Originally Posted by Up&Away

I would like somebody to explain to me why pre- 1967 there where no calls to Jordan which occupied the West Bank, and to Egypt which occupied Gaza, for a Palestinian state...

Hypocrisy.

Real or alleged Muslim on Muslim injustice is much more acceptable in the world and in the region than real or alleged Jew on Muslim injustice.

Talk about disproportionate response; compare the press and world reaction to 40,000 civilians dead in Syria's current conflict to the press and world reaction to casualties in the recent Israel/Gaza conflict.

Originally Posted by RumRunner_1492

In a peaceful situation with someone negotiating in good faith I think they will come a long way.

In that case, I suggest reading the article ''Why Americans don't understand Palestine'' I posted a link to above.

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

But not generous enough for greedy Israel.

Dusty

Greedy?

I'm sorry to make you the subject of discussion rather than the topic, but your words are more inflammatory than your opinion.

It would be more pleasurable engaging you in these discussions if you avoided such language.

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

Are you kidding? You think Israel is going to agree to almost abide by international law and dismantle almost all it's settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, through negotiations with the Palestinians?

Dusty

It seems such agreements were almost signed between Barak and Arafat, and then Olmert and Abbas.

My opinion is that any deal would result in assassinations and rebellion within Palestinian ranks, so the Palestinian leaders balk at the last minute.

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

Hypocrisy.

Real or alleged Muslim on Muslim injustice is much more acceptable in the world and in the region than real or alleged Jew on Muslim injustice.

The main problem in the West Bank and East Jerusalem is Israeli settlements displacing the indigenous population from their land and homes. Did Jordan expel Palestinians from their land and homes in the West Bank to make way for Jordanian settlers? No. That's the difference. There is no hypocrisy.

Dusty

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

Greedy?

I'm sorry to make you the subject of discussion rather than the topic, but your words are more inflammatory than your opinion.

It would be more pleasurable engaging you in these discussions if you avoided such language.

Yes, greed. They are prepared to accept a state on 22% of Palestine. How much is enough for Israel?

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

It seems such agreements were almost signed between Barak and Arafat, and then Olmert and Abbas.

My opinion is that any deal would result in assassinations and rebellion within Palestinian ranks, so the Palestinian leaders balk at the last minute.

I seem to remember Rabin being assassinated by an Israeli, a few days after agreeing to allow Palestinian elections and an expansion of self-rule.

Have any Palestinian leaders been assassinated by any Palestinians, after making headway towards self-rule? I seem to remember Abbas being particularly popular in the West Bank when he was on his way to the UN a year ago.

So contrary to your opinion, the facts seem to demonstrate that deals are more likely to result in assassinations and rebellion within Israeli ranks, while the opposite happens within Palestinian ranks.

Dusty

I lost all sympathy for the Palestinians in the early 1990's,

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

Did Jordan expel Palestinians from their land ...
Dusty

How did Jordan deal with the many thousands of Palestinians that were causing the kingdom trouble?

Did they expel them?

No.

They killed them.

So somebody said we need a place for these people, lets give them the land that these people live on!!

The problem started in the late 19th century when the Zionist movement started with a group of secular European Jews to establish a homeland for the Jews in Palestine. Before that Jews lived in peace with Muslims and Christians in Palestine for about 1300 years (except when the European Crusaders killed all the Jews and Muslims in Jerusalem 900 years ago). Most of the Jews who lived in Palestine till then were Arabs.

When Britain occupied Palestine during WWI, they gave a declaration (Balfour Declaration 1917) to the Jews that they will give them a homeland in Palestine. There was one big problem however: the land already was populated by indigenous Arabs (Mostly Muslim, but with significant Christian 6% and Jewish minorities 10%).

Britain opened the door to Jewish immigration from Europe, which escalated during WWII and after because of the Holocaust. In 1948 the Jews made up 33% of the population of Palestine, but owned only 5% of the land. The UN voted to split Palestine 55% for the Jews and 45% for the Palestinians to establish a Jewish and Arab States in Palestine, and to make Jerusalem an internationally controlled area. War broke out between the Arabs and Jews in 1948 and the Jews occupied nearly 80% of Palestine and established Israel on it. In the process Israel ethnically cleansed 80% of the Palestinians from the land they occupied and destroyed and depopulated more than 400 Palestinian villages, massacred thousands of Palestinians and made 3/4 million Palestinians refugees.

The UN voted in 1948 (Security Council Res. 93 and General Assembly Res. 194) to tell Israel to allow the Palestinian refugees to return to their homes, but until today Israel never complied. In 1967 Israel militarily occupied the remainder of Palestine (The West Bank and the Gaza Strip). The Security Council again voted in 1967 and 1973 that Israel return to the 1967 borders and allow the refugees to return, but Israel never complied (Security Council Res. 237, 242, 338).

This gives you a brief history of the roots of the problem. The Palestinians now negotiate to get only the lands occupied in 1967 back to establish their own state on it, and for Israel to allow the deposed people in 1948 and 1967 to return to their original homes.

Israel is only accepting to return only parts of the lands occupied in 1967. The land they accept to return has no borders with the outside world (making it an effective jail guarded by the Israelis). They also refuse to allow the refugees to return. They also have built many illegal settlements in the West Bank and planted nearly 350,000 Israeli extremists in them. Israel has taken control of nearly 5/6 of the water resources in the West Bank, and has built an apartheid wall that dwarfs the Berlin wall around and through Palestinian cities and villages in the West Bank ( http://chromovision.com/films/Wall.wmv ). They also refuse to return East Jerusalem, which is part of the West Bank, to the Palestinians.

Again this is a very brief background. It in no way describes the daily suffering, abuse, humiliation, terror and deprivation of basic human rights the Israelis inflict on the Palestinians.

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

Yes, greed. They are prepared to accept a state on 22% of Palestine. How much is enough for Israel?

If you'll recall, the little bit that Israel was prepared to accept in 1947 was too much for the Arabs to stomach.

I'll tell you what is enough for Israel: 1967 borders with land swaps.

Originally Posted by Dusty1000

Have any Palestinian leaders been assassinated by any Palestinians, after making headway towards self-rule?

Dusty

Go back and check.

Learn how Arafat dealt with his competition.

Originally Posted by RCWorks

I lost all sympathy for the Palestinians in the early 1990's,

I haven't.

Originally Posted by lowkeylaidback

Again this is a very brief background. It in no way describes the daily suffering, abuse, humiliation, terror and deprivation of basic human rights the Israelis inflict on the Palestinians.

It also in no way takes into account anything before the 19th century.

It also in no way accounts for Jews that moved into uninhabited areas. (Tel Aviv, Israel's biggest city, was nothing but sand before Jews established it.)

It also doesn't explain why wars broke out.

It also doesn't explain why Jews were prohibited from holy sites in Jerusalem after 1948.

It also doesn't consider the 700,000 to 800,000 Jewish refugees from Arab countries.

It also lies regarding the massacre of thousands of Palestinians.

Originally Posted by Michael in Toronto

If you'll recall, the little bit that Israel was prepared to accept in 1947 was too much for the Arabs to stomach.

That ''little bit'' was 55% of the land, which was at least 48% more than Jews had purchased. That's despite Jews accounting for only around 30% of the population.

Not many people would agree to give any of their land to strangers, if asked. If a stranger asked you for 1% of your land, what would you say?

I'll tell you what is enough for Israel: 1967 borders with land swaps.

Then wouldn't the 1967 borders be a good place to start?

The more settlements Israel builds, the more obstacles Israel creates, in the way of a viable Palestinian state.

As Likud party policy is to prevent the creation of a Palestinian state though, it's not hard to see why they are building so many illegal (according to the international community, UN, and International Court of Justice) settlements.

Dusty