.
I don't know about a 'landlocked' Hungary. Haven't you ever heard of the Danube? You can sail from Budapest to Austria, Slovenia or Croatia.Yes, but in order to approach Hungary on the Danube, you need to go through other countries. At times of war, such a situation was awkward for Hungary.

The proposed situation for Palestine is nothing like Hungary. Imagine if it's neigbours controlled all Hungarian airspace, closing down it's airports and controlled it's external borders - every single coming and going of people and freight approved or denied by others. I think the Hungarians would be complaining long and loud.
What makes these other situations viable, is that the countries/regions concerned have control over their borders, coasts, waterways and airspaces.OK, but these are times of war. When measures of good will take effect, by both sides, the situation will be relaxed over a period of time. Given the bitter history of this 120 year old conflict, the Palestinians cannot expect miracles "overnight". After all, isn't that what everyone is trying to tell Israel about Palestinian terrorism ?

Good will of course is important. And yes Palestinians should be trying to establish good neighbourly relations. It just seems that the preferred Israeli plans rarely counternence such a thing. Control, not co-operation, is the goal.

And why not ask the same question in return - Is there any reason why the Israelis should not strive to develop good will with the Palestinians?Yes, they both should. But until this happens, Israel has no other choice than to control it's own security (after all, no one else seems to care about it). The situation will be gradually relaxed over time, once the Palstinians demonstrate that their own well being is more important to them than their hatred of Israel.

[Sumud]

Yes, they both should. But until this happens, Israel has no other choice than to control it's own security (after all, no one else seems to care about it). The situation will be gradually relaxed over time, once the Palstinians demonstrate that their own well being is more important to them than their hatred of Israel.
And what was happening in the 1980's. There was much less border control between the OT's and Israel. Palestinians moved fairly freely into Israel. Tens of thousands of Palestinains worked daily inside Israel. If the destruction of Israel is the goal fo every Palestinian, then they missed a golden opportunity.

They didn't because Palestinains are people like every other people. They want to work, raise a family, and enjoy basic freedoms without being controlled by others. The portrayal of Palestinains are little more than fanatics committed to killing Jews is just plain bigotry.

At the end of first intifada what most Palestinains were hoping for was a return to some kind of normal life. The barometer of this was the ability to work and of an improvement in people's economic situation. Unfortunatley the barometer plummeted and has kept falling ever since.

The chances for a lasting peace in these circumstances is not good, which is why the end of Israeli occupation and the removal of the settlements is so important.

[Mediocrates]

Any sane person has to wonder what they'll do with Gaza if they are the sole Jew free masters of their dominion. I mean you have to at least appreciate Dead Arafat's precience that running a country was not in his or anyone's best interests as long as they could blame intentional failure on the Jews. Does anyone seroiusly imagine that Gazastan will evolve into a functioning place as long as it's wiped clean of Jews? Or will it crumble and stumble on its way to broken down third would irrelevancy? And in either case, who will they blame? I think reality will slap in the face like a cold fish when they discover that the world really no longer gives a damn about them after they can't be a foil for antisemitic rage. And then what? They will be forced to make some attempt at running things on their own and being uniquely responsible for it. Clearly the long run outcome of this is anarchy, dysfunction, tyranny, despair and then someone will step in to launch terrorist attacks against Israel again. And don't fool yourselves, my Sabras. There is ZERO, let me reiterate this, ZERO chance that anyone in the EU, the UN, the Arab world and probably the US too who will let you take any meaningful defensive action against an independent Gaza-Palestine. As hard as you find it now to defend yourselves against terrorists, the perception that Evil Jews are attacking the poor defenseless freedom loving people of peace of Palistan will be orders of magnitude worse. You would see a hue and cry worse than what you see in relation to the evil Great Satan invader colonialist zionist crusader Yankees in Iraq. It's axiomatic. So the challenge will be to, completely disdengage - absolutely. Build a big wall between Gaza and Israel (metaphorically speaking). Don't patrol the coasts, don't interfere or engage them economically and allow only the smallest trickle of day labor into Israel. Anything else will make their failure your fault and your problem. The only real logistical problem will be how to manage the flow of traffic and goods and services between Gaza and Ramallah. And face it, whatever you do, they will hate you and blame you and try to kill you over it anyhow.

[MGB8]

(1) Israel did not have a national concensus on what to do with the territories or the people there. Originally the idea was to give a portion back to Jordan as part of a peace treaty, but the "3 no's" etc. Many wanted to keep them all with foreign national/permanent resident status for the resident Arabs - that was probably the closest thing to a concensus that Israel had, with the idea that eventually many of the Arabs, the ones who wanted to be under Arab sovereignty, would move to another Arab nation, while the other Arabs would stay and maybe sometime get citizenship in the future, when Israel officially annexed all the territories, but would be overwhellmed demographically by Jewish immigration and natural growth (they didn't think this through very clearly, but, otoh, the russian immigration gave reasons for this hope.)

(2) The PLO hadn't developed in the territories as much in the early 80's - people hadn't been so indoctrinated as they are know. The big mistake was Oslo, and allowing the PLO back in - Israel should have worked with local leaders, instead, but Arafat did a good PR job and Bush Sr., Baker, Peres and Rabin revived Arafat.

(3) Religious Jihadism was focused elsewhere at this time - the tail end of the Afghan conflict, Iran was busy with Iraq to spread the Mullah's evil elsewhere, etc.

[Sumud]

Clearly the long run outcome of this is anarchy, dysfunction, tyranny, despair and then someone will step in to launch terrorist attacks against Israel again. And don't fool yourselves, my Sabras. There is ZERO, let me reiterate this, ZERO chance that anyone in the EU, the UN, the Arab world and probably the US too who will let you take any meaningful defensive action against an independent Gaza-Palestine......................................... ............................................... And face it, whatever you do, they will hate you and blame you and try to kill you over it anyhow.

Oh yes. Poor, poor little us!

Picked on by the entire world, no one really loves us!
There's just the world-wide conspiracy plotting to throw us all into the sea by letting Gaza become a 3rd world ghetto.
How feindishly clever of those anti-semites who run the world!

Woe is me.....

"....and they're picked on, oppressed, they're the victims in all of this. It would be hysterically funny if it weren't true and otherwise non paint huffing people didn't believe it."

[KWAK]

Sorry to interrupt, MGB8,

What land was gifted to Israel by the UN ?
Arent you talking about the WB and Gaza here?

[Gilgamesh]

Oh yes. Poor, poor little us!

Picked on by the entire world, no one really loves us!
There's just the world-wide conspiracy plotting to throw us all into the sea by letting Gaza become a 3rd world ghetto.
How feindishly clever of those anti-semites who run the world!

Woe is me.....

"....and they're picked on, oppressed, they're the victims in all of this. It would be hysterically funny if it weren't true and otherwise non paint huffing people didn't believe it."

I'll answer your idiotic post, last thing first.

In Israel today, it's the eve of the holocuast memorial day, one week ahead of our independence day. The holocuast is one example of partial successful conspiracy to wipe out world Jewary. They menaged to do on only 40% of world Jewish population, some of my relatives included.

More recent conspiracies to rid to world from us, Jews, include the 1948 war, which it's clear aim was to annhilate all Jews. 1967 and 1973 had fasioned a soviet involvment in a conspirecies to genocide the Jewish people in Israel, and the last but not least, was Germany and European involvment in supplaying Iran and Iraq with WMD with the clear goal to gas Jews, using the Arabs as their proxies.

Anti semties world conspiracies is not in our head, but a fact of life for all Jews, for ages.

As for Woe... I call it letting off steam. This is one of the reasons for such forums to exist.

In Israel, we Jews are not obbsessed with pathetic self pity they way you'd like to imagion us. Personaly, I served at the IDF, and so many of my co-patirots. We are well Amred and equipped with Israeli made cutting edge weapon technology, the kind of gadegets the American Aid can't give us. So woe our enemies, woe yourself...

BTW, foreign sources suggest Israel also armed with a large varaity of nuclear devices with indigenously made delivery systems ... so we are not peddling self pity nor do we at anybody's mercy. Not even the USA.

Never delud yourself to consider our anger at the world as self pity, our anger is understatement for planets consuming rage. Fear us, you have all the reasons to do so and then some. I suggest you start pity yourself, insignificant Eurotrash.

[Gilgamesh]

And what was happening in the 1980's. There was much less border control between the OT's and Israel. Palestinians moved fairly freely into Israel. Tens of thousands of Palestinains worked daily inside Israel. If the destruction of Israel is the goal fo every Palestinian, then they missed a golden opportunity. These Arabs not only moved in, but stayed in. And they do take part in the execution of many terror attacks within Israel.

They didn't because Palestinains are people like every other people.
They want to work, raise a family, and enjoy basic freedoms without being controlled by others. The portrayal of Palestinains are little more than fanatics committed to killing Jews is just plain bigotry. Your description fits also the Germans in the holocaust period. Like the Nazis, the Arabs are also equally bent on the allimination and annhilation of Jews. The Arabs are under orginized, and we Jews are too strong for them to finnish off that easily. Yet, in terms of motivation, there is little difference between Nazis the Arabs.

At the end of first intifada what most Palestinains were hoping for was a return to some kind of normal life. Yeah?? Says who?

The chances for a lasting peace in these circumstances is not good, which is why the end of Israeli occupation and the removal of the settlements is so important. You seem to fall into an easy propaganda trap, such a trap insultes most people inteligiance.

These so called "settlements" which are nothing different from any small town America, were never the real cause of Arab uprising, as they define ANY Jewish community as settlement. Fact is, Arabs attack ANY jewish community they can creep into. TEL AVIV is also considered a "settlement" by them.

[MGB8]

In that case, I wasn't. My fault for not communicating more clearly. Portions of the WB and Gaza will be gifted to the Pal Arabs by Israel, similar to a portion of the Palestine mandate was gifted to Israel by the UN. Now, Sumud could retort - well, a portion was also gifted to the Pal Arabs - but their leadership, and the Arab leadership in general, rejected that resolution - and thus no Palestine, nor a revolt in the WB and Gaza against rule by Jordan or Egypt.

By the way, the gifting is only really about soveriegnty, and control/title of "state lands", as well as I guess the powers of the sovereign like eminent domain and/or nationalizing, re-distributing private lands. Its funny how some on the left have no problem with nationalizing and re-distributing in one context, but call it a "war crime" or whatnot in the next. It shows the dominance of Marxist thought.

[Mediocrates]

OTOH & it's been mentioned here, Syria needs a new country to invade and West Bankistan seems as good as any. The day the PA declares statehood every middle eastern country will boot their Palestinians and send them off to their homeland. Day-2 Syria will send in the army to 'stabilize the situation'.

[Reffo]

And what was happening in the 1980's. There was much less border control between the OT's and Israel. Palestinians moved fairly freely into Israel. Tens of thousands of Palestinains worked daily inside Israel. If the destruction of Israel is the goal fo every Palestinian, then they missed a golden opportunity.See ? When there was a relative calm, Israel's control was relatively relaxed. As the Palestinian violence increased, due to incitement and due to the stupid miscalculation by Arafat to use violence as a political tool to get Israel to make 100% concessions, the consequent repression increased. There is some logic to that isn't there ?

They didn't because Palestinains are people like every other people. They want to work, raise a family, and enjoy basic freedoms without being controlled by others. The portrayal of Palestinains are little more than fanatics committed to killing Jews is just plain bigotry.I agree that palestinians are people like any other people, but unfortunately their elites and their leders have been consistently leading them the wrong way. Consequently, their fanatics have been the prominent ones and unfortunately their ordinary folk have been the victims (just as Israeli civilians were victims of Palestinian terrorism). Yes, the Palestinians were victims of Israeli reactions but more importantly, the victims of their own leaders and elites. Let's hope that things will change for the better in the future....

At the end of first intifada what most Palestinains were hoping for was a return to some kind of normal life. The barometer of this was the ability to work and of an improvement in people's economic situation. Unfortunatley the barometer plummeted and has kept falling ever since.

The chances for a lasting peace in these circumstances is not good, which is why the end of Israeli occupation and the removal of the settlements is so important.Yes, but you know very well that in order for Israel to deliver it's part, the Plestinians must deliver their parts as well. Moreover, just as Israel has to be patient with the Palestinians, they too have to be patient with Israel.

[Sumud]

Anti semties world conspiracies is not in our head, but a fact of life for all Jews, for ages.
Yep, everyone else is just paranoid, but the world really is out to get me. :rolleyes:


In Israel, we Jews are not obbsessed with pathetic self pity they way you'd like to imagion us. Personaly, I served at the IDF, and so many of my co-patirots. We are well Amred and equipped with Israeli made cutting edge weapon technology, the kind of gadegets the American Aid can't give us. So woe our enemies, woe yourself...

BTW, foreign sources suggest Israel also armed with a large varaity of nuclear devices with indigenously made delivery systems ... so we are not peddling self pity nor do we at anybody's mercy. Not even the USA.


LOL

[Sumud]

OTOH & it's been mentioned here, Syria needs a new country to invade and West Bankistan seems as good as any. The day the PA declares statehood every middle eastern country will boot their Palestinians and send them off to their homeland. Day-2 Syria will send in the army to 'stabilize the situation'.
Only if they can get the IDF out of the way. Not likely.

[Sumud]

See ? When there was a relative calm, Israel's control was relatively relaxed. As the Palestinian violence increased, due to incitement and due to the stupid miscalculation by Arafat to use violence as a political tool to get Israel to make 100% concessions, the consequent repression increased. There is some logic to that isn't there ?
And so the occupation ended and the settlements were packed away?

Err.... not quite.

In fact, it had little influence. Palestinians who tried to stand up to the occupation were imprisoned, expelled, shot as per usual.
There were quite a few non-violent approaches to the occupation. They all had zero effect of course.

And where were all those people you now lament the fact that Israel is forced to adopt such harsh measures against the terrorist Palestinains? No where to be seen of course.



I agree that palestinians are people like any other people, but unfortunately their elites and their leders have been consistently leading them the wrong way.
And I agree about the wrong direction, but we probably have very different ideas about what is the right direction.

[Reffo]

And so the occupation ended and the settlements were packed away?

Err.... not quite.

In fact, it had little influence. Palestinians who tried to stand up to the occupation were imprisoned, expelled, shot as per usual.
There were quite a few non-violent approaches to the occupation. They all had zero effect of course.

And where were all those people you now lament the fact that Israel is forced to adopt such harsh measures against the terrorist Palestinains? No where to be seen of course.Sumud, you know very well that the "Occupation" will end when thePalestinians and Israelis reach consensus about what constitutes secure borders. That will happen when both parties will be willing to compromise. One of the most important dreams that the Palestinians will have to drop is the idea that Israel will accept the return of several million Palestinians to Israel proper, that will never happen! In the meanwhile, unfortunately the occupation will continue and if the Palestinians respond with violence then unfortunately they too will have to endure violence. I am sure that people like you and me agree at least on this that violence is not desirable and is stupid ?

And I agree about the wrong direction, but we probably have very different ideas about what is the right direction.What direction would you like to see ?

[Mediocrates]

Only if they can get the IDF out of the way. Not likely.


I give it slightly better than 50-50. It's not clear that Baby Asaad will survive in power much longer without compensating the army for leaving Lebanon. Or alternatively if the army removes Asaad they may proceed on to West Bankistan on their own. Syria has a fresh supply of weapons from Russia plus they've already been forgiven or rescheduled the billions of dollars of weapons they already purchased from Russia. You will see a new militarism from Syria soon.

[MGB8]

Given that until the first Intifadah, the WB was considered a bargaining chip with JORDAN and the rest of the Arab States...

Regardless, the idea that Pal Arabs were all peace marching for "an end to the occupation" before the first Intifadah is a joke. Its another falsehood. The very idea of "the occupation" as it is understood today didn't fully exist - it was developing. The PLO then was about ending Israel's very existence, as for many of PLO members it still is today.

Sumud being dishonest again...what a shock!

[Sumud]

What direction would you like to see ?

I was thinking more of past directions and the intrusion of Arafat into the negotiations between Israel and Palestinian representatives in the early 1990's.

[Sumud]

Given that until the first Intifadah, the WB was considered a bargaining chip with JORDAN and the rest of the Arab States...
......by Israel.



Regardless, the idea that Pal Arabs were all peace marching for "an end to the occupation" before the first Intifadah is a joke. Its another falsehood. The very idea of "the occupation" as it is understood today didn't fully exist - it was developing. The PLO then was about ending Israel's very existence, as for many of PLO members it still is today.

Sumud being dishonest again...what a shock!
History is not your strong point MGB8, and certainly not with regard to what was happening in the WB and Gaza.

I'm sure you're familair with the name Abdel Aziz Rantissi? Laterly well-known as a Hamas leader (shortest on record). Something most people don't know is what he was doing in the 1980's before Hamas existed.

He first came to the attention of israeli in 1984 as on eof the instigators of a tax revolt against the Israeli occupation. It was well recognised that the primary nature of the occupation was one of economic exploitation and early efforts were focussed on economic means as a way to undermine and protest against the occupation.

[MGB8]

The "Siniora plan", if that is the one you are referring to (Beit Sahur), was a predominantly Christian boycott, including taxes, in 1988-89. 1988-89. Not early or mid 80's - after the start of the first intifadah.

The only mention of Rantissi was his allegedly being arrested in 1983 for attempting to Organize a tax revolt in Gaza against the Israeli administration there. Oh, the unbaised historical site.... www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org.

This is a michael-esque tactic of deceit. You have two "examples" - one limited Christian one, and one that never came to fruition, and yet you try to cast these two exceptions as the rule?

Meanwhile, my above point still stands.

"Primary nature of the occupation was economic exploitation???" What, are you reading out of the Communists books now? Israel's presence in Gaza and the WB doesn't have all that much to do with economic exploitation. There was the issue of those wars - you know, 1967, 1973. Israel's economy is based on tech and tourism...where exactly does the WB and Gaza fit in? You could make some arguments about Water in the WB, which is a seperate issue altogether. But Gaza? Please.


......by Israel.




History is not your strong point MGB8, and certainly not with regard to what was happening in the WB and Gaza.

I'm sure you're familair with the name Abdel Aziz Rantissi? Laterly well-known as a Hamas leader (shortest on record). Something most people don't know is what he was doing in the 1980's before Hamas existed.

He first came to the attention of israeli in 1984 as on eof the instigators of a tax revolt against the Israeli occupation. It was well recognised that the primary nature of the occupation was one of economic exploitation and early efforts were focussed on economic means as a way to undermine and protest against the occupation.

[Sumud]

The "Siniora plan", if that is the one you are referring to (Beit Sahur), was a predominantly Christian boycott, including taxes, in 1988-89. 1988-89. Not early or mid 80's - after the start of the first intifadah.

The only mention of Rantissi was his allegedly being arrested in 1983 for attempting to Organize a tax revolt in Gaza against the Israeli administration there. Oh, the unbaised historical site.... www.fromoccupiedpalestine.org.

This is a michael-esque tactic of deceit. You have two "examples" - one limited Christian one, and one that never came to fruition, and yet you try to cast these two exceptions as the rule?

Meanwhile, my above point still stands.
They 'never came to fruition' because Israel stamped them out. As it did any challenge to it's control of the territories.






"Primary nature of the occupation was economic exploitation???" What, are you reading out of the Communists books now? Israel's presence in Gaza and the WB doesn't have all that much to do with economic exploitation. There was the issue of those wars - you know, 1967, 1973. Israel's economy is based on tech and tourism...where exactly does the WB and Gaza fit in? You could make some arguments about Water in the WB, which is a seperate issue altogether. But Gaza? Please.
Not at the start.

If I'd argued that Israel was economically dependant on the OTs your point might make some sense.

But they were a profitable little enterprise, one which Israel slowly became addicted to. A captive population of several million, who have no option but to buy your products. It's rather hard to give up. One of the reasons why Israel has always preferred options that give it controol of Palestinian borders. Otherwise cheap goods will flood in from Egypt and Jordan and this little market for Israeli businesses will almost completely disappear.

[NewsGuy]

A captive population of several million, who have no option but to buy your products. It's rather hard to give up.
Nonsense. The Arabs are economically worthless to Israel, and worse, they are a big liability. Securing Israel from Arab terrorism is far more costly than any gain made by having Arabs buy Israeli products.

And, again, you want to shift the blame for Arab-created problems on everyone else rather than on the Arabs themselves.

The fact is that the vast majority of Palestinians have complete control over their everyday municipal affairs and can open their own factories to produce their own goods which they can buy and sell as they please.

The problem is that too many the Palestinians invest their time and efforts in making bombs, not making a living.

One of the reasons why Israel has always preferred options that give it controol of Palestinian borders. Otherwise cheap goods will flood in from Egypt and Jordan and this little market for Israeli businesses will almost completely disappear.
More nonsense. Israel has peace agreements with both Egypt and Jordan that are designed to encourage import-exports. The problem here, again, is the hateful Arab culture in those countries that threatens anyone trading with Israel, with death.

So, here you go again blaming Israel for the Arab refusal to normalize relations with Israel.

[riskyscheme]

I am new to the forum.

I have followed this situation since the 1970's and I tell you, I do not see peace from the Arabs. For 30 years, that I have witnessed, the only time I heard them talk of peace is after 9-11, when they were on TV, talking about how "peaceful" they were. That is no Joke.

When discussing viability of the State of Israel, one has to conclude that Israeli citizens themselves have to decide what that is, and not worry about anybody else.

Any palestinian "peace" agreement is not gonna include peace. I would find it hard to believe that they will ever sign such a thing. If they did there would be a mass of foreigners coming in there on suicide missions. The idea that the likes of these fundamentalists letting go of this issue, is almost an impossibility. That has to be the overriding consideration of viability. Peace is going to lead to war quickly.

[MGB8]

Sumud...your point about economic exploitation is nice...too bad it has nothing to do with reality (and the concept of Israel needing a market for goods from, by Israeli standards, relatively impovrished Palestinians is also laughable - like the US using the Chineese or Mexican countryside as a market...see how well that theory has turned out... such a stupid argument....):

From "What Occupation" by Efraim Karsh

""....Thus it happened that, at the end of the conflict, Israel unexpectedly found itself in control of some one million Palestinians, with no definite idea about their future status and lacking any concrete policy for their administration. In the wake of the war, the only objective adopted by then-Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan was to preserve normalcy in the territories through a mixture of economic inducements and a minimum of Israeli intervention. The idea was that the local populace would be given the freedom to administer itself as it wished, and would be able to maintain regular contact with the Arab world via the Jordan River bridges.

In sharp contrast with, for example, the U.S. occupation of postwar Japan, which saw a general censorship of all Japanese media and a comprehensive revision of school curricula, Israel made no attempt to reshape Palestinian culture. It limited its oversight of the Arabic press in the territories to military and security matters, and allowed the continued use in local schools of Jordanian textbooks filled with vile anti-Semitic and anti-Israel propaganda.

Israel's restraint in this sphere-which turned out to be desperately misguided-is only part of the story. The larger part, still untold in all its detail, is of the astounding social and economic progress made by the Palestinian Arabs under Israeli "oppression." At the inception of the occupation, conditions in the territories were quite dire. Life expectancy was low; malnutrition, infectious diseases, and child mortality were rife; and the level of education was very poor. Prior to the 1967 war, fewer than 60 percent of all male adults had been employed, with unemployment among refugees running as high as 83 percent. Within a brief period after the war, Israeli occupation had led to dramatic improvements in general well-being, placing the population of the territories ahead of most of their Arab neighbors.

In the Economic sphere, most of this progress was the result of access to the far larger and more advanced Israeli economy: the number of Palestinians working in Israel rose from zero in 1967 to 66,000 in 1975 and 109,000 by 1986, accounting for 35 percent of the employed population of the West Bank and 45 percent in Gaza. Close to 2,000 industrial plants, employing almost half of the work force, were established in the territories under Israeli rule.

During the 1970's, the West Bank and Gaza constituted the fourth fastest-growing economy in the world-ahead of such "wonders" as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Korea, and substantially ahead of Israel itself. Although GNP per capita grew somewhat more slowly, the rate was still high by international standards, with per-capita GNP expanding tenfold between 1968 and 1991 from $165 to $1,715 (compared with Jordan's $1,050, Egypt's $600, Turkey's $1,630, and Tunisia's $1,440). By 1999, Palestinian per-capita income was nearly double Syria's, more than four times Yemen's, and 10 percent higher than Jordan's (one of the betteroff Arab states). Only the oil-rich Gulf states and Lebanon were more affluent.

Under Israeli rule, the Palestinians also made vast progress in social welfare. Perhaps most significantly, mortality rates in the West Bank and Gaza fell by more than two-thirds between 1970 and 1990, while life expectancy rose from 48 years in 1967 to 72 in 2000 (compared with an average of 68 years for all the countries of the Middle East and North Africa). Israeli medical programs reduced the infant-mortality rate of 60 per 1,000 live births in 1968 to 15 per 1,000 in 2000[/b] (in Iraq the rate is 64, in Egypt 40, in Jordan 23, in Syria 22). And under a systematic program of inoculation, childhood diseases like polio, whooping cough, tetanus, and measles were eradicated.

>>No less remarkable were advances in the Palestinians' standard of living.
By 1986, 92.8 percent of the population in the West Bank and Gaza had electricity around the clock, as compared to 20.5 percent in 1967;
85 percent had running water in dwellings, as compared to 16 percent in 1967;
83.5 percent had electric or gas ranges for cooking, as compared to 4 percent in 1967; and so on for refrigerators, televisions, and cars. <<

Finally, and perhaps most strikingly, during the two decades preceding the intifada of the late 1980's, the number of schoolchildren in the territories grew by 102 percent, and the number of classes by 99 percent, though the population itself had grown by only 28 percent. Even more dramatic was the progress in higher education. At the time of the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, not a single university existed in these territories. By the early 1990's, there were seven such institutions, boasting some 16,500 students. Illiteracy rates dropped to 14 percent of adults over age 15, compared with 69 percent in Morocco, 61 percent in Egypt, 45 percent in Tunisia, and 44 percent in Syria.

ALL THIS, as I have noted, took place against the backdrop of Israel's hands-off policy in the political and administrative spheres. Indeed, even as the PLO (until 1982 headquartered in Lebanon and thereafter in Tunisia) proclaimed its ongoing commitment to the destruction of the Jewish state, the Israelis did surprisingly little to limit its political influence in the territories...."

[Sumud]

Sumud...your point about economic exploitation is nice...too bad it has nothing to do with reality (and the concept of Israel needing a market for goods from, by Israeli standards, relatively impovrished Palestinians is also laughable - like the US using the Chineese or Mexican countryside as a market...see how well that theory has turned out... such a stupid argument....):
Clueless.

Did I say that Israel needs the territories economically? No, not at all. Again, I know that you're not dishonest, you just keep making mistakes.

One example highlights the advantage of a controlled population.
Where does fuel in the OT's come from?
There are quite a few choices in neigbouring countries, some who could probably provide realtively cheap fuel.
The least sensible choice would be from Israel, as it has some of the most expensive fuel supplies in the region.

But that is exactly where all Palestinian fuel comes from - Israel.

A nice profitable enterprise for a few Israelis and their Palestinian partners. The same is true of most commodities supplied from Israel - they could be sourced more cheaply from just about anywhere else, but that is not about to happen.


On the more general point you raised - totally clueless.
Palestinians working in Israel were paid a fraction of their Israeli counterparts, but paid tax at the same rates. Sales tax in the OTs was levied at the same rate as in Israel, but Palstinans workers were not paid the same, so in reality they were taxed more than Israelis.

This fact is what drove many of the attempts to organise tax revolts in the 1980's.

In return Israel provided some municipal services and health services (and free jailing /expulsion / IDF raids).

The great thing about it for Israel, was that with the tax they paid and the cheap labour they provided in Israel the Palestinaians met the costs of their own occupation, with a little profit for the Israeli Government to top it off.

A nice little scam.

[KettleWhistle]

Tax rates are calculated based on income.

[MGB8]

You said, Sumud, that the Occupation was economic in nature. Not me. The occupation was economic - a BOON to the Palestinians standard of living and, pre-intifadah, without much daily life consequence - as the Israeli state of mind was essentially - leave them alone (under Jordanian administration), hopefully they leave us alone. Israel didn't get involved, and it should have - it was a big mistake - but not in the ways you claim. It didn't get involved to prepare the population for peace by exerting control over education, nor did it stop immigration from across the Jordanian border, which resulted in a massive influx of Arabs the WB in the 70s.

Tax revolts? I've only heard of one attempt. Its possible that is just ignorance - or its possible that there was only one attempt in Gaza in the 80's. Proof....

As for economic benefits - there may have been some, particularly cheap labor, but, if you hadn't noticed, Israel had an influx of people from Russia in the 80's, and also has a TON of non-Pal Arab foreign labor. The cheap Arab labor still, for them, was a huge jump in their wages and standard of living. Israeli administration, to the extent that it wasn't "leave it alone" improved the economic wellbeing of Pal Arabs. To state that Israel didn't leave because they were hooked on Pal Arab labor and the pal Arab market - a tiny market, by the way, and one that was supplied quite well by cheaper Arab food producers, for example, in certain foodstuffs.... its a laughable neo-marxist argument.

The benefits are tiny compared to the other issues involving the WB and Gaza. Israel kept the WB and Gaza because there was no concensus on what to do with them, and the closest thing to concensus was the hope that Israel would give the local Arabs permanent foreign national status with autonomy, but be able to keep the territories - gains from the Jordanian and Syrian Invasions in 1967 and Israel's pre-emptive strike on Egypt at the same time, although Egypt then made peace and renounced its claim on Gaza in return for getting the whole of the Sinai back

** Note - it appears as Sinai was never seriously in the plans, which is too bad, since it could have been the basis for a Pal Arab state - 1/3 to the Pal Arabs, 2/3 to Egypt, but then maybe no peace with Egypt - and at the time the Pal Arab nationalist movement, as opposed to Pan Arab rantings, was in its infancy, and had promised Jordan and Egypt that it had no aims on Gaza or the WB (including East Jerusalem! How important it is to them today, though!) only what was Israel proper! **

They wanted to keep the territories not primarily for economic reasons, but for nationalist and security reasons. The WB as a buffer to Jordan. The Golan as a buffer from Egypt. Land for the expanding population to move to. Water issues are fair to bring up, too - and economic issues stemming not from the population that was brought under Israeli control, but from the LAND that was under Israeli control - more beaches, more areas to plant woods, etc.

[Sumud]

You said, Sumud, that the Occupation was economic in nature. Not me. ....
Yes, that's what I said.

But as usual, you misconstrue every argument you encounter (not dishonestly, purely from incompetence I'm sure).
Which is why you said this in your previous post,
"and the concept of Israel needing a market for goods from,...... relatively impovrished Palestinians is also laughable"
And why I need to point out to you again that I didn't make any such point.

My point was just the opposite, that Israel liked the captive market that the OTs represented, ie. a market for Israeli goods.

And I also noted that was a situation "which Israel slowly became addicted to".

Though on this point, it's worth noting that by the mid-1970's the OT's were Israels second biggest (in $$) export market.




Tax revolts? I've only heard of one attempt. Its possible that is just ignorance - or its possible that there was only one attempt in Gaza in the 80's. Proof....
Why do you insist on making arguments about a subject which you now acknowledge you know vitually nothing?

That was one of the main features of the intifada. In Jan '88 (roughly) all the tax collectors resigned.

Get thee to a library. :D





As for economic benefits - there may have been some, particularly cheap labor, but, if you hadn't noticed, Israel had an influx of people from Russia in the 80's, and also has a TON of non-Pal Arab foreign labor. .................... To state that Israel didn't leave because they were hooked on Pal Arab labor and the pal Arab market - a tiny market, by the way, and one that was supplied quite well by cheaper Arab food producers, for example, in certain foodstuffs.... its a laughable neo-marxist argument.
.
Cheap labour can only be non-Jewish, or didn't you know that? Hence since the closures, Israel has had to increasingly rely on importing people from Thailand/Phillipines for this kind of exploitation.

The only exception to this general rule is the importation of Yemeni Jews in the early 1900's. The Histradut ban on Palestinian labour was causing problems, but someone had a brillaint idea. Employing Jews from Yemen didn't violate the ban, but they were still Arabs and so could be paid very little. ;)

As for the tiny market, see above. Exports to the OT's generally comprised around 10% of Israeli exports (at least until the intifada).

The other aspect that was highly addictive, was that in the 1980's Israel imposed a VAT on the OT's (and a land tax). This mean that the Israeli Treasury started collecting tax from the sale of Palestinian goods, manufactured and sold within the OT's. It was this tax in particular that generated significant Palestinian anger.

Another lure for Israeli business, was that in 1986 the EC granted the OT's favourable trading status. Some Israeli businesses then started to export through the WB to take advantage of this.


But you knew all of this already. :rolleyes:

[MGB8]

There was no miscontruction, just as you provided no proof.

The idea that a relatively impovrished area is an essential export market to Israel is specious, at best.

As for your accusations of racism about Cheap Labor and Israelis/Jews, this is also plainly wrong. Just as the US got comfortable and thus "passed off" jobs to foreigners, so to did Israel, with its relative prosperity and large social safety net. That is one of the reasons people want to cut back the safety net - so that more Jews work in labor. They won't be as cheap - because the cost of living in Jewish areas is still higher than the cost of living in Arab areas. Nevertheless, this is just "in-sourcing" work that can't be "out-sourced." Any group will do it - Arabs in Africa, for example, do the same to relatively less wealthy native Africans.

[MGB8]

Just two more quick points. Early on in Israel/pre-Israel (just like early on in the US), Israelis (including the "European" Jews) did the heavy labor. See Kibbutzim, etc. They outsourced as they could afford to, just like anyone else.

Another point - the "OT" export market data, if you actually have any, surely would take into account E.Jerusalem and the Jewish suburbs thereof that were growing there...which would further weaken the argument - its not the occupation of the Palestinian Arab people that creates much of an economic incentive... Undoubtedly today, the 200,000 or so Jews over the green line provide more economic activity for Israel than the Arab residents in the WB.

[Mediocrates]

Who is it? Rachel Ehrenfeld who has written extensively on the corruption and missing billions of the PLO? Didn't the last PLO finance minister quit because he was forced to be powerless against all the corruption, graft, bribery and theft? Isn't the EU going through the motions of locating 900 million Euros of their money that's gone missing down the PLO rathole? The fact remains, and no one should forget it that the Palestinians are the most subsidized people in the history of the planet. And virtually every last shekel, dollar and dinar has vanished into the criminal enterprise called "Palestine" while providing almost zero benefit for 'ordinary Palestinians'.

One of the things that people don't understand is how expensive terrorism and smuggling really is. When you have to buy everything on the black market and pay off all the middlemen then the bullets and bombs, radios, explosives, payoffs for stolen cars, and so on are very pricey. The rate quoted to smuggle one terrorist into Gaza through the Philadelphia tunnels is in the 10's of thousands of dollars. Bullets cost a dollar or more a piece. Guns are often discarded and have to be replaced. For every murderous bomb attack for every obliterated maimed child there are 10 or 20 or 30 attacks thwarted and all of that materiel is lost to them. So terrorism costs. That is where most nearly all of the money from the UN, the EU and even the US has gone - to the upkeep of that terrorism. All other issues are secondary. Palestinians had whatever standard of living they had - UN estimates were USD3900/year per capita (FY2000) most of which was driven by 160,000 day labor work permits for cheap manual labor in Israel. This served a specific purpose to the PLO:

It keeps people poor and angry
It makes good PR to film checkpoints
It puts a lot of terrorists inside Israel
It keeps the oiligarchs in power

This is why the PLO never has had any serious intention of developing a viable infrastructure or economy. This is why they even went so far as to demand that Israel demolish the houses in Gaza so as to prevent squabbling over what will probably be the only new homes built in Gaza for years and years. This is why 'viability' is a myth: because you need something valuable to ship from one place to another before you can build roads to ship it on. And none of that has ever existed. At best the Palestinians long run economic viability is not in industry its in services - gambling, resorts, security, training, media and all those service related industries that other similar tiny state-lets are good at: banking, brokerage, communications and so on. But first you need to have some semblence of contract law and a reasonable expectation that commercial contracts and agreements are enforceable - without of course blowing up someone's store with a suicide bomber.

[Sumud]

There was no miscontruction, just as you provided no proof.

The idea that a relatively impovrished area is an essential export market to Israel is specious, at best.
You're at least consistent MGB8.
Did I say anywhere that the OT's were an "essential export market? No.

I'll guess you'll do your usual trick and make another post changing your point, without ackonwledging that this one was 'mistaken', and saying something about me 'inferring' such a thing.

Another example of mis-representing someone else's argument - a version of what is commonly referred to as the 'straw-man' argument.

I guess when you can't answer the point rationally, this is the only option.




As for your accusations of racism about Cheap Labor and Israelis/Jews, ....
Where did I accuse anyone of "racism".

Let me guess - it's inferred!! :D

You're on a roll MGB8.

[Sumud]

The fact remains, and no one should forget it that the Palestinians are the most subsidized people in the history of the planet.
Sorry. I thought that honour belonged to Israel, having been firmly attached to the American welfare 'nipple' for decades, dwarfing the paultry sums the EU has sent to the PA.




UN estimates were USD3900/year per capita (FY2000) most of which was driven by 160,000 day labor work permits for cheap manual labor in Israel. This served a specific purpose to the PLO:

It keeps people poor and angry
It makes good PR to film checkpoints
It puts a lot of terrorists inside Israel
It keeps the oiligarchs in power

You forgot something.

The tens of thousands of workers in Israel achieved another purpose - they made Israelis feel good for helping the poor and underprivliged.
I mean, that was the only reason there were there wasn't it? :rolleyes:

[MGB8]

Cheap labour can only be non-Jewish, or didn't you know that?

If this isn't an allegation of racisim, then the world is flat. You are also consistent, Sumud. You consistently try to escape the clear meaning of what you write. Vincente Fox of Mexico was accused of making a racist statement for saying "Mexicans in the US do jobs even Black people won't do." Your statement is even more clear, as the accusation is that Jews think that they are "too good" to do cheap labor - which in a sense is true, but only in the same sense that it is true of Americans or Europeans or any other 1st world population. But you didn't say "Israeli's" now... in fact, you then pointed to Yemeni Jews...

You are a flat earther, aren't you, Sumud.

The points above remain the same, and uncontested, in reality, by you. So we can infer they are admitted.

[MGB8]

ps. still waiting on some evidence (or any substantive reply... instead of misdirection)... but some evidence would be nice.

Still waiting....

[Mediocrates]

Sorry. I thought that honour belonged to Israel, having been firmly attached to the American welfare 'nipple' for decades, dwarfing the paultry sums the EU has sent to the PA.

Per capita the PLO has received more money than any other 'people' in the history of man.

The tens of thousands of workers in Israel achieved another purpose - they made Israelis feel good for helping the poor and underprivliged.
I mean, that was the only reason there were there wasn't it? :rolleyes:

What the PLO didn't understand and continues to not understand is that their cheap labor was infinitely replaceable with fungible cheap labor from Africa and Asia. When Israel reduced day work permits from 160,000 to 15,000 that gap was readily replaced by other workers. The Palestinians were blindsided by their own arrogance and didn't understand how that happened so quickly. Now daily permits fluctuate in the 35-50,000 round at least that's what they talk about. So long run about 100-125,000 jobs are gone from the Palestinians.

Now one would think this is unusal but in fact it is not. All across the Arab world countries experience something called structural un/underemployment or hidden unemployment. This occurs where a nominally social welfare state gives people do-nothing jobs in the government in order to pad their employment figures and give people something to do. Egypt and Saudi Arabia are world famous at this where public unemployment figures are 25% or so but in reality are at 50% or more once you discount all the jobs which are 4th assistant deputy minister of horseshoe nails. This is the single largest factor in the size of the government relative to the GDP and why their economies show zero or negative growth. So 40 or 50% figures like you see in Gaza or the West Bank aren't that surprising relative to the overall lack of progress regionally. And then over time you'll see that with so many young people making up such a large fraction of the overall population even if there were jobs there won't be enough working people to support everyone.

[minusthejihad]

If this isn't an allegation of racisim, then the world is flat.

I think it was more a case of someone completely ignorant about what really happens in Israel and just spouting his mouth off about Evil Yid Menace. As if Jews in Israel are incapable of cheap labor, just what do you think immigrants do for the first few years? What an entirely ignorant assessment from someone who knows nothing about Israel that he doesn't read in Al Jazeera.

[KettleWhistle]

Many in Eastern Europe LOVE to go to Israel for several months to work in construction there. For them it's like a paid vacation, and they also get experience in different construction methods. The only backdraw for Israelis is having to listen to the annoying music they are blasting night and day from their stereos.

[Sumud]

If this isn't an allegation of racisim, then the world is flat. You are also consistent, Sumud. You consistently try to escape the clear meaning of what you write. Vincente Fox of Mexico was accused of making a racist statement for saying "Mexicans in the US do jobs even Black people won't do." Your statement is even more clear, as the accusation is that Jews think that they are "too good" to do cheap labor - which in a sense is true, but only in the same sense that it is true of Americans or Europeans or any other 1st world population. But you didn't say "Israeli's" now... in fact, you then pointed to Yemeni Jews...
Hey, make up your mind. Is this "an allegation of racisim...." or is it "in a sense...true".

Otherwise,fair complaint.

More accurately it wasn't about non-Jewish labour, but about non-European Jewish labour. Post-48 the influx of Arab Jews provided a neat solution to the problem of the loss of the cheap Palestinian labour force. The new Jewish immigrants found themselves in the developement towns on the newly established borders and doing the most menial work for the lowest pay. The situation led to riots in the mid-late 1950s, as the Mizharim felt discriminated against by Jews of European origin.

It wasn't too surprising really, as Zionism took with it some of the European baggage, from which it was born, including the sense of superiority over native peoples (or any dark skinned people for that matter).





The points above remain the same, and uncontested, in reality, by you. So we can infer they are admitted.
Which points?

[Sumud]

As I speculated some time ago on this thread, it is highly likely that Israel wants to keep the Jordan valley. Recent comments by the Israeli Agriculture minister, detialed his proposal for a planned expansion of the Jordan Valley settlements.

There are 2 basic reasons for this. It gives Israel access to water supplies from the Jordan River and allows Israel to control the border of the Palestinian 'state'. Withdrawal from this area would also mean that Palestine would have a stake in negotiations over the Dead Sea, as it would become a shoreline state, while Israel would no longer be.

It's entirely logical to do this if Israel wants to undermine the viability of a Palestinian state. Without effective control of your own borders, trade and commerce are seriously hampered. The Jordan Valley would also be a likely venue for resettled returning refugees, expanded agricultural production and future tourism development.

The expansion of MA, effectively joining with EJ, and keeping the settlements to it's east, make more sense under the assumption of Israel planning to keep the Jordan Valley. This would provide the most natural route and would maintain territorial contiguity with Israel-proper.

[MGB8]

Ah, so now the clear allegation of racism comes out, after the denials. Its not a religious thing, its a skin color thing.... Or, maybe its a MONEY thing, you SOB. Your post did three things nicely - (1) proved that you were lying, above, in saying that you weren't alleging racism; (2) admitted that you were alleging racism; and (3) shifted off the religion thing onto the skin color thing, but still missing the most obvious, and the point that is true - that groups that are generally more wealthy pass along more menial tasks to groups that are generally less wealthy.



Hey, make up your mind. Is this "an allegation of racisim...." or is it "in a sense...true".

Otherwise,fair complaint.

More accurately it wasn't about non-Jewish labour, but about non-European Jewish labour. Post-48 the influx of Arab Jews provided a neat solution to the problem of the loss of the cheap Palestinian labour force. The new Jewish immigrants found themselves in the developement towns on the newly established borders and doing the most menial work for the lowest pay. The situation led to riots in the mid-late 1950s, as the Mizharim felt discriminated against by Jews of European origin.

It wasn't too surprising really, as Zionism took with it some of the European baggage, from which it was born, including the sense of superiority over native peoples (or any dark skinned people for that matter).






Which points?

ALL OF THEM.

[MGB8]

Here is the article, by AFP.

http://p144.news.scd.yahoo.com/s/afp/mideastisraelwestbanksettlers

Israel's agriculture ministry has drawn up plans to double the number of Jewish settlers living in the sparsely-populated Jordan Valley area of the West Bank.

"The plan which has already won approval from within different ministries will increase the number of residents in 21 settlements by 50 percent in a year and then by a further 50 percent in the following year," spokesman Benjamin Rom told AFP on Friday.

A total of 6,300 settlers currently live in the Jordan Valley, according to official figures.

Rom said that the plan would involve a major increase in agricultural subsidies and the development of tourism in the area which also incorporates the Dead Sea.

The plan would be submitted within two weeks to an inter-ministerial commission on rural affairs which is chaired by Agriculture Minister Israel Katz.

A report in the Yediot Aharonot daily said that Katz had already coordinated the plan with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's office director general Ilan Cohen. It had been approved by the finance ministry's budget director Kobi Haber.

The overall cost for the project, which will see at least 50 housing units built per year, is expected to reach 32 million dollars, the paper added.

Under the terms of the internationally-backed roadmap peace plan, Israel is meant to freeze all settlement activity but the government has continued to come up with expansion schemes.

Sharon believes that Israel's voluntary pullout from Gaza Strip will enable the country to strengthen its control over the West Bank where the vast majority of the 245,000 settlers live.

Katz, one of the most right-wing members of Sharon's cabinet, has been a consistent sceptic on the Gaza withdrawal which is due to begin in mid-August.

"The answer to those who give sponsorship to terror is strengthening Israeli settlements in the Jordan Valley," he told Yediot.

"Abu Mazen and the leaders of the terror organizations will look out the Muqataa window every morning and see the Israeli Jordan Valley flourishing."

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who held talks with Sharon in Jerusalem last weekend, has consistently warned Israel against creating "facts on the ground."

No doubt some Israelis WANT to hold onto the Jordan Valley. Not just Nu? This plan is far from a done deal. The settlements are also on the wrong side of the fence. If Israel does indeed encircle the WB by keeping the Jordan Valley - then you would have a legitimate viability argument. If it is posturing, card playing, and internal politics, then you have nothing. You are worrying about a bridge that we haven't yet come to - for what... for an excuse to not come to the table, and a justification for murder.

BTW - the WB only borders about 1/4 of the NW portion of the dead sea.


As I speculated some time ago on this thread, it is highly likely that Israel wants to keep the Jordan valley. Recent comments by the Israeli Agriculture minister, detialed his proposal for a planned expansion of the Jordan Valley settlements.

There are 2 basic reasons for this. It gives Israel access to water supplies from the Jordan River and allows Israel to control the border of the Palestinian 'state'. Withdrawal from this area would also mean that Palestine would have a stake in negotiations over the Dead Sea, as it would become a shoreline state, while Israel would no longer be.

It's entirely logical to do this if Israel wants to undermine the viability of a Palestinian state. Without effective control of your own borders, trade and commerce are seriously hampered. The Jordan Valley would also be a likely venue for resettled returning refugees, expanded agricultural production and future tourism development.

The expansion of MA, effectively joining with EJ, and keeping the settlements to it's east, make more sense under the assumption of Israel planning to keep the Jordan Valley. This would provide the most natural route and would maintain territorial contiguity with Israel-proper.

[Sumud]

Ah, so now the clear allegation of racism comes out, after the denials. Its not a religious thing, its a skin color thing.... Or, maybe its a MONEY thing, you SOB. Your post did three things nicely - (1) proved that you were lying, above, in saying that you weren't alleging racism; (2) admitted that you were alleging racism; and (3) shifted off the religion thing onto the skin color thing, but still missing the most obvious, and the point that is true - that groups that are generally more wealthy pass along more menial tasks to groups that are generally less wealthy.
What "clear allegation of racism", you poor deluded thing?

And where did I post that a statement denying my alleged racism that makes you say this- "proved that you were lying...in saying that you weren't alleging racism"? Yet again, it's just in your over-active imagination. :D

Maybe I'm pointing to a 'class' issue (if you believe in such things).





ALL OF THEM.
Care to narrow it down just a little?

[MGB8]

Sumud's Quote:
Cheap labour can only be non-Jewish, or didn't you know that?

This is a clear and unmistakable allegation that Jews are racist. (In of itself, it is an Anti-semetic canard, but sumud clearly is a Jew hater, so this is no surprise). You denied that this was an allegation of racisim in post 101. You then shifted it as not a Jewish/Non-Jewish issues, which is the post above, but a Euro (white), non-Euro (dark), issue - another clear allegation of racism. You also now seem to deny that you denied it was an allegation of racism.

LIE LIE LIE LIE.

Seriously, do you have one honest bone in your body? Do you have an ounce of decency and credibility? Do you have a pinch of intellectual courage? So far, all you have done is perpetuate the dishonest Arab stereotype. You would make Arafat proud. What a pathetic excuse for a person...

Now you bring up class... but class is not a fixed thing, there is economic mobility in the world. You mean to tell me, Sumud, that more wealthy people would rather work in an office than do unskilled laboring in the hot ME sun? That, if they can afford it, they pass along the work? I'm shocked, really.



As for the points - in that post I was referring to posts 93, 98 and 99.

[Sumud]

Sumud's Quote:


This is a clear and unmistakable allegation that Jews are racist. (In of itself, it is an Anti-semetic canard, but sumud clearly is a Jew hater, so this is no surprise).
As long as you ignore that in my very next paragraph I said that the same policy was applied to some Jewish people.



You denied that this was an allegation of racisim in post 101. You then shifted it as not a Jewish/Non-Jewish issues, which is the post above, but a Euro (white), non-Euro (dark), issue - another clear allegation of racism. You also now seem to deny that you denied it was an allegation of racism.
In post 101, I did not make any denials at all. Not a single one. I asked you a question - "Where did I accuse anyone of "racism"?".

You know, one day MGB8, you'll post a comment without a factual error in it. It hasn't happened yet, but given the laws of probability, you will one day (by mistake most likely :D :D )





Now you bring up class... but class is not a fixed thing, there is economic mobility in the world. You mean to tell me, Sumud, that more wealthy people would rather work in an office than do unskilled laboring in the hot ME sun? That, if they can afford it, they pass along the work? I'm shocked, really.

Are you really this dim??

The issue now, as it was before, is exploitation. Do 'guest workers' get he same pay and conditions as Israeli workers? Did Palestinians? No and no.
While you could argue that this is simply an opportunity for the less well off, the circumstances inform us otherwise. Such workers are offered less than standard wages. The same work could be offered to unemployed Israelis, but they'd have to be paid standard rates. With guest workers and Palestinians, far lower wages can be offered. That is exploitation. It was the same with the Yemeni Jews in the pre-state period.

[MGB8]

You hide behind semantics and splitting hairs. You made an assertion. I correctly classified it as an accusation of racism and a standard anti-semetic canard. You countered "where is the racism" - an effective denial. Then you denied that you made the denial. Do you really think you are fooling anyone? You aren't. For g-d's sake, even Reffo, who has the patience of a saint, sees through your manuvering.

Nor is the issue exploitation. The workers are free to not immigrate to work in Israel. The issue is simply one of market forces. The more wealthy, including more wealthy Arabs, employ the less wealthy for more physical work. Nothing new, or shocking, nor having much to do with religion (you brought up Jews) or skin color.

Try for one day, just one, to be an honest person. Your accusations are more lies. Its pathetic.

[Mediocrates]

"day workers" is a backdoor illegal immigration. At least it is when anyone else uses it in the context of any country I can think of. Countries are supposed to regulate day labor and guest workers. That's one of the key functions of the government. Which is why day work permits are issued at all. That's what a guest worker program does. It's not designed to 'make equal' foreigners. And when the Visa period is expired the guest worker leaves. This is an entirely workable arrangement between Israel and the citizens of all other countries. That guest worker programs are subject to abuse such as African workers illegally overstaying their temporary residency and therefore being abused is fairly common. It's very hard to keep track of thousands of people who want to remain hidden. Because as bad as it is in Israel or Munich or Laredo Texas for them it's way better than where they came from.

Similarly, Israel tried to develop maquiladoras with the Palestinians. It didn't work so well because the Palestinians insisted on blowing up their own places of business;e.g. Gaza trade zones.

[Sumud]

You hide behind semantics and splitting hairs. You made an assertion. I correctly classified it as an accusation of racism and a standard anti-semetic canard. You countered "where is the racism" - an effective denial. Then you denied that you made the denial. Do you really think you are fooling anyone? You aren't.
Oh, so my question wasn't actually a denial, it was only an "effective denial", which is, as usual, your inference. Did someone mention splitting hairs? Maybe that's why I "denied...the denial". :D







Nor is the issue exploitation. The workers are free to not immigrate to work in Israel. The issue is simply one of market forces. The more wealthy, including more wealthy Arabs, employ the less wealthy for more physical work. Nothing new, or shocking, nor having much to do with religion (you brought up Jews) or skin color.
If the 'guest workers' are given inferior working conditions and lower pay (illegally, by the way) the argument about market forces collapses - it's simple exploitation.

[MGB8]

Same dishonest tactic, different day. :o

And he probably thinks he is fooling someone. :D

[Sumud]

If you see racism as the explanation for my fairly accurate descriptions of discrimination, that is your perogative. I'd assume that you have good reasons for doing so.

[MGB8]

:D :D

At least we now have an admission that it was an allegation of discrimination. So he alleges Jews discriminate against non-jews.... hmmm... then he brings up... oh, not, it was Europeans (lighties) discriminating against the darkies...

But Sumud never alleged racisim... :rolleyes:

[Sumud]

How should I put this?....D'oh!!

Discrimination can be on the basis of sex, religion, race, class, money, power.....

If you think, in this case, it is based on race, you're entitled to this view.;)

[Sumud]

Israel has announced it's plans for the Wall to cut off from EJ some 55,000 Palestinian residents. They will be seperated from all services such as hospitals, 3000 children will find themselves on the wrong side of the Wall from their schools.

As I said earleir, the plan is to isolate EJ from the surrounding Palestian areas and townships to strangle the like out of Palestinian EJ, to make sure that it won't be the capital of Palestine, and turn it into an Israeli EJ.

[MGB8]

Funny... the reports cite it as Israel building the wall THROUGH Jerusalem, leaving 55,000 Arab residents OF JERUSALEM on the West Bank side of the fence. Rightists have even called it "partitioning Jerusalem."

There is no doubt that Israel plans to keep a large chunk of Municipal Jerusalem, including suburbs such as Ma'ale Adumim. That has nothing to do with a viable Pal Arab state - it has to do with getting sovereignty over all the places they want. Bottom line, they won't. Israel will fight, to the end, if need be, for certain things. Israel will never go all the way back to the 67 borders, and they don't legally have to. Nor will Israel ever give a better offer than Taba - in fact, it is unlikely that Taba is ever offered again, the top now is probably the Camp David offer.

If the Arabs can't accept that - fine - its war. Just don't complain about the consequences of war.

Oh - and the first comment was something like "because Jews can't do manual labor, right" - yup, you brought up class, there. Then you mentioned European versus Arab... So first you alleged Jews are "racist" against non-Jews, and then that Europeans Jews were racists against Non-Europeans. But at least you are closer to admitting the truth, now.... to bad you have already denied it so many times.

Israel has announced it's plans for the Wall to cut off from EJ some 55,000 Palestinian residents. They will be seperated from all services such as hospitals, 3000 children will find themselves on the wrong side of the Wall from their schools.

As I said earleir, the plan is to isolate EJ from the surrounding Palestian areas and townships to strangle the like out of Palestinian EJ, to make sure that it won't be the capital of Palestine, and turn it into an Israeli EJ.

[Sumud]

Oh - and the first comment was something like "because Jews can't do manual labor, right" - yup, you brought up class, there. Then you mentioned European versus Arab... So first you alleged Jews are "racist" against non-Jews, and then that Europeans Jews were racists against Non-Europeans. But at least you are closer to admitting the truth, now.... to bad you have already denied it so many times.
Here's a surprise :rolleyes: - any attempt by you to describe what I said is factually incorrect. The word "racist" didn't appear in my posts. This was your explanation (after you commented that my description was "in a sense...true"). Discrimination can be based on social status, educational level etc.
Though it is interesting that a small but growing number of academics in Israel have described the attitude of European Jews to their non-European counterparts as racist. I'm a little surprised that you seem to agree with them.

[NewsGuy]

Israel has announced it's plans for the Wall to cut off from EJ some 55,000 Palestinian residents. They will be seperated from all services such as hospitals, 3000 children will find themselves on the wrong side of the Wall from their schools.
No, the Palestinians will have access to hospitals and schools that the Palestinians will be welcome to build on their own territories. it's time that the Palestinians take responsibility for their own institutions.

Of course, it's tough to make progress when the Palestinians are more preoccupied with making bombs than with making a living, but maybe some of the G8 charity can go to building schools and hospitals instead of buying weapons for a change.

As I said earleir, the plan is to isolate EJ from the surrounding Palestian areas and townships to strangle the like out of Palestinian EJ, to make sure that it won't be the capital of Palestine, and turn it into an Israeli EJ.
Until Palestinians will be barred from going into the mosque built on the Temple Mount (which is not likely to happen), we can expect a Palestinian presence in Israel's capital.

[SteveMetch]

The big lefty/pal Arab point recently is that a Pal Arab state must be "viable."

To be viable, they say, you must give the Arabs 100% of what they want.

Now, that sounds good, until you (as always) start adding context.

The Partition Plan did for ISRAEL had contiguity issues along with many of the problems the lefties claim make such and such plan "unviable."

The Vatican is completely landlocked and surrounded by one state (Gaza, OTOH, has the sea), and other states have similar issues ... I believe there is one within South Africa or one of the other southern African nations, and other small states that have sea borders but just one nation behind them (Monacco, etc.) You even have the example of Luxemburgh, which has two states, but is land locked.

The point being, when someone shouts "viability", ask them first, what makes the plan that they are protesting not viable (are they assuming Israel will control the Jordan Valley (unlikely) or the Philadelphia corridor (for how long?) How is this different from other landlocked nations where the surrounding nation controls half the border?

viable (n. viability)
the state of being alive; able to germinate, as seeds, fungus spores, sclerotia, etc.; capable of growth

Use in Language

A viable State can contain no more than 10% Fundamentalist Muslims.

Or

The viability of the State is in doubt because it has more than 10% Fundamentalist Muslims.

[SteveMetch]

No, the Palestinians will have access to hospitals and schools that the Palestinians will be welcome to build on their own territories. it's time that the Palestinians take responsibility for their own institutions.

Of course, it's tough to make progress when the Palestinians are more preoccupied with making bombs than with making a living, but maybe some of the G8 charity can go to building schools and hospitals instead of buying weapons for a change.


Until Palestinians will be barred from going into the mosque built on the Temple Mount (which is not likely to happen), we can expect a Palestinian presence in Israel's capital.

To be viable in the world economy you need to produce a product or service. The only product the Muslum’s in the land of historic Israel produce are suicide bombers. Any state “viable” or otherwise will just be a glorified refuge camp.

Poverty starts in the soul before it ends up in the wallet. The money sent to the Muslims in historic Israel only increases the number of people who hate us.

[Sumud]

Funny... the reports cite it as Israel building the wall THROUGH Jerusalem, leaving 55,000 Arab residents OF JERUSALEM on the West Bank side of the fence. Rightists have even called it "partitioning Jerusalem."

There is no doubt that Israel plans to keep a large chunk of Municipal Jerusalem, including suburbs such as Ma'ale Adumim. That has nothing to do with a viable Pal Arab state - it has to do with getting sovereignty over all the places they want.....
The wall seperates residents from essential services within EJ, and seperates most of the Palestinian residents of the surrounding Palestinan towns and villages from EJ.

It just highlights again that the claims of the Wall being only about security are false. The current route places over 100000 Palestinians, including refugee camps, on the Israeli side of the Wall.

Israel claims that access will be provided through gates in the Wall. But Palestinians who’ve experienced the way Israel operates the gates, know that this means effective access will be denied most of the time.

The purpose of the gates is to minimise inconvenience. But not for Palestinians, it’s to minimise political inconvenience for Israel. Accusations that the Wall adversely impacts on the daily lives is countered with the argument that Israel is minimising the impact by providing numerous access and crossing points. The story from Haaretz below gives some idea of how the gates work in reality, which is of course, exactly how they are meant to work,

….the red-headed soldier, who prevented residents of Qafin from passing through the gate in the separation fence last month to get to their lands. These are 5,000 out of 8,200 dunams of agricultural land in a village in the northwestern West Bank. These are lands belonging to the families of these residents for several generations, and for so-called security reasons they were separated from the village - as has happened, and will happen, with hundreds of other Palestinian villages.

Several residents have Civil Administration permits allowing them to pass through the closed gate. Signed permits serve as written proof - intended for the High Court of Justice, and indirectly for the world court at The Hague - that the security establishment and the state are keeping their promises, whereby the security fence does not keep farmers away from their land, that it is "measured."
………….
But the soldier knows better, because he's in the field, and he doesn't lie: “These permits don't obligate the army”, he said (and the Civil Administration confirmed this, when asked), because this gate is only for the olive harvest season. That is, the autumn - but now it's summer. Since the gate near their land is closed, there's no chance that the Qafin farmers can pass through to plant 7,500 olive saplings received as a donation, to replace the 12,000 trees destroyed by the fence. Since the gate near their land is closed, when fires break out they can't get there quickly and save the groves their grandfathers planted. And since the gate is closed, they are unable to plant wheat, okra or corn between the groves to slightly improve the nutrition of their families, which are trapped in a cycle of poverty and unemployment.
…….
He didn't hide the geopolitical worldview in whose name he is commanded to safeguard the gate's welfare. "There is no entry to Israel from here," he said. When he was told that the farmers don't want to enter Israel, but to walk 200 meters to get to their age-old lands, a few kilometers away from the Green Line, he responded: "To be politically correct, it is all Israel."

How right the soldier is. From his standpoint, on the security road that links up with bypass roads for Jews only, which in turn link up with settlements and Israel proper, this is what he and his colleagues watch every day: The space called "Israel," from the river to the sea, containing all kinds of "crowded population concentrations" surrounded by fences and imprisoned behind locked gates.

It's not only one locked gate that separates the farmers of Qafin from their lands. Another locked gate in the separation fence, in the north of the village, also divides them from their lands. And there's a third gate open only to those who have permits, but it involves its own tricks to ensure that the residents of Qafin won't really be able to work their lands. It's 12 kilometers away from the center of the village and is located in what's called the Reihan terminal, which cuts off and isolates some of the northwestern West Bank villages from other parts of the West Bank. In other words, it costs money no one has to get to this gate, which is between four and eight kilometers away from village lands. Residents aren't allowed to get to the lands by car or donkey. They are not allowed to take tools or saplings. In short, it's a hike of several hours, so as to cry over the neglected land. This is the nature of "the access to the land" that the security establishment promises the High Court justices, who believe what they are told.

The tricks don't end here. Out of 1,050 people who submitted requests to the Civil Administration to be allowed to get to their lands, only a minority received the permits (the residents put the number at 70; as of June, and the Civil Administration says 206). Hundreds were refused because the Civil Administration officials decided the residents were "distant relatives" of the people under whose name the land is registered. Several sons and grandsons of landowners were denied permits because they were considered "distant relatives." In one case, a permit was given to a man but not his wife; in another, only the elderly wife was granted permission to go on the long journey, alone, to the family land.

The residents of Qafin have come to one conclusion: The goal is to bring about the neglect of their green agricultural lands until they become wilderness. Then Israel can rely on an old Ottoman law that allows neglected and abandoned land to become public property, in order to make the wilderness bloom. In Israel, as every soldier knows, the "public" is the same as the "Jews." And so will the mistake of 1948 be rectified. At that time, some 18,000 dunams from Qafin became part of Israel, became Jewish land. Now it will happen to an additional 5,000 dunams.

[Mediocrates]

So? You're getting what you demanded. Live with it. Build your own services or didn't the instructions for building a society come with that Semtex?

[Sumud]

Building up services and the institutions of a state are exactly what these type of actions are aimed at preventing. :rolleyes:

[Leon]

Israel has announced it's plans for the Wall to cut off from EJ some 55,000 Palestinian residents. They will be seperated from all services such as hospitals, 3000 children will find themselves on the wrong side of the Wall from their schools.

As I said earleir, the plan is to isolate EJ from the surrounding Palestian areas and townships to strangle the like out of Palestinian EJ, to make sure that it won't be the capital of Palestine, and turn it into an Israeli EJ.

Netanaya was hit yesterday because part of the wall where the terrorists came from wasnt completed. Better finish off the wall and block them all of nice and fast and all those "poor Palestinians" who are inconvienanced and are late for work as a result only have their terrorist brethren to thank.

So called "Palestinian humiliation" is only a small price to pay as oppossed to Israeli school children and mothers having their heads, arms, legs and limbs blown off. Humiliation or a child's head blown off with nails dipped in rat poision flying around...??

sleep on that one Al-Summud.

[Mediocrates]

More to the point. They can have a slice of Jerusalem in exchange for Maaleh Adumim, etc. or they can lick rocks. They wanted an al Quds for Palestinian mythology and they will get it plus al Aqsa. And let's face it Saab Ereket went on a PR tear this weak whining that none of the Arab leaders complained about this plan. The other states see it much like Israel does, as a bargain. But...as long as the peaceful peaceloving people of peace of Palistan insist on an All or Northing national policy, they're political support will continue to erode. Not even more terrorist attacks that murder innocent Israelis will help them. What we see happening is that the PLO, 4+ decades into their one-trick pony of screaming 'occupation' and then murdering people has left them with no other options, no plan-B.

[Leon]

the very idea of offering them anything let along negotiating with them is terrifying

[Sumud]

Netanaya was hit yesterday because part of the wall where the terrorists came from wasnt completed. Better finish off the wall and block them all of nice and fast and all those "poor Palestinians" who are inconvienanced and are late for work as a result only have their terrorist brethren to thank.

So called "Palestinian humiliation" is only a small price to pay as oppossed to Israeli school children and mothers having their heads, arms, legs and limbs blown off. Humiliation or a child's head blown off with nails dipped in rat poision flying around...??

sleep on that one Al-Summud.
Unfortunately there have been plenty of "childs heads blown off". But some people, strangely, find that it's not much of a problem when it's done with a snipers rifle. Personally, I can't see the difference.

On the wall - yeah sure, build it at fast as possible. But on Israeli land. No one would much care if it was a 1000ft high, as long as they defiled their own land with it.

[Mediocrates]

Why what's the harm, either they will do what they do and walk away or they will deal. Either way Israel gets to claim they've extended yet another offer and they've decided to negotiate under fire while the drunk and disorderly ADHD children we call the PA come off looking like morons. Ok so Israel gets no support for showing what morons the PA is, but it's one more step in the PA's irrelevancy.

[Sumud]

There is certainly no pressing reason why Israel should offer anything substantial to Palestinians. As Mediocrates correctly suggests, Palestinians have little political standing and experience has shown that there are few meaningful practical consequences for Israeli transgressions of international law or human rights standards. The main concern for Israel is for quiet. It should continue doing what it's doing, but draw as little attention as possible. The E1 project was a case in point - a few days of press coverage then it all blows over while the bulldozers continue their work. The Jerusalem Wall route will probably play out the same way.

The only case for not doing so are trifling moral and ethical ones, which grown-ups like Mediocrates can, in their towering intellectual sophistication, cast aside, comforted by the words of Plato - justice is nothing more than the interests of the powerful. So let them "lick rocks".

[MGB8]

Here's where your case fails, Sumud. The only moral and ethical considerations that are really valuable are that the Pal Arabs get self determination. This says nothing about East Jerusalem, it says nothing about Ma'ale Adumim. It does say something about overall viability, which is why, as I have said repeatedly, if Israel does indeed try to annex the Jordan Valley while giving the Pal Arabs the WB in between the Valley and the modified green line, there WILL be a viability issue and ethical moral concerns. Nevertheless, those concerns are balanced by Israel's concerns for the strategic safety of its people - not by a piece of paper, which can easily be disregarded (and given history, likely will be), but by actual geographic and demographic conditions.

Like many have said - disengagment is not giving up to Palestinian terrorism. It is giving up on the Palestinians themselves. There is no trust that the Pal Arabs will ever give up on destroying Israel (and that caution is there with Arabs generally, given media, polls, etc.) Israel is not going to be dependent on the good will of its neighbors for self-defense .. no "please do not attack us." It will be dependent on secure and defensible borders. That a Palestine's borders might be less defensible... tough - partition Israel's borders weren't very defensible, either. Could have accepted that plan. Didn't. Consequences. Anyway, frankly, The Arabs know they have less to fear from an Israeli attack than vice versa. If they don't, if you don't, it is only from self-delusion.

[Sumud]

Here's where your case fails, Sumud. The only moral and ethical considerations that are really valuable are that the Pal Arabs get self determination. This says nothing about East Jerusalem, it says nothing about Ma'ale Adumim. It does say something about overall viability, which is why, as I have said repeatedly, if Israel does indeed try to annex the Jordan Valley while giving the Pal Arabs the WB in between the Valley and the modified green line, there WILL be a viability issue and ethical moral concerns. .
Succesive Isralei Govts have indicated that they consider the Jordan Valley vital for 'security'. I don't recall Sharon ever being an advocate of relinquishing control of the valley.





The Arabs know they have less to fear from an Israeli attack than vice versa. If they don't, if you don't, it is only from self-delusion.
What's this, the 'poor little Israel' myth yet again?

I'm not quite sure from which countries Israel might be fearful of an attack. There aren't any that come even close to matching it militarily.

[minusthejihad]

I'm not quite sure from which countries Israel might be fearful of an attack. There aren't any that come even close to matching it militarily.

Never underestimate the Arab World leaders' collective stupidity. It never fails. 48, 67, 73, 02, etc.

[Sumud]

Never underestimate the Arab World leaders' collective stupidity.
Difficult to do.

[MGB8]

This is my take on Sharon's expectations (btw, the JV fence was not approved, so I don't think your guess as to his intentions is all that valid, nor do his intentions really matter - all that is is an excuse for murder, what matters is actions, not desires)...

My best guess is that Sharon (a) expects to leave Gaza and the settlements in the Northern West Bank. He then expects more violence from the Pals. As a result, the "process" will be stuck. Furthermore, the West, not wanting a blow up of the process to all out war, will not push the process very hard. In lulls, such as we are in now, Israel will be asked, and will, relinquish control of towns and even pull out of settlements, one by one, over the course of many years. As violence flares, Israel's presence will return.

Regading the Jordan Valley, I expect it to be up in the air for quite a long time, until the amount of lulls and trust in the Pal Arabs has gone to a point where a real deal is in sights - which we are nowhere near, today. However, at some point Israel may feel the need to relinquish claims on a part of the WB (and Gaza), a sort of Israel unilateral establishing of a Pal Arab state by ceasing to be there. If that happens, I don't see Israel keeping the JV, except for maybe a military presence right on the border.

Lets put it this way. I don't think anyone seriously believes that this conflict is going to be resolved anytime in the next 20 years. The red lines on the Israeli side are: no national suicide (ie. no "right of return"), no re-partition of most of Jerusalem (although some of municipal Jerusalem can be given up), progressive steps on, as opposed to immediate, loosening of the border control (over a LONG time) so to have some assurances that no flood of weapons will come into the PA controlled lands. Israel would be willing to give up control of demographically Arab lands in Israel proper to help make this work.

However, the Pal Arab red line doesn't seem to be anywhere near this level. The Arab red lines seem to be "all of the WB or bust", national suicide for Israel (right of return not only for original refugees, but also decendants), and immediate and unconditional border control, so Israel has no assurances but a piece of paper that weapons won't flood in. Israel would have to be nuts to agree to any of that - strategically and demographically, its terrible for Israel. And Israel has no need to do it, really. And the west, knowing that this would make containment of the situation MORE DIFFICULT, not less, doesn't want this either.

In fact, what's funny is that this newest intifadah has probably done more to destroy the hope for the soon establishment of a "Palestine" than anything - because the West now realizes that such an establishment would destabilize more than stabilize the situation, and the West just wants containment.

The best the Pal Arabs can hope for is to lower the level of violence to a minimum, so that there will be much less Israeli presence (to pre-intifadah levels) and an ever increasing amount of autonomy, eventually leading to a state, but no time soon.

As for Arab states invading Israel, Egypt and SA have advanced US weaponry,and Syria and Jordan have large armies. Iraq, too, will have a nice army. Regimes can change, bad gambles can be made. Israel learned from the Arab sneak attack on Yom Kippur, when Israel had a GREATER military advantage than it does now (except number of nukes) not to underestimate their enemies. Moreover, its not just invasion, but general border war that is a danger.


.
Succesive Isralei Govts have indicated that they consider the Jordan Valley vital for 'security'. I don't recall Sharon ever being an advocate of relinquishing control of the valley.






What's this, the 'poor little Israel' myth yet again?

I'm not quite sure from which countries Israel might be fearful of an attack. There aren't any that come even close to matching it militarily.

[Sumud]

This is my take on Sharon's expectations (btw, the JV fence was not approved, so I don't think your guess as to his intentions is all that valid, nor do his intentions really matter - all that is is an excuse for murder, what matters is actions, not desires)...

My best guess is that Sharon (a) expects to leave Gaza and the settlements in the Northern West Bank. He then expects more violence from the Pals. As a result, the "process" will be stuck. Furthermore, the West, not wanting a blow up of the process to all out war, will not push the process very hard. In lulls, such as we are in now, Israel will be asked, and will, relinquish control of towns and even pull out of settlements, one by one, over the course of many years. As violence flares, Israel's presence will return.
It's probably best summed up as Allon Minus. The Allon Plan minus Gaza. The only other significant difference is that it's initial conception the territories would either be controlled by Jordan or by autonomous under Isralei rule. Jordon is no longer at option. No Govt on the Israeli side has ever supported a real Palestinian state, so I'dimagine that Sharon envisages a Palestinian entity that is little more than a municipality. The only complication is Bushs words about a viable state. The hope probably is that they were just words.



Lets put it this way. I don't think anyone seriously believes that this conflict is going to be resolved anytime in the next 20 years. The red lines on the Israeli side are: no national suicide (ie. no "right of return"), no re-partition of most of Jerusalem (although some of municipal Jerusalem can be given up), progressive steps on, as opposed to immediate, loosening of the border control (over a LONG time) so to have some assurances that no flood of weapons will come into the PA controlled lands. Israel would be willing to give up control of demographically Arab lands in Israel proper to help make this work.

However, the Pal Arab red line doesn't seem to be anywhere near this level. The Arab red lines seem to be "all of the WB or bust", national suicide for Israel (right of return not only for original refugees, but also decendants), and immediate and unconditional border control, so Israel has no assurances but a piece of paper that weapons won't flood in. Israel would have to be nuts to agree to any of that - strategically and demographically, its terrible for Israel. And Israel has no need to do it, really. And the west, knowing that this would make containment of the situation MORE DIFFICULT, not less, doesn't want this either.


This 'red line' is entirely unreasonable? - it's the international concensus on what constitutes a just political settlement. :rolleyes:

The real question for Palestinans is what is practically achievable? The political situation isn't all that favourable, but when has it been? Despite understandable pessimism, significant gains have been made. Palestinians were invisible in the 50's and 60's, and outcasts in the 70's. In the 80's the Israeli position was never ever to negotiate with the PLO, which then turned into a recognition of the PLO and direct talks.
In fact, every past advance had seemed to be in the face of an overwhelmingly negative political reality.

Will a settlement take 20 years? I think that is the Israeli hope and any progress towards it will involve dragging Israel, kicking and screaming, in that direction.

[Mediocrates]

The wider question is that after 40 years intentional nonprogress and no real mechanism to develop the next generation of leaders how does the PLO expect to make any real advancement resembling the formation of a functioning state? One could give them whatever their little hearts desire and they would not be in any position to creatively and constructively form a working nation with a working political, legal, judicial, bureaucratic and legislative system in place.

[MGB8]

Sumud,

You are kidding yourself if you think that (a) the international concensus - if you factor in the West - is that Israel should commit national suicide, or (b), if indeed that was the case - meaning that everyone agreed that Israel should committ suicide, that it would matter.

There is NO LEGAL OBLIGATION for Israel to do so. There is no MORAL obligation. If the international concensus was for Israel to expell the Pal Arabs, would that matter to the Palestinians in making their claims?

The idea that you can force a state to committ national suicide because other states want it to is laughable. And, again, given what the Western governments actually want, given the actual meaning of R. 242, your claim of international concensus is, at best, exagerated, and, at worst, another lie.

[Leon]

Unfortunately there have been plenty of "childs heads blown off". But some people, strangely, find that it's not much of a problem when it's done with a snipers rifle. Personally, I can't see the difference.

your right on the mark - sniper rifles are another Palestinian weapon of choice...and the little Jewish baby who had her head blown off by a sniper rifle in Hebron three years ago while she sat in her pram (I met her parents) was but one of many examples of " brave Palestinian resistance" to the "facist Israeli occupation." There really isnt much of a difference in their tactics at all - targetting civilians - seems to be the same.




On the wall - yeah sure, build it at fast as possible. But on Israeli land. No one would much care if it was a 1000ft high, as long as they defiled their own land with it.

And thats exactly where its been built. And your right the land has been defiled as a result - they shouldnt have to build fences on their own land in the first place.

Judging by latest events I guess the British will have to start building fences on their own land too

[MGB8]

Yup, a big prison, occupation, occupation, occupation... see: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/15/international/middleeast/15mideast.html?pagewanted=2&adxnnl=0&adxnnlx=1121443209-ZWFQNWxIEZeI9Z5NEY7lsQ

Meanwhile, the incidences that Sumud cites are few and far between, he, as usual, exagerates... but, again, that would be expecting honesty from Sumud. :rolleyes:

[Cato]

Do not forget the Egyptian and Jordanian Borders.

So much for Israel having total controll of the borders like a prison guard.

Or do you feel that Palestinians have a right to work in Israel?

It is like Tony Blair explained when adressing Parliament about deporting extremists "Moving to Britain is not a right, it is a priveledge we give you that entails certain obligations and means you will uphold British values, if instead you decide to try to destroy those values and place your loyalty not to Britain then you will not be welcome here".

Britain has every right to controll immigration to the UK, and it's borders, and Israel has every right to controll how many Palestinians will enter and exit Israel.

Working in Israel is not a right for Palestinians, it is a priveledge given to them by the state of Israel.

[MGB8]

I just wanted to add about non-contiguous lands... Russia, Oman and Azerbeijan have non-contiguous provinces that are seperated from them by independent neighbors. I don't know if they have "safe passage." There are probably more nations, i just took a quick look at the map. If they can do it..

[Achihud]

Sumud, Why are all posts from Sumud being removed ? Did he ask for that? It really devaluates this thread and all the effort put in it!

[Mediocrates]

What's the solution then, I mean other than Jew Bad US Bad?

[MGB8]

Lets see.... we gave back, completely, the border with Egypt. Its been used to smuggle rockets and anti-tank missles used to kill Jews. We give greenhouses, they are destroyed. We had a plan for redevelopment, but Gaza, outside of any Israeli influence, is a chaotic mess. We open up work crossings, they are used for terror or attacked.

Wake up, fool. You are not a jewish leader, you are a jewish idiot.

[MGB8]

Yup... Pablo Lance's post isn't actual analysis... its "Israel is bad and is to blame." Not with any analysis of Israeli actions, really, certainly not with any analysis of Arab actions, but merely - "I hate Israel, I hate Jews, they are at fault." Without any reasoning. Just chest beating. Yeah, we know you hate us. You can suck it.