Actually the Camp David peacedeal was achieved under heavy American pressure and insentives to both parties, as is the case today and during the early 90 s.Well, they can perceive what they want in Egypt, but the fact is that Egypt could not defeat Israel in this War (or the 67 war) even when combined with Syrian forces. Egypt only recognized Israel because they realized they could not defeat Israel and then Sadat made gestures to Israel (first) and Israel accepted.
I'm not even going into that, been there, done that. Fact is there was clearly an Arab majority in what is now Israel and the occupied territories before 1948. And today there is still a large Arab majority in theoccupied territories, and they are not israeli citizens and don't want to be part of Israel .And, you can keep on throwing out the term "occupied territories" all you want, but here are the facts:
1) There was know "Palestinian people" before 1967.
The international community has never accepted Israeli claims on that land, and the big majority in those lands call themselves Palestinians and are certainly not Israeli and don't accept Israeli claims on the land they inhabit.2) As there was no "Palestinian people" or sovereign "Palestine", even to this day, the "West Bank" is not "Palestinian" land. What it is is land that was liberated from Jordan, who occupied it from 1948-1967 (and did not let a single Jew live there during that period). Those who want to claim to be "objective" in this conflict have no choice but to admit that, at the very most, it is "disputed" territory, but it is not and has never been "Palestinian" territory.
as they had over India, etc. what's your point exactly?3) Before 1948, the British (not "Palestinians") had sovereignty over "Palestine" and before the British the Turks has sovereignty over all of "Palestine". (Neither of whom, by the way, wanted it back)
.The "occupied territory" claim is a farce and historically inaccurate
it isn't. The 1967 Israeli military conquest of these lands have never been accepted, not by any country nor by the people living there. So there's no other word to describe the situation.
the palestinians fight for their freedom, not a single people would accept the situation they're in right now. And if Israel doesn't want other nations to use the palestinians in their quest against Israel (Iran for example) than it should make peace with the palestinians, and end the occupation, give them their independence (that's what they want), and give in to international demands.The "Palestinians" have been used as an excuse for continued war against Israel.
So what you are saying is that palestinians should be ethnically cleansed from Israel and the Westbank? People who have lived there for many generations? They don't want that, and you can't force them. It's not realistic and you know it. Once again even in the Balfour declaration it was clearly stated that the rights of the indigenous people should not be violated, and the 181 resolution already mentioned a twostate solution. Palestinians rejected that in 1948 but now they are willing to accept it. But radicals on the other side are now obstructing such a situation.If the Arabs TRULY cared about their brothers then they would have taken them into their countries (as they have hundreds times more land than Israel) and assimilated them, just like tiny Israel did for all the Jewish refugees from the holocaust and from Arab countries.
I do give you this Takeo, you make me laugh When you were here 10 years ago (and hence, became an "expert" on the Israel/Arab conflict), did you meet any Gaza "extremists" or did you just run to meet Gush Shalom activists. Because the residents of Gaza covered all ends of the political spectrum, as well as religious beliefs. Most residents of Gaza were simple, hardworking families who were there because they could afford the homes, loved the beach, worked in agriculture, etc.
Why did they have to live in Gaza? Isn't there a beach or opportunities in Israel? Why did they have to live in a warzone that doesn't belong to Israel?
And your arguments make no sense. These people have no connection to Gaza whatsoever. However millions of palestinians originate in what's now Israel, they too want a hardworking life, work in agriculture, enjoy the beach, and enjoy the better economic opportunities in Israel. But they can't return. So why do you think people who have no connection to Gaza whatsoever have the right to live there, while people who have lived for many generations in what's now Israel can't return? It doesn't make much sense.
You think palestinian lifes haven't been devastated? Not only the 100000'q who have been ethnically cleansed but equally the millions living in Westbank under israeli occupation.I can also tell you from meeting these "extremists" up close that their lives were devestated from this EXPULSION.
We are not just talking about houses being destroyed, but their livelihoods. Your problem, Takeo, is you don't see any Jew living over the "green line" as a person, but an "obstacle to peace" and, hence, deserving everything coming to him, being it expulsion or terrorism.
But it's part of the choice they made. They choose to live in a warzone. They could have stayed in Israel and lead a peaceful normal life as any Israeli. Palestinians didn't choose. They always lived there for many generations, and they have nowhere to go.
Which brings me to the senselessness of the whole colonial project, why should Israeli live amidst millions of palestinians in difficult warlike situations if it's not for pure ideological reasons, eventough they have no family connection to that land? Are you denying that most (not all) choose to live in occupied territories for pure ideological reasons?
because I don't agree to colonisation, oppression of palestinians and occupation, because I believe that palestinians should have the same rights as Israeli?And then you lament about how we get an "allergic reaction whenever we see your name".
nonsense of course. You can see in my post "takeo's peaceplan" that I think colonists (that's what they are, or can anyone proove that they lived there for many generations, or that any country accept this as part of Israel?) should be able to stay, and their rights should be garanteed, IF they accept palestinian laws and become palestinian nationals. Palestinians who choose to live in Israel should become Israeli nationals and respect Israeli laws. That's the only right way in my eyes. But you only want rights for Israeli, and want to expulse palestinians.Your constant use of the word "colonialist" is just a code word for you getting hormones when Jews are kicked out of their homes, but if even one arab gets kicked out of his home, you have a fit.
no, for example I don't think Olmert is an extremist, nor is Livni, altough their views certainly do not jive with Gush Shalom. Everyone calling for Eretz Israel and expulsion of Palestinians is, in my eyes, an extremist, and I stick to that.Another problem of yours Takeo is that you consider anyone an "extremist" whose views do not jive with Gush Shalom.
but the majority of Israeli, according to polls, support a two state solution, which means they are no extremists. Many Israeli I talked to also don't support the colonisation project in the occupied territories.If that is the case, then I guess 94% of Israeli Jews, at the current time, are "extremist", as only 6% of Israeli Jews consider Obama's policies pro-Israel (according to a recent poll by the Smith Institue, mentioned in the Jerusalem Post recently).