3 solutions for Palestine

Commy

1. A 2 state solution along the 1967 borders. virtually all of the arab community support this, as does Iran, Hamas and most of the international community. the only obstacle to this plan is Israel and the United States.


2. A 1 state solution where everybody lives under one democratic state.


3. Israel and the United States simply take what they want. This has been the path they have taken.


There are many conflicts around the world that have very complex and unclear solutions, the Israel Palestine issue is not one of them. Hamas was democratically elected, Israel and the US attempted to oust them with a coup (in typical disdain for democracy) and they went on to agree to peace along the 1967 borders, the green line. Again, the only obstacle to this is Israel and the United States.



Chomsky on Israel/Palestine....

http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?opt ... mival=5873

catefrances

i dont think israel will allow a palestinian state that is absolutely autonomous. i think they would put too many restrictions on it. and worse... that theyll be allowed to.

for so very long the land that is now israel had no probem supporting a population that was 'mixed'. even now there are palestinians and jews living and working side by side in places. why is there such an insistant need to divide the land? is this what the people want? are the bigheads out of touch with what people want? what agenda are they driving by not seeing that relatively peaceful coexistence is not only possible but that it is happening.


oppression is a loaded gun.

Commy

think its obvious the "agenda they are driving" is taking what they want. and i'm not so sure division is the goal. certainly the outcome, not necessarily the goal. Israel conquer's and expands through force, while pretending to wonder why the Palestinians fight back with suicide bombs or rockets.



worrying about security at this point, given circumstances, is absurd for Israel. they've had a choice, land or peace.

Thoughts_Arrive

It was always the Palestinians land, I think the invaders should leave.

Commy

Thoughts_Arrive wrote:

It was always the Palestinians land, I think the invaders should leave.

good call. most people do think Israel should leave, given the facts.

Thoughts_Arrive

I would be pretty pissed off if someone took over my country.

Commy

eh. i'd be pissed if someone attacked my local community, was killing people i knew.


nationalism may be worse than religion when it comes justification for atrocities.

catefrances

Commy wrote:

Thoughts_Arrive wrote:

It was always the Palestinians land, I think the invaders should leave.

good call. most people do think Israel should leave, given the facts.

israel should leave??? what you mean is the jews should leave, right? well given their history that is something theyre familiar with... being chased out of places. but you know what, the jews arent going anywhere so a solution has to be found that treats all people equitably. its ridiculous to expect already established communities to uproot when there is a viable alternative. and yes yes i know how many palestinian villages have ceased to exist. i know how many people have died or been displaced. i know how offensive israeli govt policy is. clearly its not working. and the israeli govt needs to be shown that their policies are not working cause it seems theyre too pigheaded to see what theyre doing to their country. you dont do that by saying that the invaders should leave or that 'israel' should leave. you do that by including everyone. you dont want an exclusivist jewish state.. well im sure you dont want an exclusivist palestinian state either.

catefrances

Thoughts_Arrive wrote:

I would be pretty pissed off if someone took over my country.

you mean like how the white man took over indigenous australia??

Thoughts_Arrive

catefrances wrote:

Thoughts_Arrive wrote:

I would be pretty pissed off if someone took over my country.

you mean like how the white man took over indigenous australia??

Yep.

TriumphantAngel

catefrances wrote:

Commy wrote:

Thoughts_Arrive wrote:

It was always the Palestinians land, I think the invaders should leave.

good call. most people do think Israel should leave, given the facts.

catefrances wrote:

israel should leave??? what you mean is the jews should leave, right? well given their history that is something theyre familiar with... being chased out of places.

but you know what, the jews arent going anywhere so a solution has to be found that treats all people equitably. its ridiculous to expect already established communities to uproot when there is a viable alternative. and yes yes i know how many palestinian villages have ceased to exist. i know how many people have died or been displaced. i know how offensive israeli govt policy is. clearly its not working. and the israeli govt needs to be shown that their policies are not working cause it seems theyre too pigheaded to see what theyre doing to their country. you dont do that by saying that the invaders should leave or that 'israel' should leave. you do that by including everyone. you dont want an exclusivist jewish state.. well im sure you dont want an exclusivist palestinian state either.

i'm pretty sure commy was talking about the fact that Israel should cease all settlement expansion and return to the '67 borders. Hamas and the entire world has called for a two-state solution on the 1967 borders. Israel has refused.

curious as to why you feel the need to mention this? "well given their history that is something theyre familiar with... being chased out of places."

everyone knows that Europes Jews were treated terribly in the past. just horrible. thing is, it's 2010 now and the Nazi genocide of Europe's Jews no longer excuses the state of Israel from the demands of international law and of common humanity. it's about time they and other people realized that.

personally i'm not a fan of the two state solution. i'm more in favor of a one state solution that acknowledges the right of both sides. one democratic state for Palestinians and Israeli Jews, living side by side with equal rights.

there was a thread where some of us discussed our thoughts on the 2 state v one state solution. i'll link it in case anyones interested.

viewtopic.php?f=13&t=136487&start=0

redrock

catefrances wrote:

....
for so very long the land that is now israel had no probem supporting a population that was 'mixed'....

TriumphantAngel wrote:

personally i'm not a fan of the two state solution. i'm more in favor of a one state solution that acknowledges the right of both sides. one democratic state for Palestinians and Israeli Jews, living side by side with equal rights.

As catefrances said... they 'cohabited' before, why can't it be done again? Obviously, for the jews, it seems a non-starter. It would take away the 'jewishness' of the state which seems to be of the utmost importance - more important than peace and real democracy.

gimmesometruth27

in my opinion those are three options, not three solutions. we are lucky if one of the options becomes a viable and workable potential solution.

i am not optimistic.

TriumphantAngel

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

in my opinion those are three options, not three solutions. we are lucky if one of the options becomes a viable and workable potential solution.

i am not optimistic.

like Chomsky said, the situation is not as complex as they would have you believe.

i'm with Ali Abunimah and believe his one state solution offers the best chance for peace.

so what would be your solution as far as a fair and just peace for all the people in Palestine and Israel?

catefrances

TriumphantAngel wrote:

i'm pretty sure commy was talking about the fact that Israel should cease all settlement expansion and return to the '67 borders. Hamas and the entire world has called for a two-state solution on the 1967 borders. Israel has refused.

curious as to why you feel the need to mention this? "well given their history that is something theyre familiar with... being chased out of places."

everyone knows that Europes Jews were treated terribly in the past. just horrible. thing is, it's 2010 now and the Nazi genocide of Europe's Jews no longer excuses the state of Israel from the demands of international law and of common humanity. it's about time they and other people realized that.

personally i'm not a fan of the two state solution. i'm more in favor of a one state solution that acknowledges the right of both sides. one democratic state for Palestinians and Israeli Jews, living side by side with equal rights.

there was a thread where some of us discussed our thoughts on the 2 state v one state solution. i'll link it in case anyones interested.

http://forums.pearljam.com/viewtopic.ph ... 87&start=0

oh excellent.. thanks for that link.


im sure commy will tell me what he meant if he deems it important enough.


when i speak of the history of the jews and being chased out of places, i am not speaking about the shoah exclusively. that has been done to death and as you said is no excuse. the history of jewish persecution goes way further than that. and it directly goes to why they feel the need for a jewish state. and yes again it is no excuse for the oppression visited upon the palestinian people. the israeli govt seems to think that by creating a jewish state they will be safe. theyre like an abused child wanting to shut everyone out, so no one can get close enough, so theyll never be hurt again. unfortunately and sadly theyre wrong... not wrong in feeling and thinking that, just wrong in the execution of creating this so called safe haven. i also have to wonder what the israeli govts policy is doing to their own people. to live such a constant state of paranoia and fear must be psychologically damaging.

gimmesometruth27

TriumphantAngel wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

in my opinion those are three options, not three solutions. we are lucky if one of the options becomes a viable and workable potential solution.

i am not optimistic.

like Chomsky said, the situation is not as complex as they would have you believe.

i'm with Ali Abunimah and believe his one state solution offers the best chance for peace.

so what would be your solution as far as a fair and just peace for all the people in Palestine and Israel?

i think if i had all of the answers i would write a book about it....

TriumphantAngel

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 04665.html

Israel and Palestine: A true one-state solution
By George Bisharat
Friday, September 3, 2010

"Where is the Palestinian Mandela?" pundits occasionally ask. But after these latest Israeli-Palestinian peace talks in Washington fail -- as they inevitably will -- the more pressing question may be: "Where is the Israeli de Klerk?" Will an Israeli leader emerge with the former South African president's moral courage and foresight to dismantle a discriminatory regime and foster democracy based on equal rights?

For decades, the international community has assumed that historic Palestine must be divided between Jews and Palestinians. Yet no satisfactory division of the land has been reached. Israel has aggravated the problem by settling roughly 500,000 Jews in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, eliminating the land base for a viable Palestinian state.

A de facto one-state reality has emerged, with Israel effectively ruling virtually all of the former Palestine. Yet only Jews enjoy full rights in this functionally unitary political system. In contrast, Palestinian citizens of Israel endure more than 35 laws that explicitly privilege Jews as well as policies that deliberately marginalize them. West Bank Palestinians cannot drive on roads built for Israeli settlers, while Palestinians in Gaza watch as their children's intellectual and physical growth are stunted by an Israeli siege that has limited educational opportunities and deepened poverty to acute levels.

Palestinian refugees have lived in exile for 62 years, their right to return to their homes denied, while Jews from anywhere can freely immigrate to Israel.

Israeli leaders Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak have admitted that permanent Israeli rule over disenfranchised Palestinians would be tantamount to apartheid. Other observers, including former U.S. president Jimmy Carter and South African Archbishop Desmond Tutu, have said that apartheid has already taken root in the region.

Clearly, Palestinians and Israeli Jews will continue to live together. The question is: under what terms? Palestinians will no more accept permanent subordination than would any other people.

The answer is for Israelis and Palestinians to formalize their de facto one-state reality but on principles of equal rights rather than ethnic privilege. A carefully crafted multiyear transition including mechanisms for reconciliation would be mandatory. Israel/Palestine should have a secular, bilingual government elected on the basis of one person, one vote as well as strong constitutional guarantees of equality and protection of minorities, bolstered by international guarantees. Immigration should follow nondiscriminatory criteria. Civil marriage between members of different ethnic or religious groups should be permitted. Citizens should be free to reside in any part of the country, and public symbols, education and holidays should reflect the population's diversity.

Although the one-state option is sometimes dismissed as utopian, it overcomes major obstacles bedeviling the two-state solution. Borders need not be drawn, Jerusalem would remain undivided and Jewish settlers could stay in the West Bank. Moreover, a single state could better accommodate the return of Palestinian refugees. A state based on principles of equality and inclusion would be more morally compelling than two states based on narrow ethnic nationalism. Furthermore, it would be more consistent with antidiscrimination provisions of international law. Israelis would enjoy the international acceptance that has long eluded them and the associated benefits of friendship, commerce and travel in the Arab world.

The main obstacle to a single-state solution is the belief that Israel must be a Jewish state. Jim Crow laws and South African apartheid were similarly entrenched virtually until the eves of their demise. History suggests that no version of ethnic privilege can ultimately persist in a multiethnic society.

Israeli perspectives are already beginning to shift, most intriguingly among right-wing leaders. Former defense minister Moshe Arens recently proposed in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that Israel annex the West Bank and offer its residents citizenship. Knesset speaker Reuven Rivlin and Likud parliamentarian Tzipi Hotovely have also supported citizenship for West Bank Palestinians, according to the Haaretz. In July, Hotovely said of the Israeli government's policies of separation: "The result is a solution that perpetuates the conflict and turns us from occupiers into perpetrators of massacres, to put it bluntly."

Is one of these politicians the Israeli de Klerk? That remains to be seen. Gaza is pointedly excluded from the Israeli right's annexation debate. They still envision a Jewish state, simply one with a larger Palestinian minority. But their challenge to the two-state orthodoxy, which empirical experience has proven unrealistic, is healthy.

If Americans aspire to more than managing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict via perpetual and inconclusive negotiations, we should applaud this emerging discussion. Having overcome our own institutionalized racial discrimination, we can model the virtues of a vibrant, multicultural society based on equal rights. President Obama, moreover, would be a fitting emissary for this vital message.

The writer is a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law in San Francisco and a senior fellow at the Institute for Palestinian Studies.

Commy

catefrances wrote:

im sure commy will tell me what he meant if he deems it important enough.

TA was right on, as usual. i was talking about israel getting out of Gaza and the west bank and east jerusalem, not out of the region all together. no one is suggesting israel doesn't have a right to exist, tha'ts absurd.

catefrances

Commy wrote:

catefrances wrote:

im sure commy will tell me what he meant if he deems it important enough.

TA was right on, as usual. i was talking about israel getting out of Gaza and the west bank and east jerusalem, not out of the region all together. no one is suggesting israel doesn't have a right to exist, tha'ts absurd.

indeed it is.

TriumphantAngel

catefrances wrote:

when i speak of the history of the jews and being chased out of places, i am not speaking about the shoah exclusively. that has been done to death and as you said is no excuse. the history of jewish persecution goes way further than that. and it directly goes to why they feel the need for a jewish state. and yes again it is no excuse for the oppression visited upon the palestinian people. the israeli govt seems to think that by creating a jewish state they will be safe. theyre like an abused child wanting to shut everyone out, so no one can get close enough, so theyll never be hurt again. unfortunately and sadly theyre wrong... not wrong in feeling and thinking that, just wrong in the execution of creating this so called safe haven. i also have to wonder what the israeli govts policy is doing to their own people. to live such a constant state of paranoia and fear must be psychologically damaging.

when i visited the Holocaust Museum, as horrifying as it was and how sick and sad i felt for those people who were so terribly treated and persecuted against, it just made me even more determined to speak out against the injustices that are being carried out against the Palestinians.

otherwise we have learnt nothing and they died in vain. that is not how we should honor their memory.

If you had contemplated the victim’s face and thought it through, you would have remembered your mother in the Gas chamber.

you would have been freed from the reason for the rifle and you would have changed your mind: this is not the way to find one’s identity again.

-Mahmoud Darwish

catefrances

TriumphantAngel wrote:

catefrances wrote:

when i speak of the history of the jews and being chased out of places, i am not speaking about the shoah exclusively. that has been done to death and as you said is no excuse. the history of jewish persecution goes way further than that. and it directly goes to why they feel the need for a jewish state. and yes again it is no excuse for the oppression visited upon the palestinian people. the israeli govt seems to think that by creating a jewish state they will be safe. theyre like an abused child wanting to shut everyone out, so no one can get close enough, so theyll never be hurt again. unfortunately and sadly theyre wrong... not wrong in feeling and thinking that, just wrong in the execution of creating this so called safe haven. i also have to wonder what the israeli govts policy is doing to their own people. to live such a constant state of paranoia and fear must be psychologically damaging.

when i visited the Holocaust Museum, as horrifying as it was and how sick and sad i felt for those people who were so terribly treated and persecuted against, it just made me even more determined to speak out against the injustices that are being carried out against the Palestinians.

otherwise we have learnt nothing and they died in vain. that is not how we should honor their memory.

If you had contemplated the victim’s face and thought it through, you would have remembered your mother in the Gas chamber.

you would have been freed from the reason for the rifle and you would have changed your mind: this is not the way to find one’s identity again.

-Mahmoud Darwish

well i dont choose between which dead of war to honour cause imo theyve all died in vain. and yes that includes family members. i no longer visit the jewish museum cause its just too sad and i get angry and frustrated.

and tbh i dont think we have learnt anything. cause these kinds of atrocities continue to occur and we continue to be hamstrung to do anything about them. we wring our hands and say for shame for shame but then we remember where we live and thank god for the accident of our birth that placed us in such a fortunate position. and i am speaking generally here... we as in the human race, cause there are always righteous people trying to do righteous work amongst the crapola and indifference.

Thoughts_Arrive

Palestine for Palestinians!

MotoDC

TriumphantAngel wrote:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/02/AR2010090204665.html

Israel and Palestine: A true one-state solution
By George Bisharat
Friday, September 3, 2010

<snip>
The main obstacle to a single-state solution is the belief that Israel must be a Jewish state. Jim Crow laws and South African apartheid were similarly entrenched virtually until the eves of their demise. History suggests that no version of ethnic privilege can ultimately persist in a multiethnic society.
<snip>

I'm sorry, help me out here. I always imagined the zionist movement to be a push for a jewish religious state, not a jewish racial/ethnic state. I realize the line between "jewish" as an ethnicty and "jewish" as a religion is often indistinct....but which is it?

yosi

It is the later, though the description is crude at best. Israel is (and hopefully will remain) a state where the majority population is Jewish, and which therefore has a state culture that is Jewish in the very broadest sense. It is also a democracy that grants equal rights and protections to minority groups within the population. This system is imperfect, but one should not make the ridiculous mistake of thinking of Israel as being analogous in principle to apartheid South Africa or Nazi Germany.

catefrances

yosi wrote:

It is the later, though the description is crude at best. Israel is (and hopefully will remain) a state where the majority population is Jewish, and which therefore has a state culture that is Jewish in the very broadest sense. It is also a democracy that grants equal rights and protections to minority groups within the population. This system is imperfect, but one should not make the ridiculous mistake of thinking of Israel as being analogous in principle to apartheid South Africa or Nazi Germany.

whos talking about principle? im talking about practise. i see gaza and the walling of the west bank as highly analogous of bantustans. sth africa divided by race. israel divided by religion with exceptions. the restrictions on travel. on where the oppressed can live. the palestinians treated basically like aliens in their own country. there is no way white sth african could ever be considered the majority but still managed to oppress the blacks despite that fact. the israeli govt continues to oppress palestinians in hopes of keeping their own majority because in some weird warped mindset they quite possibly think a palestinian majority is a threat to their existence. neither the black sth africans nor the palestinians were/are treated as equals by the respective oppressors.
is it more important to the israeli govt to maintain this 'state culture' at the expense of their peoples security. and why do they not think it can be maintained in a free and equal society that is inclusive of all the people who live there? and i agree yosi, the system is imperfect, as any system of separate development is... grossly imperfect and highy oppressive.

Byrnzie

yosi wrote:

one should not make the ridiculous mistake of thinking of Israel as being analogous in principle to apartheid South Africa or Nazi Germany.

The only sense in which the comparison is ridiculous is that the situation in the occupied territories is far worse than anything that occured in Apartheid South Africa.

gimmesometruth27

and last i heard those in south africa were not going on about a "white state", or a "christian state", or any other exclusionary state based on ethnicity or religion or race alone...

catefrances

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and last i heard those in south africa were not going on about a "white state", or a "christian state", or any other exclusionary state based on ethnicity or religion or race alone...

but at one point they did. fortunately they were show the error of there ways and sanity and justice prevailed. perhaps some time, maybe even in the near future, we can say the same about israel.

catefrances

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and last i heard those in south africa were not going on about a "white state", or a "christian state", or any other exclusionary state based on ethnicity or religion or race alone...

but at one point they did. fortunately they were shown the error of there ways and sanity and justice prevailed. perhaps some time, maybe even in the near future, we can say the same about israel.

catefrances

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and last i heard those in south africa were not going on about a "white state", or a "christian state", or any other exclusionary state based on ethnicity or religion or race alone...

but at one point they did. fortunately they were shown the error of their ways and sanity and justice prevailed. perhaps some time, maybe even in the near future, we can say the same about israel.

catefrances

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

and last i heard those in south africa were not going on about a "white state", or a "christian state", or any other exclusionary state based on ethnicity or religion or race alone...

but at one point they did. fortunately they were shown the error of their ways and sanity and justice prevailed. perhaps some time, maybe even in the near future, we can say the same about israel.