IF strategy counsel

[Mira]

All views are appreciated here, but too often threads get hijacked by extremists, they don't stay on point, or they are flooded with way too many participants and they spin out into insults and nothingness. I would like to perform an experiment on this board with a few of the regular forum members, a sort of "think tank" within the context of the larger board. I would like to have two people representing the Palestinian position, two people representing the Israeli position, and another four representing the EU and US. Ideally, it would be a locked thread, available only to those participating. I've seen this done on another board, so I know it's possible, but I don't know what the capabilities of this board are. We can have general nominations for the various players, and then either Newsguy, or myself (since I came up with the idea) will pick the participants. Anyone who agrees, has to agree to fulfill the role with some degree of ernest, and if they fail to participate, then we can replace them.

What do people think?

[frizzer1]

Mira, perhaps I'm being thick, but I don't really see what that would accomplish.

[Mira]

It would focus some of our most knowledgeable and articulate members in a few designated strategy threads without all the interuption and side-tracking that goes on in many of the other threads. You see what happens here all the time. A few posters make very valuable contributions, but they get lost in the noise.

[Gilgamesh]

All views are appreciated here, but too often threads get hijacked by extremists, they don't stay on point, or they are flooded with way too many participants and they spin out into insults and nothingness. I would like to perform an experiment on this board with a few of the regular forum members, a sort of "think tank" within the context of the larger board. I would like to have two people representing the Palestinian position, two people representing the Israeli position, and another four representing the EU and US. Ideally, it would be a locked thread, available only to those participating. I've seen this done on another board, so I know it's possible, but I don't know what the capabilities of this board are. We can have general nominations for the various players, and then either Newsguy, or myself (since I came up with the idea) will pick the participants. Anyone who agrees, has to agree to fulfill the role with some degree of ernest, and if they fail to participate, then we can replace them.

What do people think?

Good idea. I am all for it.
There is a varid level of posters, with different level of experiance and different ability to have their opinions fly across. Also, such a thread can help accumulate experiance and present it a way everybody can learn from, even the most veterans.

[Roland]

What do people think?

Oh Mira! DO you want to know, or am I not in your favorites list?

IMHO you are exactly opposing this forum's intention - to share and discuss your POV publicly. You should start your own blog for exclusive discussions.
IF is good enough as it is. Some trolls come and go, but handpicking your personal audience can't replace what you get in normal threads.
Good postings are far from drowning in the noise.

We have no desire to censor valuable content.
...
Remember, this forum is for the benefit of our entire community, which is comprised of people of all ages and backgrounds.

[Mira]

Are you sure about that, Roland? 90% of this board is pure venting. I've been here about three years now and some have been here even longer. I've seen a couple of threads lately that at various points were really good, but unfocused and honestly, a lot of us are becoming less and less interested in bringing up the same points over and over for every new person with an opposing oppinion, especially when a lot of them are trolls. Why not try something new? It doesn't have to be a select group, or it can be a group representing the players I described, but we rotate new people in for every issue? Also, everyone would still participate in every other thread.

Do you, or anyone else, want to suggest something different? I don't really care how it's done, but I would like some FOCUSED discussion on topics like next steps, sharing natural resources, Palestinian continuity and Israeli security needs, possible incentives for both sides by US and EU....

[redcake]

I think it's an interesting idea. Pick out our best and brightest, and let them go at it in a cage match. One long continues discussion that touches on various points of the conflict, rather then 50 simultaneous threads. The thing is, I don't see it serving much purpose unless we perhaps you find a Pro-Palestinian forum that wants to share in the experiment and invite their best and brightest
to bring the rhetoric. Let's face it, the really frightening Palestinian platform isn't on display here, and it would be nice to see our heavyweight thinkers go toe to toe in a debate. The only time I'm aware this has been done, was as a faux Seeds of Peace type arrangement..."bringing people together" .

[Mira]

I think it's an interesting idea. Pick out our best and brightest, and let them go at it in a cage match. One long continues discussion that touches on various points of the conflict, rather then 50 simultaneous threads. The thing is, I don't see it serving much purpose unless we perhaps you find a Pro-Palestinian forum that wants to share in the experiment and invite their best and brightest
to bring the rhetoric. Let's face it, the really frightening Palestinian platform isn't on display here, and it would be nice to see our heavyweight thinkers go toe to toe in a debate. The only time I'm aware this has been done, was as a faux Seeds of Peace type arrangement..."bringing people together" .

That's kind of what I had in mind. There are a few Israelis here with excellent military service who could give us good details of facts on the ground and there are some excellent posters from the EU and US who can give their perspectives. You're right, we don't have the same for the Palestinian side. The closest I've seen is maybe Smud, and again, he can't give us any analysis involving facts on the ground. Still, there are plenty of articles out there that can be used to represent the Palestinian perspective, so until someone comes along with more detailed experience, we can rely on what's out there. I would still like to try maybe one thread, and we can open this to everyone, but set some ground rules for debating, with moderators really doing their jobs to weed out insults, venting, and unnecessary rhetoric that doesn't promote the agenda of the thread, which is to achieve a clearer understanding of the pros and cons of specific courses of action. Oppinions need to be supported with documented evidence.

What do people think about starting off with one thread analyzing the security needs of Israel and the developmental needs of the Palestinians?

[redcake]

Yeah but unfortunately, debating purely on facts misses the boat. The rhetoric has been made out to be more relevant then anything, and in this day and age it's easier to discount information which is provided as factual.

I guess you're saying you'd like to see less bickering here, with an emphasis on meaty detailed debates that can't be rebutalled with a quick "you're wrong".

[Mira]

Yeah but unfortunately, debating purely on facts misses the boat. The rhetoric has been made out to be more relevant then anything, and in this day and age it's easier to discount information which is provided as factual.

I guess you're saying you'd like to see less bickering here, with an emphasis on meaty detailed debates that can't be rebutalled with a quick "you're wrong".

The rhetoric will only get both sides so far, it's mainly to influence world oppinion. At the end of the day, the real question is whether the two state solution will work and if not now, when?

[NewsGuy]

We can have general nominations for the various players, and then either Newsguy, or myself (since I came up with the idea) will pick the participants.

You can pick the participants, no problem. I would be interested to see how it all works out.

As for the technical aspects of limiting a thread to certain participants, I will look into this to find out if it is feasible. But otherwise, you can simply lay down the ground rules that any "noise" will be edited out mercilessly by a moderator of your choice.

[redcake]

Okay, I wish I could agree, but I believe the coexistance talk is merely a smoke screen. It's a starting point for a decent discussion, sure, but does it really capture what this conflict is all about? I think it's a diversion honestly. I think the more we indulge in excersises of discussing what we wish was the issue, rather then the real issues - that we're just playing into the rhetoric itself .... and I do agree that the point of the rhetoric is to influence world opinion.... but that's why a two state solution is considered okay to talk about, while being outright pro-Israel and rejecting the current PA makes one an extremist.

[Mira]

Okay, I wish I could agree, but I believe the coexistance talk is merely a smoke screen. It's a starting point for a decent discussion, sure, but does it really capture what this conflict is all about? I think it's a diversion honestly. I think the more we indulge in excersises of discussing what we wish was the issue, rather then the real issues - that we're just playing into the rhetoric itself .... and I do agree that the point of the rhetoric is to influence world opinion.... but that's why a two state solution is considered okay to talk about, while being outright pro-Israel and rejecting the current PA makes one an extremist.

I'm not looking for a group hug. I'm looking to figure out what are legitimate obstacles to negotiating a durable settlement. Maybe the answer is that peace isn't possible under a two-state solution. I want to get as close to answering that question as possible and I want it to based on a technical analysis rather than a sense of entitlement by either party. What do the Palestinians need to have a viable State in terms of land and other resources, and what does Israel need for security? How can other nations use whatever means are available, technology, financial resources or otherwise, for alleviating those needs? What are costs to both sides regarding the issue of Jerusalem, borders, refugees and what are the options available? etc....

[KettleWhistle]

All views are appreciated here, but too often threads get hijacked by extremists, they don't stay on point, or they are flooded with way too many participants and they spin out into insults and nothingness.

I agree, but IMO it makes much more sense to remove each and every post that fall into the category of petty-bickering. As for "extremists," by what standard would you define who that is? And that's aside from the fact that when you bump off people who aren't PC, you just end up with a bunch of people who agree with each other, and as a result accomplish nothing.

[redcake]

Isn't that contigent on a belief that the current representation for the Palestinians have an interest in a viable state? Actions speak louder then words, and even their words aren't disguising their intentions. I don't mean to be argumentative, I just think the situation has escalated to where we can not concede to fiction over history. We can't pretend that Gaza and the WB were a unified nation owned by Palestinians. We can't pretend that the 300,000 to 600,000 Arabs who have any ounce of claim to Israel, mushroomed into 70% of Jordan, 1.5 million in Gaza, who knows exactly how many in the WB, 1 million Israeli Arabs, and a strong population in many other countries including the US. Not just for the sake of Israel, but for the sake of the very human rights causes that the Pro-Palestinians crowd claim to care about. I wouldn't wish my worst enemy a life under PLO rule.

Now the above might play as rhetoric to some, but for 10+ years, we've attempted to find a reasonable starting point for discussion - and it's a mistake - on the contrary, we need to find an ACCURATE starting point instead.