Home› A Moving Train

The Ongoing Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

orig_long redorig_long red Posts: 2,029
edited August 2008 in A Moving Train
What are your thoughts? Who is in the wrong? Is there even a right?

Is the Two-State Solution the best possible answer?

Hamas says they suicide bomb because of the Israeli occupation, Israel says the occupy because of the suicide bombings.

I want some opinions on this mess.
Jam out with your clam out.
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    long red wrote:
    What are your thoughts? Who is in the wrong? Is there even a right?

    Is the Two-State Solution the best possible answer?

    Hamas says they suicide bomb because of the Israeli occupation, Israel says the occupy because of the suicide bombings.

    I want some opinions on this mess.

    Well the first palestinian suicide Bomb went off after the occupation started.
    I don't think a real two state solution is possible, Not when one side (israel) wants the entire land. Unless the Palestinian state should be the size of a small swimming pool.

    Recent so called peace maps only lead the way for jewish only roads and areas. blocking off the palestinians from everyday needs.

    Israel is in the wrong....the people of palestine are just reacting to a brutal occupation in probably the same way anyone other human would react to such pain.

    Not that the Palestinians don't or have not made any mistakes. But at the end, Israel holds most responsibility for the trouble.
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    haha ...

    i'm sure the dozen or so threads on it will get you a good idea of what peeps think here ...
  • orig_long redorig_long red Posts: 2,029
    polaris wrote:
    haha ...

    i'm sure the dozen or so threads on it will get you a good idea of what peeps think here ...

    yeah i'm trying to condense things a bit.
    Jam out with your clam out.
  • polarispolaris Posts: 3,527
    I will condense for you - there are 3 primary views here:

    1. israel is the bully and occupying force who have been oppressing the palestinians for decades. They need to withdraw from the occupied territories and other disputed areas. Stop further expansion and withdraw back to the 1967 borders.

    2. both sides are equally at fault here. palestinians need to stop tossing rocks and the suicide bombings while israelis need to stop killing innocent people for no reason.

    3. israel is just defending themselves against palestinian terrrorists
  • FiveB247xFiveB247x Posts: 2,330
    Good work. You may also want to include option 4 which you occasionally hear: It's not US business or problems so let's either walk away from it all or conversely, bomb the entire Middle east to hell.
    polaris wrote:
    I will condense for you - there are 3 primary views here:

    1. israel is the bully and occupying force who have been oppressing the palestinians for decades. They need to withdraw from the occupied territories and other disputed areas. Stop further expansion and withdraw back to the 1967 borders.

    2. both sides are equally at fault here. palestinians need to stop tossing rocks and the suicide bombings while israelis need to stop killing innocent people for no reason.

    3. israel is just defending themselves against palestinian terrrorists
    CONservative governMENt

    Our government is the potent, the omnipresent teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example. Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law-breaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy. - Louis Brandeis
  • Kel VarnsenKel Varnsen Posts: 1,952
    MrBrian wrote:
    I don't think a real two state solution is possible, Not when one side (israel) wants the entire land. Unless the Palestinian state should be the size of a small swimming pool.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't both sides offered their own state in 1948? The Israelis accepted but the Palestinians decided that they would rather go to war.
  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    Kel Varnsen wrote:
    Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't both sides offered their own state in 1948? The Israelis accepted but the Palestinians decided that they would rather go to war.

    Well it was unfair to begin with. we go back to the Balfour Declaration of 1917...and remember learning about the prohibiting of the employment of Araba on 'jewish' land. So many things, so many reasons for the Palestinians to be angry about.

    Someone goes to your home and is like "ok, we need to divide this shit"
  • Cree NationsCree Nations Posts: 2,247
    It is a long standing mess that started with Israel taking land away (claiming) land from Palestine. The conflict continues because Israel wont stop expanding into the west bank and the palestinians wont stop blowing people up.
    Solutions:'
    stop expanding in the west bank and create two states.
    >>>>
    >
    ...a lover and a fighter.
    "I'm at least half a bum" Rocky Balboa

    http://www.videosift.com/video/Obamas-Message-To-American-Indians

    Edmonton, AB. September 5th, 2005
    Vancouver, BC. April 3rd, 2008
    Calgary,AB. August 8th, 2009
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    FiveB247x wrote:
    Good work. You may also want to include option 4 which you occasionally hear: It's not US business or problems so let's either walk away from it all or conversely, bomb the entire Middle east to hell.

    Those would be options 4 and 5 and shouldn't be confused with each other. I'm a proponent of option 4. The US needs to quit being interventionist, especially in a conflict that we have no hopes of solving. Our choosing sides only exacerbates the problem.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • MrBrianMrBrian Posts: 2,672
    jeffbr wrote:
    Those would be options 4 and 5 and shouldn't be confused with each other. I'm a proponent of option 4. The US needs to quit being interventionist, especially in a conflict that we have no hopes of solving. Our choosing sides only exacerbates the problem.

    Also cutting off the funds and weapons it sends to Israel? Not just on the way America votes always in favor of Israel...something like that
  • jeffbrjeffbr Seattle Posts: 7,177
    MrBrian wrote:
    Also cutting off the funds and weapons it sends to Israel? Not just on the way America votes always in favor of Israel...something like that

    Exactly. That would also be part of not intervening. No voting alliance. No funding of either side.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • inmytreeinmytree Posts: 4,741
    I'm for option 2 and 4....
  • fuckfuck Posts: 4,069
    Kel Varnsen wrote:
    Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't both sides offered their own state in 1948? The Israelis accepted but the Palestinians decided that they would rather go to war.
    The Jews in Palestine during 1948 owned 6% of the land. The UN offered them a jump from 6% to 55%. do you think the Israelis wouldn't accept that? And the Palestinians had been trying to declare their independence for decades since then, yet the UN only offered them 45% of the land. do you think the Palestinians should be forced to accept that?

    The Palestinians didn't choose war either. Zionist organizations had already been terrorizing Palestinians by 1948...
Sign In or Register to comment.