Israel offers to freeze settlement building on one condition

It's not actually possible to sit down and talk when both sides consider what the other consider their fundamental rights to be attacks on their fundamental rights

I think the only issue involved here truly that contentious and fundamental is the right of return.

But all of it is a non-issue because Hamas continues to attack Israeli civilians with rockets.

Let's transplant the argument anywhere else. The result is the same, the side firing will not cease and the side receiving is in no mood for peace talks.

Say we moved this to the US-Mexico border. Mexican drug gangs firing rockets into American towns and cities like Brownsville, El Paso and San Diego. Do you honestly think a sitting US President would even consider peace talks when his entire constituency is both under attack and baying for the blood of those responsible? No, the only action we'd do in the situation is send the US Army and Air Force in to flatten the sites used for firing the rockets (taking and occupying them is also viable) even if it meant razing a city like Juarez to the last building.

Right now, razing Gaza to the last building might be the only viable option Israel has left to stop the rockets.

^ You sure they wouldn't just start firing from somewhere other than Gaza?

edited 13th Oct '10 9:17:55 PM by FeoTakahari

Yes because that worked so well last time. Funny thing is I feel half inclined to say the same about the refugees.

by the way, by this "If there is going to be a Palestinian state one day, they're welcome to do whatever they like, but Jaffa, Haifa, Tiberia Ashkelon are off limits." did you mean that those being part of a Palestinian state is off limits, or that Palestinians with home there being allowed to return to those is off limits. Becuase the first is more or less a given, the later is so far from reasonable you couldn't see it with the world's biggest telescope

I meant that all those refugees would be welcome to enter the Palestinian state, but not Israel.

Also, I'm curious - what would you do if you lived in a place with a Gaza-like situation? What if some remote island started bombing the shores of Norway and demanding independence?

So you're saying the refugees shouldn't be allowed to return? It seems like it's impossible to get a straight answer from you on this.

As for your scenario, if all they wanted was independence sure. If any part of Norway want's independence they should be given independence. For other demands you've simply got to treat them based on their individual merits

Edit: I'm more and more getting the feeling that you define peace as "the Palestinians not fighting back"

edited 14th Oct '10 2:51:00 AM by Kzickas

What you don't seem to understand is that Hamas doesn't want independence, it wants, and I quote, the replacement of Israel and the Palestinian Territories with an Islamic Palestinian state. They want a second Iran where Israel is. Not independence, domination. Get it? Giving them everything they want isn't going to ensure peace since they want to obliterate and nullify Israel. To make it cease to be, to stop being there. They want to march down King George street in Tel Aviv and pretend its name is Tel-Alrabi, which is the name of the fictional village that was supposedly where Tel-Aviv is now.

For a lot of Israelis, peace means not having to be afraid to go on buses and that they'll explode. It means not having to know where is the nearest bomb shelter, and not having to listen to people from the other side of the world telling them how they should live their lives. Honestly, all we want is to be left alone with our lives. So answer me honestly, how many SECONDS would pass between the minute some island-based Islamic faction would demand the destruction of Norway and the minute Norse tanks start rolling it?

And regrading the refugee question: again, when a possible Palestinian state rises, they can go there if they desire. However, I don't think the Israeli government would let more then a million half-hostile people into its territories. If two states are to coexist peacefully, then the right of Israel to refuse entrance to Palestinians is as valid as the US's right to deport illegal immigrants.

And to the Palestinians peace means being able to live in their homes. Peace ultimatly means that the Palestinians must realize they don't have a right to get rid of the Jews and the Israelis must realize that they don't have the right to get rid of the Palestinians. HAMAS are bastards, but the Palestinians have little reason to do anything about them as long as there is no hope that Israel will allow a peaceful solution. If Israel commited to real peace including the right of return they could work with Palestinians who felt the same way to weaken HAMAS. But as long as Israel rejects peace then to those Palestinians HAMAS instead becomes a potentially usefull, but dangerous, ally.

And comparing not allowing people to immigrate with intentionally getting rid of a large part of your population because of their race is almost dishonest

Edit: Also I prefer to look at it from another direction. How many seconds would it take from a Palestinian state forcing most of the Jews, including you, out of Palestine and you calling for the destruction of the Palestinians state. I'm going with however many it takes to find a megaphone

Edit 2: Would renaming Tel Aviv Tel Arabi be kind of like forcing the entire population of Lydda from their homes at gun point, setteling some Jews there instead and pretending it's name is Lod. Because I have kind of a problem caring when Israelis get outraged that HAMAS wants to do exactly what Israel has already done

edited 14th Oct '10 3:41:40 AM by Kzickas

The leadership of Hamas and much of its populace want Israel gone altogether though... at the moment.

Big Sock, making concessions in key areas might just convince some Palestinians that the Israelis are serious. More importantly, it would undermine Hamas, which is painting itself as the champions of the region.

What you do is agree to lift the blockade and roll back the settlements, before stating loud and clear to Hamas leadership that if they so much as send a rock over the border of Israel, then the whole lot will be slapped back on. On the other hand, if they don't throw missiles over the border for a few years, maybe Israel could start talking about letting Palestinians back into Israel. Stopping prejudice against Palestinians in Israel must also be achieved. For this, you must get better law and order... and you'll need a new government. Netanyahu is a hardline fool who I wouldn't trust running a shop, let alone a government.

This is how you take the moral high ground and undermine a violent terrorist campaign. It is the only way to stop terrorists entrenched in a region without resorting to massive bloodshed.

By the way Tom, you seem awfully eager to resort to the raze and burn strategy. Which is contemptably ineffective in the long term as the underlying hatreds will still persist. You also seem to give the Israelis no criticism. Frankly, I find your views bewildering.

^ Every concession Israel has done in recent has only Gone Horribly Wrong.

Remember the IDF left Gaza the first time willingly as a shot at peace. Guess what happened? Hamas moved in, took over and began firing rockets.

What's to say more instances of Nice Job Breaking It, Hero won't happen with further concessions?

Really everything being proposed by Kzickas has more or less been tried before and failed miserably mostly due to the Palestinians themselves. I lost track how many times Arafat alone undermined the peace process into conflict.

You mean after they invaded gaza? Leaving a place you invaded isn't really a concession.

They left Gaza only to keep settling the West Bank and then slap a blockade on. Hamas are the enemy, but maybe Israel should stop giving them so many excuses.

edited 14th Oct '10 8:19:25 AM by GameChainsaw

This isn't nearly enough. Israel needs to put much more on the table. It must stop the Gaza blockade and abandon all Israeli settlements which cut into Palestinian territory in order for such to be a fair deal. Even then, a withdrawal deal won't make up for the conquest of Palestine and systematic war crimes against the Palestinians. Hamas is now being used as a scapegoat, when in fact it poses little to no threat to Israel.

Palestinians killed in last major Gaza invasion: ~ 1400 (mostly civilians) Israelis killed: 13 (mostly soldiers)

I suppose that's ok if you believe Gazans are less than human.

edited 15th Oct '10 5:44:38 AM by Shichibukai

The important thing is not to look into the past. Past injustices are bygones, the issue is the ongoing injustices.

Though many people seem to forget this...

^ That may be true for something that occured a century ago, but this is living memory we're talking about. It is important to make amends. Think of the long-term, if the Palestinians continue to feel collectively downtrodden and oppressed after a mediocre peace settlement, there will be little hope of a lasting peace. Palestinian children - and adults too - have been brought up to despise Israelis for most of their lives. It's the same for Jewish Israelis too, but they are in a much better socio-economic situation, and will hardly have a reason to feel oppressed.

edited 15th Oct '10 2:04:55 PM by Shichibukai

^You may be right... I guess I'm just afraid of complicating the issue even more than it already has been.

The thing is that the refugee situation isn't an in any way an old grievence, the problem isn't the suffering that the Palestinians went through went they were forced out of Israel it's the suffering they are going through now because they aren't allowed to return. It's like arguing against aboliting slavery because the slaves were enslaved a long time ago and everyone should move on. It's situation rather than the act that started the situation that is the issue

Exactly. We need to focus on immediate grievances.