babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Plan for instant Israeli Security

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Plan for instant Israeli Security
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 30 May 2003 12:13 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Allow the Palestinians the right to return, and give them full citizenship rights.

The percieved threat from the Arab world would disappear, as Israel would no longer be an exclusively "Jewish entity."

Peace can only come through integration with the neighbourhood, not in segregation.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 30 May 2003 12:16 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Dream on Al...you know that if this is what is being held out , then a Palestinian state will never be...show some pragmatism.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 30 May 2003 12:26 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But it is pragmatic, and may make Jews safer in the region. It's only unpragmatic if one insists on racial exclusivity.
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 30 May 2003 12:27 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Al's right. A two-state solution is so difficult to reach because it is to difficult to implement. Electronic fences, segregation (see my thread on Sharon's proposed Nuremberg-like law), uprooting of the settlements and territorial continuity are totally impractical and unjust. Besides, a modified one-state solution would allow the settlers to remain where they are.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 30 May 2003 12:28 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
People READ MY LIPS, no Zionist from Peace Now to anywhere else will ever accept this idea...EVER EVER!!
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 30 May 2003 12:30 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But it's the just, and workable, solution.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
tyoung
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3885

posted 30 May 2003 12:40 PM      Profile for tyoung        Edit/Delete Post
Ay, there's the rub.
quote:
...will ever accept this idea...EVER EVER!!

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: tyoung ]


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 30 May 2003 12:46 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Do you think, though, that integration would happen smoothly? I would expect there to be violence and conflict aplenty.

These are people who have hated each other for years. I'm not sure that just throwing them together in one state is a practical solution in the short term. I do believe it's a good goal to strive for in the long term (sorry, Mishei), but right now I think emotions are probably running too high and inequalities are too extreme to allow for smooth integration.

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 30 May 2003 12:54 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As opposed to the violence and conflict now?

Plus, a two-nation, one state solution would permit Zionists to live anywhere in the "land of Israel."


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 30 May 2003 12:58 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I invite Mish to think like a Canadian for a bit when contemplating my suggestion.

Further to that, instead of thinking of a peace plan which would be implemented in 2005 or whatever, and henceforth considered cast in stone, think of a plan for the next 200 years.

Think of history.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 30 May 2003 01:08 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, I like the idea of a one-state solution too. I don't see why the rights of Jews could not be constitutionally protected if they're worried about being out-bred by Arabs.

Sure beats the racial purity laws being considered in Israel right now according to that article josh posted in the other thread.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 30 May 2003 01:08 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is not a plan for instant security it's a plan for accelerated destruction.

The "right of return" means two Palestinian states not one.

A by national state means one Palestinians state on the whole of Israel.

It is not just or workable it's a ploy to destroy Israel plain and simple the Arab nations which the refugees live couldn't care less about the refugees they only care about destroying Israel. Israel's existence is humiliating to them. For them it's O.K. to sacrifice life to reach this goal even a couple million Palestinians refugees are worth it to achieve this goal


"Right of return"="Right to destroy Israel" have dealt with the Refugees and Israel there is no reason not believe this is another attempt to destroy Israel.

Not only once "the right of return" is dropped will Israel's future be secure will Israel's future be secure but then there will be peace in the middle east. It will be much easier to move settlement and troops from disputed/controlled territories and it will be easier to cooperate to stop terrorist and any other kind of violent out burst.

The refugee problem must be dealt with but for the sake of peace for the sake of the refugees (I already see here that the sake of Israel doesn't amount to much for a lot of people) the right of return must be dropped in its current context. It can not be absolute and unconditional.

You are not going to get much left then me in Israel accepting 47 borders perhaps Jerusalem becoming an international city. The only people in Israel that will agree to the right of return are maybe a few Arab Israeli Criticizes and a couple fanatic socialists. You can't get more socialist then a Kibbutz Ironically you can't get much more left wing Zionist either. And the majority of them wouldn't accept the unconditional right of return. .

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Justice ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 30 May 2003 01:12 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The refugee problem must be dealt with but for the sake of peace for the sake of the refugees

But it isn't being dealt with. The only suggestion I've seen is "anywhere but here."


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 30 May 2003 01:22 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
But it isn't being dealt with. The only suggestion I've seen is "anywhere but here."

Dealt with means financial compensation, finding them jobs, Building them homes allowing them to own land in the countries they are currently in allowing them a place in those countries governments. Making sure they have infrastructure adequate heath care and education.

And under special circumstances the right to immigrate to Israel. The rest can do so gradually They might not be so quick to immigrate if they have a comfortable life where they are. Quality of life is the issue. Them swamping Israel and very probably destroying it won't improve their quality of life

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Justice ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 30 May 2003 01:43 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As opposed to the violence and conflict now?
Plus, a two-nation, one state solution would permit Zionists to live anywhere in the "land of Israel."

Yeah, I know. I just don't think such a plan can be implemented instantly. I agree with Justice on one point - dealing with the economic inequality, the abominable lack of dignity afforded the Palestinian Arabs in the occupied territories, is the first step.

I think integration is a worthy eventual goal (and yes, I do believe it is an eventual goal; I don't accept the long-term necessity of an enforced Jewish majority on that land, or indeed any enforced racial majority on any land) but I don't think it can be achieved instantly.

Edited to quote Justice:

quote:
They might not be so quick to immigrate if they have a comfortable life where they are.

Agreed.

quote:

Quality of life is the issue. Them swamping Israel and very probably destroying it won't improve their quality of life

Okay, but if the entire region were amalgamated into one secular state, presumably most of the people in that state would stay where they are.

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 30 May 2003 02:00 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Look people the numbers for the Jews just do not work.

There are 13 million Jews WORLD WIDE. There are 100 million Arabs. A one state solution will destroy a Jewish state. Hence The vast majority of Jews summarily reject it.

And Josh you may wish to put your faith in law and constitution however prior to the state of Israel laws and constitution were actually used by Germany, for example, as a pretext to wipe out world Jewry.

Jews may be paranoid about their survival but given history they have every right to their paranoia which is based on truth.

NEVER AGAIN was born out of the position that Jews will not trust others to care for them EVER AGAIN. The last time it almost destroyed them.

Israel is the fence of protection if you will for Judaism and the Jewish people. That is why almost all Jews, left right and center, from Rabbi Michael Lerner to Jeff Rose to the late David Lewis and Kalman Kaplansky support and have supported a Jewish state. I also believe that people like Janet Solberg, Michele Landsberg and possibly even Naomi Klein and Judy Rebick would not accept a one state solution. And the list is neverending. Israel has been part of our collective consciousness for centuries and the return to ZION part of our collective religious response.

Talk all you want but understand now why many of us do draw the line at those who advocate the dismantling of the Jewish state. It is not only a non-starter it is the fuel TODAY that energizes the real antisemites.

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 30 May 2003 02:10 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Okay, but if the entire region were amalgamated into one secular state, presumably most of the people in that state would stay where they are.

Yeah presumably but what's the point? Either way they will need what I said and There will be the added need for local governance each section can be divided into a state or a province with internal security, its own healthcare system, its own board of education and would collect taxes to run the local provincial government bodies as well as pay taxes to a federal government.

The federal government which would do what???? Decide how to handle antiquities and religious sites maybe how to manage a few natural resources like oil most importantly though water? "I'm sure the province of Israel would get fair representation in the federal government and all it needs to run a productive healthy province."


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 30 May 2003 02:11 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
and the return to ZION part of our collective religious response.

A secular state does not preclude your living in Zion.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 30 May 2003 02:11 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well to take your argument to its logical conclusion Mishei, why ever put faith in any laws and constitutions anywhere in the world? And it's interesting you should imply the Nuremberg laws when you have studioulsy avoided addressing Sharon's request to ban children with one Palestinian parent from automatic citizenship.

A one-state solution could include particular zones of sovereignty, or even giving the people a choice of voting in separate elections, as a transition. It would not be simple to work out, but it could be done if the parties worked in good faith.


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 30 May 2003 02:25 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
A one-state solution could include particular zones of sovereignty, or even giving the people a choice of voting in separate elections, as a transition.

Federalism! Works here, after a fashion.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 30 May 2003 02:27 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It would not be simple to work out, but it could be done if the parties worked in good faith.

There is little of this in the world never mind the Middle East!!

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
tyoung
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3885

posted 30 May 2003 02:28 PM      Profile for tyoung        Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, but would it work if Quebec had nukes and 5 billion a year in US support?
From: Vancouver Island | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 30 May 2003 02:31 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You have a point. I was being glib, of course. The histories and situations are vastly different. But fifty years ago, who'd have thought that there'd be the degree of European unity there is today? They're on their way to the dissolution of national frontiers.

[edited to correct would-be "correction" that I got wrong].

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: 'lance ]


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 30 May 2003 02:44 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Yeah, but would it work if Quebec had nukes and 5 billion a year in US support?


How many armies and other security threats do the Israelis need to defend themselves from??? And how about some Syrian unconventional weapons like "Mustard Gas missiles" This also is very persuasive.

Lance the key is gradually , not instantly, not absolutely, not unconditionally not forced.

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Justice ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 30 May 2003 05:31 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Well to take your argument to its logical conclusion Mishei, why ever put faith in any laws and constitutions anywhere in the world?

It does raise an interesting question, though, and one that I don't think has received a satisfactory answer, if a satisfactory answer is even possible. How are we to protect the Jews, or indeed any minority group? If creating and maintaining a "fenced" area where the minority is the majority isn't the answer (and I don't think it is), then what is?


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 30 May 2003 05:41 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It does raise an interesting question, though, and one that I don't think has received a satisfactory answer, if a satisfactory answer is even possible. How are we to protect the Jews, or indeed any minority group? If creating and maintaining a "fenced" area where the minority is the majority isn't the answer (and I don't think it is), then what is?

I don't believe assimilation so that not the answer. So I say accommodation and integration. but once again these are gradual processes.

I don't believe it will ever be possible for the world to be one complete country but once things have settled we can have exchange of not resources and Idea's not just fair trade but also people will be able to move freely across the globe. This must be a gradual process or else you would probably shock whole environments natural and human.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 30 May 2003 05:44 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why is Mishei talking about one hundred million Arabs? There are not one hundred million Palestinians. I thought that the welfare of the Palestinians was the point that matched the security of the Israelis.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 30 May 2003 05:47 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
He's trying to frame the discussion in David-and-Goliath terms.
From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 30 May 2003 05:48 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am still more in sympathy with Smith's and Justice's convictions that all the people involved need some breathing space, some peace, a chance to get past their immediate anger and find the freedom to think as we do.

I think it would do us all good to remember how privileged we are, as middle-class North Americans living in peace and (relative) prosperity, to be able to meditate on ideally humane conditions.

I also think that there is wisdom in Justice's reservations about the notion of a single culture, world-wide. I'm not sure I want that either.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 30 May 2003 06:12 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
We want to be free!!!

Free to move freely!!!

But we all want our own space to be at peace!!!

If someone moves in next door no problem but it going to take sometime for me to get to know him/her. Once I know him we'll I probably won't have any trouble giving him the key to my house and let him come in when ever he wants. I do expect though that he/she have the tact to understand when I want privacy. That's the whole issue I don't think the refugees have absolutely no right to live in Israel. I do believe though it has to be gradual and at for the next little while limited until things settle.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 30 May 2003 06:13 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mishei:
People READ MY LIPS, no Zionist from Peace Now to anywhere else will ever accept this idea...EVER EVER!!

Because they are largely segregationists. They don't believe in civic citizenship, they believe that 'blood' is the final determination point for political 'ingroups' and 'outgroups'. On a planet where abstract rights-based constitutional citizenship and general deterritorialisation is becoming the norm, they seek to insitute an ideology whose efficacy has long since been passed by; delegitimised by the failures of segregationist politics in Nazi Germany, South Africa, the United States, and elsewhere.

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Courage ]

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 30 May 2003 06:31 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mishei:
Israel has been part of our collective consciousness for centuries and the return to ZION part of our collective religious response.

There is a vast difference between traditional religious concepts of 'the return to Zion' and the modern, blood and soil nationalism characteristic of Zionism. Historically, the kind of nationalism you are talking about is quite recent, while the general mythology of 'the return' is much older. What has happened is that the concept has been brought out of the religious and politicised, placed in the language of 'national self-determination' and the 'Jew' has by the logic of this move ceased to be a 'spirtual' figure, but one defined by blood. Moreover, most of the key Zionist figureheads throughout the idea's history have been patently non-religious; Herzl was an atheist, Jabotinsky only took up 'religion' as a demagogic fascist ploy; Ben-Gurion was long a socialist who believed in the redemption of people through 'work' not through 'God'.

quote:
Talk all you want but understand now why many of us do draw the line at those who advocate the dismantling of the Jewish state. It is not only a non-starter it is the fuel TODAY that energizes the real antisemites.

Enough of this nonsense. Antisemites will hate Jews regardless of whether there is a Jewish state or not. The current political use of this term by many Jews and non-Jews alike has actually had the obverse effect as intended. It has largely diminished the meaning of the term, and has come to be seen as a kind of 'crying wolf'; a cynical demagogic ploy.

Moreover, this attempt to equate criticism of atavistic segregationist politics as 'anti-semitism' carries maximum irony. The logic is simple, always has been, and at least earlier Zionists, like Jabotinsky were more honest than you about it: To 'create' a Jewish state, the Palestinians need to be moved, segregated and pushed aside which by it's very nature produces a negative reaction from them which is then labelled antisemitism. This segregationist behaviour puts Jews in greater danger, though many, including you, refuse to admit your role in the problem. To call a Palestinian who used to live on the west side of the Green Line, who was removed from his home by armed paramilitaries in 1948, has lived under varying forms of abuse from the Israeli government since 1967, and lost his home and business to bulldozer making way for settler's an 'antisemite' because he is mad at the realities of creating 'a Jewish State' is the height of delusional thinking; complete lack of self-consciousness or reproach. It is a failure to be honest about the reality of the policies and ideas that one holds when they are applied to real people, in real time. It actually prevents clear thinking about the mistreatment and abuse of Palestinians and their response, as well as clouding thinking about real antisemitism. As such it is an two-fold intellectual failure.

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ][/QB][/QUOTE]

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Courage ]

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 30 May 2003 06:36 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Where in the Torah does it mention that the Palestinians have no right of return?
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 30 May 2003 06:57 PM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Because they are largely segregationists. They don't believe in civic citizenship, they believe that 'blood' is the final determination point for political 'ingroups' and 'outgroups'. On a planet where abstraction and deterritorialisation is the becoming the norm, they seek to insitute and ideology whose efficacy has long since been passed by - delegitimised by the failures of segregationist politics in Nazi Germany, South Africa, the United States, and elsewhere.

NO you're wrong. Perhaps you wish that but if think that 90% of Jews are racist I would say that sounds a little racist.

There really is a mortal danger if you don't follow the formula I wrote above. They want there own land to live peace it's not about segregation it's about security. In time Palestinians and other Arabs should be allowed to immigrate to Israel but if you put the pressure on you're going to cause serious damage.


quote:
. Antisemites will hate Jews regardless of whether there is a Jewish state or not.

Your right you almost answer the problem yourself. You see If they are in their own state with their own army to defend them it will be much hard to hurt them.

quote:
the mistreatment and abuse of Palestinians

You talk about the Israeli segregation and abuse but what about the Saudi's, the Lebanese, the Iraqis and many other Arab nations they don't try to integrate their population of refugees especially Palestinian. I think I could comfortably say that Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and most other Arab countries have less rights then refugees in Israeli controlled territories.

quote:
Where in the Torah does it mention that the Palestinians have no right of return?

Irrelevant the whole fact that this argument is based on religion is out of context Herzel and Ben -Gurion weren't religious there was never a Religious Prime Minster in the whole new history of Israel. Sharon hates the religious and would love to kick them out of parliament if he could, he almost did in may 2002.

The Nazi's and most other racist didn't care and don't care whether your religious or not, all they cared/care was/is that you are Jew. That’s the Irony of the situation you can try and ignore it and deny it as much as you want, you can be the most secular atheist person in the world, but there will always be some one who will make sure you know you’re a Jew. And I don't mean it in a good way. Look the extent which the Nazi's went to they didn't care that Jews weren't practicing there Judaism or trying to integrate and move along in society like anyone else. They didn't care that the Jews were contributing to society all they cared was that they were Jewish and it still exist today just as Courage said "they will hate regardless"

[ 30 May 2003: Message edited by: Justice ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 31 May 2003 12:12 AM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Justice:
NO you're wrong. Perhaps you wish that but if think that 90% of Jews are racist I would say that sounds a little racist.

There really is a mortal danger if you don't follow the formula I wrote above. They want there own land to live peace it's not about segregation it's about security. In time Palestinians and other Arabs should be allowed to immigrate to Israel but if you put the pressure on you're going to cause serious damage.


That's a distinction without a difference, Justice. Being 'for' security and 'for' segregation are not mutually exclusive - it's a question of spin. What is 'exclusive', so-to-speak, is that many Zionists believe the only way to 'security' is 'segregation'. Look how it's working so far...


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Justice
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3877

posted 31 May 2003 01:54 AM      Profile for Justice     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes trying to control has been a disaster agreed and I am completely for a unilateral withdrawal.

That doesn't mean flooding Israel will secure them or the Israelis. A temporary separation and cooling off period is need and time to fix things on both sides so each can accommodate the free flow of people. This means building the infrastructure so first infrastructure needs to built and then we can talk perhaps also by that time the refugees might be happier where there at and only those who really want to come and integrate into Israeli society will do so. They also will have hopefully a free and productive Palestinian society if that's what they want. But at least they will stop being used as political tools.

The "right of return" will not secure not Israel's future or improve the future of the Palestinians refugees. trying to create a society like that too rapidly will cause it to collapse and be a humanitarian disaster unlike the world has seen.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 31 May 2003 11:44 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You know, I really find myself agreeing with Justice here, which is surprising, because I do find this form of segregationism extremely problematic, and I don't think the behaviour of the Arab countries is particularly relevant here, and so on.

I agree that the religious dream of the "return to Zion," as opposed to the secular one, has no place in this debate. This is a secular issue.

I do think a cooling-off period is necessary. I don't think a forced integration would work. I think a lot of the prejudice and hatred that has built up on both sides will dissipate if given time and peace. Separate states aren't an ideal solution, but I think right now they are a better idea.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 31 May 2003 02:52 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I do think a cooling-off period is necessary. I don't think a forced integration would work. I think a lot of the prejudice and hatred that has built up on both sides will dissipate if given time and peace. Separate states aren't an ideal solution, but I think right now they are a better idea.


Smith, I find myself in rare agreement with you. It makes a lot of sense.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
April Follies
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4098

posted 31 May 2003 03:31 PM      Profile for April Follies   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My own thought of the matter is part of a more generalized conception for the Middle East. I think that yes, a two-state solution is the way to go, initially - paired with a massive campaign to secularize both sides of the fence and promote human rights over tribal rights.

I also, however, think that the Middle East should start looking toward the idea of a Middle Eastern Union. It was pointed out abo e that the European Union has been an amazing success, considering some of the historical enmities. A song from less than 50 years ago includes the lines,

"The whole world is festering with unhappy souls:
The French hate the Germans, the Germans hate the Poles.."

Yet today the French, Germans, and now Poles are part of the same federation, and in fact the French and Germans seem to be coming together quite well against the common enemy of the US. I don't downplay the historical enmities that are being dealt with throughout the Middle East, but if other heart-deep enmities elsewhere can be overcome, there's hope.

I'm thinking of a gradual move from the current situation to nationalism and then internationalism. Let people have their ethnic/tribal/religious/national "safe space", while continuing to move towards a policy of integration.

Start by setting the borders at the original UN lines (though perhaps the Golan Heights can be dealt with separately) and evacuating the settlements in the occupied territories. As in the "road map", of course, this must be coupled with strong measures to protect Israeli civilians from any further attacks. One would hope that concrete moves toward a jut arrangement would vastly encourage the Palestinian moderates, and deeply undercut support for extremism. Building up an effective government apparatus in Palestine will also allow the practical enforcement of anti-terrorism measures; the current Palestinian "security forces" are pitiably unequipped to do the job.

The "right of return" can be dealt with by a combination of moves - some refugees to "return" to Israeli soil, with the understanding they'll become Israeli citizens; some to move, say, to the newly vacated settlements in the freshly created nation of Palestine; and some to receive reparations for their lost property. Given a range of options, Palestinian refugees will naturally choose different ones depending on their personal circumstances. This will greatly ease the feared influx of non-Jews into Israel, thus easing trepidation of it becoming other than a "Jewish state". Moves to alleviate ethnic tensions within Israel should of course be pursued simultaneously. Let there be an agreed on number of actual "returnees", and if necessary hold a lottery for refugee families to be among them.

Once you have a functioning Palestinian state, and an Israeli state not in a constant de facto state of military emergency, one can start negotiations toward a broader Middle Eastern community. Turkey might be a good one to include in these negotations, if the Turkish government is willing to consider an alternative or addition to European Union membership. Start with the most democratic, secular, human-rights-respecting nations in the region, set fairly high standards, and then work out a loose federation. Other nations will want to joinm and therefore have a strong incentive to rise to meet those standards. As these negotiations go on, the tensions between Israel and Palestine may start to naturally ease off, as both see the rigidity of the borders fading. Eventually, you achieve the sort of integrated federation that others here envision. With a lot of luck, we may even live to see it.


From: Help, I'm stuck in the USA | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca