18 Jun 09
Originally posted by sh76So it appears that everyone on this thread agrees that - insofar that this was the case - it was wrong for Israel to forcefully evict the people occupying the region.
And, to the extent that those evictions were forced by Israelis (my understanding is that many left on their own figuring that they'd return with the conquering Arab armies), that was wrong.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by scherzoI have a solution.
No. We should give it to the Palestinians, who were there when the Zionists attacked.
Lets make Israel a secular state, where palestinians and israelis have the same rights, and the palestinians who were bullied by Israel in the past can be given money in order to improve their lives.
The state of Israel would no longer be a jewish state, and palestinians could return to their homes, and have equal rights, this would be fair for everyone.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by scherzoNo, money is compensation for the value of the property lost.
You think that money will smooth over what they did to us??
What people choose to leave in their head is up to them. Most Palestinians are already willing to accept a two state solution; who knows maybe a generation or less after it was implemented, perhaps the two states would wind up firm allies and friends. Stranger things have happened.
18 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by generalissimoIsrael basically is a secular state. There are some theocratic elements in some of the laws, but those are few and far between. Israeli law is basically a Turkish influenced version of continental European civil law.
I have a solution.
Lets make Israel a secular state, where palestinians and israelis have the same rights, and the palestinians who were bullied by Israel in the past can be given money in order to improve their lives.
The state of Israel would no longer be a jewish state, and palestinians could return to their homes, and have equal rights, this would be fair for everyone.
There's no strict separation of church and state like in the US, but save for certain exceptions, religion has no direct bearing on the lawmaking process.
In Israel itself, everyone does have the same rights. Sure, you can quibble about the amount of government assistance that goes to this district as opposed to that one, but that's an argument that's made in every country.
Obviously, the Palestinians in the occupied territories don't have the same rights and benefits because they're not citizens. Eventually, they will have their own state, hopefully.
If you make it one big state, based on population demographics, the Arabs will be a majority pretty soon and it's only a matter of time before it becomes another Jordan/Syria/Lebanon where a Jewish minority will have to live under Arab/Islamic law as in Iran, Yemen and places like that. I'm not saying that's the worst thing in the World, but I wouldn't recommend trying to sell that idea to Israelis.
2 states is really the only realistic road to peace.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderThat would be nice, wouldn't it?
No, money is compensation for the value of the property lost.
What people choose to leave in their head is up to them. Most Palestinians are already willing to accept a two state solution; who knows maybe a generation or less after it was implemented, perhaps the two states would wind up firm allies and friends. Stranger things have happened.
The first step to that is elimination religious bigotry. "You're an infidel!" and "My God gave this to ME!" are the attitudes that have to go for this to be possible.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by sh76Arabs will be a majority pretty soon and it's only a matter of time before it becomes another Jordan/Syria/Lebanon where a Jewish minority will have to live under Arab/Islamic law as in Iran, Yemen and places like that. I'm not saying that's the worst thing in the World, but I wouldn't recommend trying to sell that idea to Israelis.
Israel basically is a secular state. There are some theocratic elements in some of the laws, but those are few and far between. Israeli law is basically a Turkish influenced version of continental European civil law.
There's no strict separation of church and state like in the US, but save for certain exceptions, religion has no direct bearing on the lawmaki ...[text shortened]... to sell that idea to Israelis.
2 states is really the only realistic road to peace.
Thats why they should have a constitution that protects the rights of everyone, a constitution that will prevent a minority from being bullied.
2 states is really the only realistic road to peace.
I accept that as well, Im only saying that you couldhave other theories.
18 Jun 09
3 edits
Originally posted by generalissimoI'm not saying that there are no other options; just why the other options are unrealistic.
[b]Arabs will be a majority pretty soon and it's only a matter of time before it becomes another Jordan/Syria/Lebanon where a Jewish minority will have to live under Arab/Islamic law as in Iran, Yemen and places like that. I'm not saying that's the worst thing in the World, but I wouldn't recommend trying to sell that idea to Israelis.
Thats why ...[text shortened]... ad to peace.[/b]
I accept that as well, Im only saying that you couldhave other theories.[/b]
A Constitution still governs by majority rule. Under a majority Arab democracy, even if there are anti-discrimination rules, that still doesn't allow Israeli self-autonomy. I'm not saying a one state solution is not morally appropriate. I'm saying it's not what the Israelis want or would possibly settle for.
Edit: Imagine if suddenly it were proposed that Canada be merged with the US as one country. Everyone would get equal rights and an equal right to vote. Each province would become a state. Would the Canadians buy that? Not likely. Not necessarily because they don't feel that their rights would be protected; but because they want to govern themselves. The same is true of the Israelis.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by sh76I'm saying it's not what the Israelis want or would possibly settle for.
I'm not saying that there are no other options; just why the other options are unrealistic.
A Constitution still governs by majority rule. Under a majority Arab democracy, even if there are anti-discrimination rules, that still doesn't allow Israeli self-autonomy. I'm not saying a one state solution is not morally appropriate. I'm saying it's not what the Is ...[text shortened]... e protected; but because they want to govern themselves. The same is true of the Israelis.
You're right about that.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by generalissimoThat's basically what I'm asking, only that the state be called Palestine, be a member of the Arab League, etc.
I have a solution.
Lets make Israel a secular state, where palestinians and israelis have the same rights, and the palestinians who were bullied by Israel in the past can be given money in order to improve their lives.
The state of Israel would no longer be a jewish state, and palestinians could return to their homes, and have equal rights, this would be fair for everyone.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by no1marauderOr, let's look at it the realistic way.
No, money is compensation for the value of the property lost.
What people choose to leave in their head is up to them. Most Palestinians are already willing to accept a two state solution; who knows maybe a generation or less after it was implemented, perhaps the two states would wind up firm allies and friends. Stranger things have happened.
The two states will spiral downward. Israel will reimplement an occupation. Palestine will be gone.
And even a two-state, time's running out. If Obama leaves office and there's no Palestinian state, chances are there'll never be.
18 Jun 09
Originally posted by scherzoWhy is that the "realistic" view?
Or, let's look at it the realistic way.
The two states will spiral downward. Israel will reimplement an occupation. Palestine will be gone.
And even a two-state, time's running out. If Obama leaves office and there's no Palestinian state, chances are there'll never be.
A Palestinian state is inevitable.