Enough people want this conflict to go on. Especially the religious fanatics. People can have this strange discussion of who is morally more justified than the other in a long conflict like this. A better discussion would be how the conflict could be ended. Without the virtue signaling. — ssu
c) adherence to prior agreements from future governments of a state of Palestine — Kenosha Kid
It is true, by the way, that they've rejected all the Camp David and Oslo Accords because those didn't establish a sovereign state and probably didn't adequately deal (in their view) with Jerusalem and the right of return.
It's a simplistic-seeming summary, but I suspect it's the thick end of the wedge. Or rather Hamas came to power in the first place as a reaction to that. I think Hamas itself is just another bloodthirsty jihadist nutjob organisation, a sort of Palestinian Trump monster emerging like a cry of desperation from a thwarted people with no good options. — Kenosha Kid
We also need to see through the ploy of submitting demands to enter into negotiations. In some rounds to start negotiations, the recognition of Israel was a requisite to start negotiations. We see in the second link (can't read the first as I reached my limit) that the recognition is a prerequisite for aid and is about Hamas' charter. Hamas consistently says Israel's status and recognition is subject to negotiation and should be part of it, so they will always reject what the PLO did : recognise the State of Israel before negotiations start. They will not recognise Israel's right to exist in their charter because of this. I do think people read too much into that because It's about territory and we know Israel doesn't recognise Palestine either and Likud's charter pretty much denies establishing Palestine too. It shouldn't be a barrier to negotiations either way. — Benkei
Not only misinformation, but also simple ignorance.The problem is that there's a lot of misinformation out there that is a barrier to a fair and just solution. — Benkei
Put it another way, there isn't an urgent need for the US to do anything in this issue and the fact is that far more important to American politicians are the domestic votes in elections and the support of AIPAC and Christian Evangelists than a solution in the Middle East.Peace brokers like the USA aren't good brokers for peace due to the persistent bias existing about Israel's role in the conflict and policy choices where they give billions to Israel. You can't negotiate peace if only one side's security is taken seriously when in fact it's the other side getting killed. — Benkei
It was a huge achievement to get Israel to recognise the PLO as the legitimate negotiator for a future state of Palestine: the Palestinian side was not a problem here until 2006 afaik. — Kenosha Kid
No, I think you've misunderstood. — Kenosha Kid
We see in the second link (can't read the first as I reached my limit) that the recognition is a prerequisite for aid and is about Hamas' charter. — Benkei
The end result of Rabin and Arafat was not going to be a Palestinian State though. — Benkei
No, I think you've misunderstood.
— Kenosha Kid
We see in the second link (can't read the first as I reached my limit) that the recognition is a prerequisite for aid and is about Hamas' charter.
— Benkei — Benkei
We also need to see through the ploy of submitting demands to enter into negotiations. — Benkei
Do you practically, or nominally? It certainly was the intention that the 5 year interim period would be used for negotiations for a permanent government of Palestine. If you mean practically, yeah well... look where we are. :'( — Kenosha Kid
The Oslo Accords created a Palestinian Authority tasked with limited self-governance of parts of the West Bank and Gaza Strip; and acknowledged the PLO as Israel's partner in permanent-status negotiations about remaining questions. The most important questions relate to the borders of Israel and Palestine, Israeli settlements, the status of Jerusalem, Israel's military presence in and control over remaining territories after Israel's recognition of Palestinian autonomy, and the Palestinian right of return. The Oslo Accords, however, did not create a Palestinian state. — Wiki
What emerges from such scrutiny is a deal that is more flawed and, for most of the Palestinian people, more unfavourably weighted than many had first supposed. The fashion-show vulgarities of the White House ceremony, the degrading spectacle of Yasser Arafat thanking everyone for the suspension of most of his people’s rights, and the fatuous solemnity of Bill Clinton’s performance, like a 20th-century Roman emperor shepherding two vassal kings through rituals of reconciliation and obeisance: all these only temporarily obscure the truly astonishing proportions of the Palestinian capitulation. So first of all let us call the agreement by its real name: an instrument of Palestinian surrender, a Palestinian Versailles.
...In sum, we need to move up from the state of supine abjectness in which the Oslo Accords were negotiated (‘we will accept anything so long as you recognise us’) into one that enables us to prosecute parallel agreements with Israel and the Arabs concerning Palestinian national, as opposed to municipal, aspirations. But this does not exclude resistance against the Israeli occupation, which continues indefinitely. So long as occupation and settlements exist, whether legitimised or not by the PLO, Palestinians and others must speak against them. One of the issues not raised, either by the Oslo Accords, the exchange of PLO-lsraeli letters or the Washington speeches, is whether the violence and terrorism renounced by the PLO includes non-violent resistance, civil disobedience etc. These are the inalienable right of any people denied full sovereignty and independence, and must fee supported.
And if so, how can the Palestinians, be it the PA or Hamas or whoever, also approach this? Can they actually make and keep peace with Israel and then face the fact that there's Israel and they have all these problems... — ssu
Gaza is one strange concentration camp, so having an effect from there is limited.I'm convinced that there is some sort of grassroots Palestinian movement in Gaza that's actually interested in peace and may in fact not want to live under fundamentalist Islamic rule — BitconnectCarlos
The PLO was designed as a government in exile, with a parliament, the Palestine National Council (PNC), chosen by the Palestinian people, as the highest authority in the PLO, and an executive government (EC), elected by the PNC. In practice, however, the organization was rather a hierarchic one with a military-like character, needed for its function as a liberation organization, the "liberation of Palestine"
The United Arab List (UAL) is set to become the first party of Palestinian citizens of Israel to take part in a governing coalition after it agreed to join the new Israeli government to be led by Naftali Bennett – a former ally of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – who had called for the annexation of the occupied West Bank.
Abbas’s UAL broke away from the Joint Arab List, the main coalition of Palestinian parties in Israel, ahead of the March elections. Abbas decided to run independently, advocating at the time that he would work with Netanyahu and other right-wing parties to improve living conditions for Palestinian citizens of Israel.
The split weakened the representation of Palestinian parties in the Knesset, which in last year’s vote won a record 15 seats in parliament.
Now, if you look at the specific details the end result would never be called a Palestinian state due to no control of borders, air space or waters and, I believe, but I can't find a reference right now, no control of their economy. — Benkei
Likely the most anti-Semitic people in the world are those who "support" Israel. Quite ironic. — Manuel
There is no shortage of criticism of Hamas or radical Islam at all. Some of it has merits, sure. But a lot of it is just racism. — Manuel
In my experience very few anti-Semites are pro-Israel. Israel is such a perfect lightening rod that I don't see why anti-Semites would avoid that opportunity. It's just so easy. — BitconnectCarlos
Could you mind citing a few examples? — BitconnectCarlos
A lot of criticism of Hamas is racism? Why would you say this about Hamas but not apply it to Israel and anti-Semitism? Radical muslims are universally despised even among other Muslims. — BitconnectCarlos
You really need sources? I'll give a few. They're mixed in with Radical Islam to make it look less blatant... — Manuel
The idea here is Hamas=Radical Islam, hence everything ugly Hamas does is because of Islam. — Manuel
The anti-Semitism in the Arab world against Israel, is overwhelmingly due to Israel's history in the region. You know this: the wars with Lebanon and Egypt and Syria, the way Palestinians are treated, etc. — Manuel
And radical Jews (settlers) are the main reason as to why Israel is so vilified. — Manuel
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.