Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

omej

Founding Father
Jan 9, 2013
316
1
Delaware
#1
With the conflict of the past few weeks, it got me really hoping for peace.

What do you think is the solution to this centuries old conflict? What can we do to finally get peace in the region?

I honestly had a glimmer of hope with Obama willing to work toward peace last summer, but he has flip flopped on that promise now. It seems like the days of Rabin, Carter and Clinton are gone.

Obviously the key is Jerusalem. We should divide that territory to before the 6 day war lines.
 
Jan 18, 2009
20
0
#2
I don't think the conflict between Israeli and Palestinian is ever going to be solved. They have been arguing for like 50year (is that correct?) who actually owns the land.

The best solution would be to move the Palestinians. Sad to say but trying to move Israeli is not good at all. Israeli have one of the most powerful military and they wont move even if we, USA tell them to move.

Then the main key questions comes, where should we move the Palestinians?
 
Jan 17, 2009
118
1
#3
I don't think that conflict will ever be resolved, but I hope that at least they can work something out that will decrease the amount of violence.

I'm not sure how such a thing could be accomplished but if nothing is done those two groups could easily end up creating War World III..
 
Jan 17, 2009
32
0
#4
It is very hard to live in a place which is under the fear of war.I am from a place which is one of the most terrorism affected cities in this world and i know how hard it is to live under the fear of guns and bombs.i feel pity for the people of both israel and palenstein and i truly feel that the governments of both the countries should take corrective measures to stop the violence and should rather concentrate on the development of their countries.
 

The Parakeet

Retired Moderator
Jan 19, 2009
639
2
#5
The only way it will end is if the Palestinian people really want it end. I don't have a lot of sympathy for them when they elect Hamas by 77%. I know that Hamas is one of the few groups with the money to provide social services to the communities, but it's still a call to further the conflict.

The problem is that Israel has lived under constant threat for a long time. I remember the analogy of what it would be like for us. It would be the same situation as if Canada elected a government who's stated objective was to destroy us. We'd ignore it for awhile. It's just mean words. Then they start to launch rockets into our cities and the Canadian government encourages further destruction. We'd probably drop the hammer on Canada pretty soon.

The ideal method would be for the Palestinians to stop supporting the war, elect a "good" government, and work with the Israeli government to actively suppress terrorist movements. This is about as likely as me winning the lottery though. There's just too many old feuds in the region and too many people on both sides with things to gain.
 
Jan 18, 2009
35
0
#6
In case people are not aware, the state of Israel did not exist until 1948. It was created out of Palestinian territory by US backing, totally disregarding the Zionist theory behind it. It was beneficial for the US coz they have ammunition enough to destroy the world 30 times and more and they would still have some left. So what do they do with all their arsenal. Manufacture wars, create demand to fuel the supply! And now the mother state is in danger of being ravaged totally.
 

The Parakeet

Retired Moderator
Jan 19, 2009
639
2
#7
Thanks for the basic history Firz. If we could go back in time then we might not support the state of Israel. It's formation just led to 60 years of fighting. That said, they deserved to have a place where they could live without fear and it was only the heavy Palestinian resistance to them that lead to the formation of the country as we know it today.

It was obviously beneficial to the US to have an ally in the Middle East during the Cold War. We did a lot of bad things to get allies in the Middle East. That was all in the past though. The question is what we can do to make it right.

The last few sentences of your post drifted off topic to Zionist conspiracy theory land...so I don't really have a response.
 
Jan 24, 2009
140
1
#8
The only way it will end is if the Palestinian people really want it end. I don't have a lot of sympathy for them when they elect Hamas by 77%. I know that Hamas is one of the few groups with the money to provide social services to the communities, but it's still a call to further the conflict.

The problem is that Israel has lived under constant threat for a long time. I remember the analogy of what it would be like for us. It would be the same situation as if Canada elected a government who's stated objective was to destroy us. We'd ignore it for awhile. It's just mean words. Then they start to launch rockets into our cities and the Canadian government encourages further destruction. We'd probably drop the hammer on Canada pretty soon.

The ideal method would be for the Palestinians to stop supporting the war, elect a "good" government, and work with the Israeli government to actively suppress terrorist movements. This is about as likely as me winning the lottery though. There's just too many old feuds in the region and too many people on both sides with things to gain.

You guys forget that Hamas was partially created by the israeli government themselves and the original funding for its madrasas came from the israeli government. Both sides have to make concessions here and to pin the blame on the palestinian people shows shortsightedness on whats going on now.

I bet most people dont even know about the zillions of israeli settlements on internationally recognized palestinian land as you can see here in this video pointed out by the jewish activist Ana Baltzer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rCBJjCiLGc

Its incredible that most people say that the palestinian people have to put their arms down . They have tried this method so many times in the last 5 to 10 years and the israeli government just went right ahead building these settlements against international law on internationally recognized palestinian land.

Is this fair also?
 

The Parakeet

Retired Moderator
Jan 19, 2009
639
2
#9
I believe that they pulled back all their settlements a year or so ago. Please link to a better source than a Youtube video. Any recognized publication would be fine.

I've heard the whole Israel funded Hamas thing, but it usually comes from the standard crowd for Holocaust Denial (yeah Godwin for the thread). Any reliable sources would be appreciated.
 
Jan 24, 2009
140
1
#10
I believe that they pulled back all their settlements a year or so ago. Please link to a better source than a Youtube video. Any recognized publication would be fine.

I've heard the whole Israel funded Hamas thing, but it usually comes from the standard crowd for Holocaust Denial (yeah Godwin for the thread). Any reliable sources would be appreciated.
What do you consider reliable? Fox newss , cnn or the history channel? Pulled back all their settlements ? loooooooooooooooooooool
Ana Baltzers map is current and that map shows all of the jewish settlements there. Its incredible that you would call her a bad source since she is a leading peace activist. It seems like i have to do all your homework for you?????????????? I guess it takes someone caring enough for the truth to bring it to you instead of you looking at all sides of the issue, but i guess thats how biases develop.

I will try to bring up a bbc, fox news, or cnn map for ya:) if they will actually have one, but im guessing they wont because we all know their biases.


Anyways, im gonna keep pounding home the facts till even the most biased and ignorant cant deny them:) And the truth will set you free. Can I hear an AMEN FOLKS. Parekeet its apparent you dont even know whats going on even in the settlement issue. they not only arent halting settlements , they are actually expanding. This is a fact and even the corrupt world bank acknowledges it.
Israel announces expansion of illegal settlements, breaking 'road map' agreement yet again


http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=2677


Israel not only increased its illegal settlements in the occupied territories of Gaza and the West Bank but also severely limited the movement of Palestinians within those territories. This was even acknowledged by a World Bank report of 2007, which noted the fragmentation of Palestinian areas which drove them to the brink of collapse

http://www.newera.com.na/article.php?articleid=1947
 
Last edited:

The Parakeet

Retired Moderator
Jan 19, 2009
639
2
#11
None. Preferably multiple academic sources with minimal editorial input to ensure an objective outlook (that was really fun to write for some reason). You are presenting a new claim and I'd like to see your justification for it. You are stating a fact (that Israel funded Hamas) and not just an idea, theory, or principle. I'd like to see the evidence.

Fox is alright for what it is. It's a republican pundit channel. Let them be for god's sake. You don't hear me railing against every idiotic media source out there. It's also just downright stupid for you to persist in calling me a Neo-Con. I'm not. I'm a fairly moderate atheist with liberal social policy favoring (not for socialized medicine though...I personally would prefer a less drastic solution). I'm against what the Republican party has become too. Your sole basis for calling me a neo-con is that I disagree with you. That's just childish. I believe the proper term in your circle for me is "sheeple". If you are going to insult me, do it right :).

CNN isn't bad since I really like Anderson Cooper. He seems to have an objective outlook on most topics with minimal sensationalism. He's also a very nice person from what I've seen (He did a great interview on Craig Ferguson's show). There tends to be a bit of liberal bias on areas of foreign policy, but it's negligible as long as one is aware of it.

History Channel has really gone downhill from its glory days. Too much woo and stupidity (no more 2012 please).
 
Jan 24, 2009
140
1
#12
None. Preferably multiple academic sources with minimal editorial input to ensure an objective outlook (that was really fun to write for some reason). You are presenting a new claim and I'd like to see your justification for it. You are stating a fact (that Israel funded Hamas) and not just an idea, theory, or principle. I'd like to see the evidence.

Fox is alright for what it is. It's a republican pundit channel. Let them be for god's sake. You don't hear me railing against every idiotic media source out there. It's also just downright stupid for you to persist in calling me a Neo-Con. I'm not. I'm a fairly moderate atheist with liberal social policy favoring (not for socialized medicine though...I personally would prefer a less drastic solution). I'm against what the Republican party has become too. Your sole basis for calling me a neo-con is that I disagree with you. That's just childish. I believe the proper term in your circle for me is "sheeple". If you are going to insult me, do it right :).

CNN isn't bad since I really like Anderson Cooper. He seems to have an objective outlook on most topics with minimal sensationalism. He's also a very nice person from what I've seen (He did a great interview on Craig Ferguson's show). There tends to be a bit of liberal bias on areas of foreign policy, but it's negligible as long as one is aware of it.

History Channel has really gone downhill from its glory days. Too much woo and stupidity (no more 2012 please).
Before i gather my info about the israel-hamas statement I would like an agreement on the settlement issue which I trust i have proven enough info to back up my answer:) deal?

I allready have the answer to it in my bookmarks and this is coming straight from the mouth of the former american ambassador to Israel:)
 

The Parakeet

Retired Moderator
Jan 19, 2009
639
2
#13
Slightly confused by what you are asking. Yes...if it's a good source that makes a solid point then I'll concede or continue the debate from my point. I can't really promise anything without seeing it.
 
Jan 24, 2009
140
1
#14
Slightly confused by what you are asking. Yes...if it's a good source that makes a solid point then I'll concede or continue the debate from my point. I can't really promise anything without seeing it.
My god, I just provided enough evidence about the settlements. Ok let me lay this out for you in plain english. If you concede that the evidence that I allready provided (2 links to quality sources and facts) on the settlements proves you wrong will you then concede that you were wrong? If I get a yes I will provide the source link about israel helping to create hamas. Since I have proven the first part 100% to everyone but you I will now provide the second part.

Parakeet ill accept your agreement that israel did help to create hamas. Thanks and have a great day:)


Here it is folks, please go through the whole link
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2007/feb/12/00017/


"Indeed, according to former U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Charles Freeman, Shin Bet—the Israeli counter-intelligence and internal security service—knowingly created Hamas: “Israel started Hamas. It was a project of Shin Bet, which had a feeling that they could use it to hem in the PLO.”


Here is another link

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ZER403A.html

Hamas is a Creation of Mossad

by Hassane Zerouky

Global Outlook, No 2, Summer 2002
www.globalresearch.ca 23 March 2004

The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ZER403A.html
Thanks to the Mossad, Israel's "Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks", the Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat's Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation
Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, "Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)".






and finally here is the information I finally found. Lets just call it now a slam dunkkkkkkkkkk. This statement is awesome considering it comes from the former ambassador to israel and an orthodox jew who isnt afraid to critize anti israeli groups.

http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2002/2902isr_hamas.html


This article appears in the January 18, 2002 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]Israeli Roots of Hamas Are Being Exposed

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular][SIZE=-1]by Dean Andromidas
[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular][SIZE=-1]Speaking in Jerusalem Dec. 20, U.S. Ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer made the connection between the growth of the Islamic fundamentalist groups Hamas and Islamic Jihad, and Israel's promotion of the Islamic movement as a counter to the Palestinian nationalist movement. Kurtzer's comments come very close to EIR's own presentation of the evidence of Israel's instrumental role in establishing Hamas, and its ongoing control of that organization.


[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular]The Enemy of My Enemy Is My Friend

[FONT=Arial,Helvetica,Geneva,Swiss,SunSans-Regular][SIZE=-1]This statement is extraordinary given the fact that Kurtzer is a very senior diplomat, having held the post of Ambassador to Egypt just prior to going on to Tel Aviv. He is also an Orthodox Jew who is not shy of criticizing the extreme anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic views held by certain Arab circles. But Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon rarely grants the United States' highest representative in Israel an official audience.








 
Last edited:

The Parakeet

Retired Moderator
Jan 19, 2009
639
2
#15
First, my apologies. You edited your post at 3:05. I posted at 2:51 and noticed that I kicked it over to the second page. I hadn't opend the first page since then. I just saw the edited post now...hence the confusion. I'm not up-to-date on the settlement situation. I had believed that they withdrew to a larger extent before the blockade took effect, I might be getting my regions mixed up though. I'm a little confused as to why you didn't just direct link to BBC (the source you linked basically just quoted their article) but that is neither here nor there.

Your sources aren't exactly impressive (It's also strange that in every discussion I found, those were the only half-decent sources mentioned). The quote by that ambassador has been called into question and is only substantiated in one book. It also doesn't really follow that he'd have access to that information anyways. I'm having a little trouble getting direct counter-arguments for your other 2 points, but they aren't exactly as damning as you make them out to be.

Either way, it sounds like standard politics. They ignored Hamas in their early stages and possibly gave them basic support (at worst) in the hope that they'd fight the more violent groups that were active at the time (And they did wipe out the opposition groups after the election...so still not incorrect). As your own quote says, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It looks like they let Hamas establish because they were busy crushing the other groups (probably a mistake to create a power vacuum like that). That was how they "created" the group and that is what both of the quotes seem to refer to.

You are insinuating that it was something darker (I think...tone is hard to read on the Internet). That is just wrong.
 
Jan 24, 2009
140
1
#16
First, my apologies. You edited your post at 3:05. I posted at 2:51 and noticed that I kicked it over to the second page. I hadn't opend the first page since then. I just saw the edited post now...hence the confusion. I'm not up-to-date on the settlement situation. I had believed that they withdrew to a larger extent before the blockade took effect, I might be getting my regions mixed up though. I'm a little confused as to why you didn't just direct link to BBC (the source you linked basically just quoted their article) but that is neither here nor there.

Your sources aren't exactly impressive (It's also strange that in every discussion I found, those were the only half-decent sources mentioned). The quote by that ambassador has been called into question and is only substantiated in one book. It also doesn't really follow that he'd have access to that information anyways. I'm having a little trouble getting direct counter-arguments for your other 2 points, but they aren't exactly as damning as you make them out to be.

Either way, it sounds like standard politics. They ignored Hamas in their early stages and possibly gave them basic support (at worst) in the hope that they'd fight the more violent groups that were active at the time (And they did wipe out the opposition groups after the election...so still not incorrect). As your own quote says, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. It looks like they let Hamas establish because they were busy crushing the other groups (probably a mistake to create a power vacuum like that). That was how they "created" the group and that is what both of the quotes seem to refer to.

You are insinuating that it was something darker (I think...tone is hard to read on the Internet). That is just wrong.

Ok im done with you. Your basically twisting facts around when they have been presented to you. This is the former american ambassador to israel. You give no facts to support your ignorant views and you call into question every one of my facts even when the sources are beyond reproach. In my final analysis you are the reason why our government can topple democracies and do whatever it wants. You belong in a nice quiet town called mayberry where ignorance rules supreme looooooooooool.

I cant believe i wasted so much time. I mean even the pure neocons on our other thread present better arguments then you just did. Everyone else can see the facts here and see that your too thick headed to admit you were 100% wrong on all points.

I only debate with people that dont ignore facts
Have a nice day and god bless you lol

Fox news yesssssssssssssssss looooooooooooooooooooooooooool
 

The Parakeet

Retired Moderator
Jan 19, 2009
639
2
#17
LOL. Beyond reproach. It's three guys saying things and not presenting any facts. It's an interesting political idea to throw around but it's not concrete fact.

I'm also sorry that I dared to analyze your information. I guess I should blindly agree with you.

I also still can't believe you are on the Fox News kick and the Neo Con idea. That is just unbelievably stupid. I've answered this several times. You dare to say I'm not reading your posts. You never responded to my point that CS Monitor is an unbiased paper either. Too embarrassed or too ignorant?

I'm sorry that you aren't mature enough to actually debate a position. You seem to only be able to run away crying and calling me a neocon (again, sheeple would be more accurate). Made me laugh at least. Thanks
 
Jan 29, 2009
8
0
#18
Hamas needs to stop lobbing rockets into Israel. Then we can talk.

Israel has every right to defend itself. Hell, they even fight their own people to remove them off settlements. It's time for the Arabs to play ball.
 
Jan 24, 2009
140
1
#19
Hamas needs to stop lobbing rockets into Israel. Then we can talk.

Israel has every right to defend itself. Hell, they even fight their own people to remove them off settlements. It's time for the Arabs to play ball.
Look when they show you they are removing their own people from the settlements you are basically seeing one of zillions of settlements there and it took the whole worlds protests for so long to even get them off.

Did you know that the israeli government is paying each israeli person 20,000 bucks to come and move into these settlements. Its rediculous.
Its like saying they themselves never did terrorism yet they had the stern gang among others that assasinated any british diplomat in the 1940's that was even a bit too pro arab in their stance.

I challenge parakeet to prove even one of Anna baltzers comments wrong.
Hes very good at making a sweeping statement but has no facts behind his stats.

You say shes wrong about the settlements dude, now prove it and get me some facts . No flat statements, just facts.

Democracy now, in case you dont know whats happening the arabs tried playing ball and have been trying for a long time but how do you think these settlements grew so long? By magic? for the last decade the palestinian people have been begging the israeli government to stop building those settlements on internationally recognized palestinian land. I didnt hear parakeet protest during this time and i dont hear him doing so now. Its his bias that keeps him from doing this. The facts are the settlements were the torch that lit this flame up and have been doing so for a long time.

There was only one guy that had the guts to try to make peace with the palestinians and that is the late GREAT YITZAK RABIN who cared more for his own people and the peace process then any leader they have today, but we all know what happened to him dont we:).
 
Last edited:

The Parakeet

Retired Moderator
Jan 19, 2009
639
2
#20
I believe that they pulled back all their settlements a year or so ago. Please link to a better source than a Youtube video. Any recognized publication would be fine.
First, my apologies. You edited your post at 3:05. I posted at 2:51 and noticed that I kicked it over to the second page. I hadn't opend the first page since then. I just saw the edited post now...hence the confusion. I'm not up-to-date on the settlement situation. I had believed that they withdrew to a larger extent before the blockade took effect, I might be getting my regions mixed up though. I'm a little confused as to why you didn't just direct link to BBC (the source you linked basically just quoted their article) but that is neither here nor there.
READ MY POSTS! Seriously...I said that I'm not up to speed on the settlement situation and I don't have numbers. I couldn't find any new articles on the situation so I'm guessing that BBC info is still fairly accurate. I also don't care enough to dig around the Internet for an hour to find them. The point where I do that to win an Internet debate is the point where I officially admit I have no life :).

All of my statements have been general political analysis. I'm not making any claims. You are (in general). Besides, anything I'd quote would just be an argument from authority. This is a classic logical fallacy. Just because you found a quote or two that shares your opinion, it doesn't make you more right.

Obviously the settlement situation is wrong, but it's complicated. It's terrible PR for the Israeli government to kick people out of their homes, yet it is a constant source of annoyance for both sides.

This in no way justifies terrorism though. Especially since the main groups don't just want the Gaza to be free. Hamas' stated goal is to destroy Israel. That removes a lot of their justifications.
 

Similar Discussions