News Will Bush's Plan Bring Peace to Israel and Palestine?

[pfisher]

To piggyback on Yonoz's point, Israel has removed settlers before from the Sinai and most recently (and unilaterally) in Gaza. Four settlements have also been dismantled in the West Bank.

 

[nabki]

and israel has recently planned to build some new settlements in east jerusalem

 

[Yonoz]

"correcting the border", as in the way it has been continuosly corrected from the end of the 1940s till now, as in from not existing to occupying all the territory in the golan, the sinani penensiula, west bank, gaza, lebanon ect...
israel has had a long history of 'correcting' its borders. or maybe its going to be a new slower way, like settlement or land seziures or even letting armed militias that, for some reason the israel government don't know about, go into a farmers field and beat him to death like what happened a few weeks ago. that makes the land legaly property of israel, since they fought for it didnt they?

You misunderstood. The corrections offered by Yisrael Beitenu include handing areas of Israeli Arab populations over to the Palestinian Authority. Naturally, Israeli Arabs wish to remain citizens of Israel rather than become ones of the PA, so that is unattainable.
BTW the Sinai peninsula is Egyptian, and Lebanon is, well, Lebanese. And no sane Israeli wants Gaza.

what happened to al-dura was a horrific act of state sponsred terrorism even if he lived, and i suggest that the people who are reading this post do a google for the video.

But you see, the other scenes in the tape all show staged Palestinian injuries. Al-Dura may well have been staged as well, just like those walking dead who were carried in the staged funeral processions in Jenin.

and how about the start of the last intifada, can you please tell us why it started? that would give the readers a good view on how much respect the leadership of israel for other religions.

I believe you're referring to Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount, but we both know that's not how it started. In any case, why should anyone not be allowed visit there? I was there, with an organized group in military uniform (no boots) just a few months before, and no one had any problems with it. I'll tell you something more, our representatives have such respect for Islam that they made it illegal for Jews to conduct any form of worship on the Temple Mount, and the Muslim Waqf has full control there. Of course that never stopped Muslims from using it as a platform to attack the Jews praying below them at the Western Wall.

or what happened in the kiyamah cathedral in jerusalem a few years ago? do you even know what movements such as hamas and hizbullah mean to the arab people?

Please, enlighten me.

is digging under the third most holiest place in islam not reason enough for resistance?

What digging?
EDIT: You must be referring to the Muslim Waqf's digs under the Temple Mount that caused unsubstantiated archaeological loss. Are you suggesting Jews should start a resistance of our own?

israel has time and time again desecrated the rights of the palestinian people and spat in the face of the arab and islamic world. and now, during a peace confrence, israel strikes at gaza killing 10! how can that help the peace process?

How do daily rocket barrages on civilians help the peace process? The operation in Gaza is meant to occupy those carrying out these attacks.

 

[nabki]

currently at least it is al-aqsa mosque, where ariel sharon entered the prayer hall with a fully armed military bodyguard ignoring all the rules of entering a mosque, then after resistance by palestinians that involved shoes being thrown at the offender, the group fired at the unarmed palestinians. if that's not how it started, then how did it?
so al-dura was not killed? staged? EVERY arab channel was showing that tape, a lot of western ones, and why didnt the government of israel say it was a false tape or a setup when it happend? and what other scenes in the tape? it seems to me that your trying to say that israel is a country that has never commited any wrong since its beggining. and when did muslims conduct attacks on jews from al-aqsa mosque?
what hapend at the cathedral was a siege that lasted for a few months. even the vatican pleaded for the israelies to stop it, but to no avail.
digging near the fragile wall for construction, and digging tunnels under the mosque WITHOUT knowledge of the islamic wuqf.
and how will talking with only the current corrupt and minoroty fatah, while ignoring the majority hamas help? of course everything israel does is 'meant' for some reason, since israel is never in the wrong. and do you think that increased military activity is going to calm hamas down?
oh, and how about putting 2/3 of the parliment in prison?

 

[henxan]

Hamas, unlike Fatah, is unwilling to accept peace with Israel, thus negotiations with it will only delay an inevitable confrontation.

I see that, at present moment. But they have been deliberately pushed out of any negotiations, trivialized. You never accomplish anything when you ignore a fraction representing the majority of a country. Hamas isn't composed of only idiots, nor is the israeli government, and reasonable people will know a good deal when they see it. Thats why I believe there is a significant mass of people in hamas that will seek an end to the "war/occupation," and they will most certainly be willing to let israel in peace, given prior-to-1967-borders.

Another thing, which I have very little knowledge, is the "holy places," muslim or jewish. How important are these? But common sense should commend that this isn't the biggest controversies.

 

[kyleb]

Hamas isn't composed of only idiots, nor is the israeli government, and reasonable people will know a good deal when they see it. Thats why I believe there is a significant mass of people in hamas that will seek an end to the "war/occupation," and they will most certainly be willing to let israel in peace, given prior-to-1967-borders.

I think it is obvious that the vast majority of Palestinians would accept such terms, including many members of Hamas. However, on the Israeli side, even self proclaimed peace supporters and settlement detractors like Yonoz say's he'd likely rather take on the world than withdraw to those boarders. Granted, it seems the Green Line has a poorly defined meaning to Israeli society; it was only recently decided to be mentioned in their children's textbooks, and last I heard was that decision was facing strong opposition.

 

[mheslep]

... Hamas isn't composed of only idiots, nor is the israeli government, and reasonable people will know a good deal when they see it. Thats why I believe there is a significant mass of people in hamas that will seek an end to the "war/occupation," and they will most certainly be willing to let israel in peace, given prior-to-1967-borders.

It may be hard to get 'reasonable' people to emerge from thttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL3UnHZ0DRc&feature=related".

 

[Yonoz]

I see that, at present moment. But they have been deliberately pushed out of any negotiations, trivialized. You never accomplish anything when you ignore a fraction representing the majority of a country. Hamas isn't composed of only idiots, nor is the israeli government, and reasonable people will know a good deal when they see it. Thats why I believe there is a significant mass of people in hamas that will seek an end to the "war/occupation," and they will most certainly be willing to let israel in peace, given prior-to-1967-borders.

At what point should we expect this change of rhetoric? Negotiations, as turbo-1 will tell you, have to be done in good faith. One cannot enter negotiations in good faith when the other side openly declares that under no circumstances will it ever recognize one's existence. I agree Hamas should be negotiated with, but as long as they do not declare the end to their mission of liberating every last cm of Palestine, negotiations will only delay an inevitable confrontation. However, I do believe Hamas will be negotiated with should they make a significant gesture of good faith, such as ending the rocket fire aimed at Israeli civilians. Until they do, negotiating with them will be rightly viewed as a strategic maneuver to gain some breath and prepare for a future confrontation.

Another thing, which I have very little knowledge, is the "holy places," muslim or jewish. How important are these? But common sense should commend that this isn't the biggest controversies.

They are important, to a certain extent. The single most explosive issue is Jerusalem, specifically the Temple Mount. Besides the obvious national importance to both Israelis and Palestinians, there will have to be some strong international effort there - freedom of worship must be assured for all faiths, and the city itself would be a revolving door for terrorists without division of the city and strong security arrangements. There are existing arrangements for Jewish pilgrimage to tombs in the West Bank, i.e. the pilgrimage is done at night under tight security, sites outside Jerusalem will probably have a similar arrangement.
Hebron will be another issue, as there are inhabited Jewish properties right at its cramped center. These have been Jewish property since before the birth of Zionism, they are inhabited by very zealous settlers, and so the situation will be difficult to diffuse.

 

[Yonoz]

I think it is obvious that the vast majority of Palestinians would accept such terms, including many members of Hamas. However, on the Israeli side, even self proclaimed peace supporters and settlement detractors like Yonoz say's he'd likely rather take on the world than withdraw to those boarders. Granted, it seems the Green Line has a poorly defined meaning to Israeli society; it was only recently decided to be mentioned in their children's textbooks, and last I heard was that decision was facing strong opposition.

It's not that obvious what terms the Palestinians would accept, especially not to a nation who had an Arab enemy attack it with every generation. As I said, most Israelis feel under siege, whether you agree they are or you don't.
If the situation you described somehow came into being, i.e. Israel would be prevented from arming itself, then the occupied territories will certainly be critical to its existence. I have learned from my national and personal histories the importance of the independence of national self-defense. The only difference between myself (and most Israeli leftists) and secular right wing Israelis is that I am optimistic as to the chance of securing Israel in its narrower, strategically inferior form. Should the western world turn Israel into another Czechoslovakia, I figure my optimism would be lost.
The green line has always been mentioned as it is a significant piece of information in the War of Independence and the Six Day War. I assure you Israeli children have been learning about both wars, the occupation and the Intifadas in history classes. You can't teach Israeli history without the green line.

 

[henxan]

Yonoz:

Well.. This is why it is good that US has come into the picture. Because they could say that israel have to go back to their original borders. They could help get about UN/nato resources to keep palestine peaceful. .I think that, what this thread started with, bush can make a change. But is he willing?

 

[turbo]

Yonoz:

Well.. This is why it is good that US has come into the picture. Because they could say that israel have to go back to their original borders. They could help get about UN/nato resources to keep palestine peaceful. .I think that, what this thread started with, bush can make a change. But is he willing?

Bush cannot make any change because he is unwilling to engage in diplomacy. Israel is in the position of military superiority, and has no reason to change the status quo. The US must be willing to offer both the carrot and the stick to both sides of the conflict, and so far, Israel has not been shown the stick and instead gets a steady diet of carrots. If this does not change, Israel will never negotiate in good faith with the Palestinians.

There are a number of things underlying the problem that make resolution tough. Zionists used ethnic cleansing to sweep Arab Palestinians from Palestine, flooding bordering countries with refugees. Also, when the Palestinians responded to the force used against them, they were branded as terrorists. Over the decades, Israel has used its influence in US politics to blunt any UN condemnation of their actions. By now, most Arabs with a rational world-view believe that the US is vehemently pro-Zionist and anti-Arab. The Zionists carved their country out of a colonial territory by using violence and terrorism against the natives living there. Under international law, these displaced persons are entitled to the right of return, or if that right of return is abrogated under extraordinary circumstances, at least reasonable restitution. Israel has denied these obligations for over 50 years.

If I invaded your home and drove you out, would you feel satisfied if after 50+ years, I allowed you to live in the tool shed, as long as I had absolute control over your comings and goings? The Palestinians in the "tool shed" are not far-removed from this example.

 

[Yonoz]

currently at least it is al-aqsa mosque, where ariel sharon entered the prayer hall with a fully armed military bodyguard ignoring all the rules of entering a mosque, then after resistance by palestinians that involved shoes being thrown at the offender, the group fired at the unarmed palestinians. if that's not how it started, then how did it?

Al-Aqsa Mosque is, well, a Mosque - the Temple Mount is a mount. The Al-Aqsa Mosque is built on the Temple Mount, as is the Dome of the Rock. The Muslim name for the Temple Mount is the Noble Sanctuary. A rose by any other name...
As for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Aqsa_Intifada#_ref-15"/Noble Sanctuary/Official Residence of the Spaghetti Monster:

"A group of Palestinian dignitaries came to protest the visit, as did three Arab Knesset Members. With the dignitaries watching from a safe distance, the Shahab (youth mob) threw rocks and attempted to get past the Israeli security personnel and reach Sharon and his entourage [...] Still, Sharon's deportment was quiet and dignified. He did not pray, did not make any statement, or do anything else that might be interpreted as offensive to the sensitivities of Muslims. Even after he came back near the Wailing Wall under the hail of rocks, he remained calm. "I came here as one who believes in coexistence between Jews and Arabs," Sharon told the waiting reporters. "I believe that we can build and develop together. This was a peaceful visit. Is it an instigation for Israeli Jews to come to the Jewish people's holiest site?"

You see - Sharon was on the Noble Sanctuary, but he never entered the Al-Aqsa Mosque, nor the Dome of the Rock. The real violence started the next day, Friday - prayer day.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Qb5fIP-MfAc", ask anyone who was in the Thanzeem at the time. There was even an attack on an Israeli settler convoy that claimed the life of an Israeli soldier the day before Sharon's visit - which for some reason doesn't signify the start of the second Intifada to you more than a Jew visiting the Noble Sanctuary - something that happened many many times before, never sparking any uprisings.

so al-dura was not killed? staged? EVERY arab channel was showing that tape, a lot of western ones, and why didnt the government of israel say it was a false tape or a setup when it happend? and what other scenes in the tape? it seems to me that your trying to say that israel is a country that has never commited any wrong since its beggining.

It quite possibly was staged: several investigations pointed to that possibility - though of course it can't be said with any certainty. The Israeli government can't make assertions such as that without a proper investigation, and that took time. The France 2 network, which holds the master tapes, will not release them to the public. Even the sequence shown in the court was cut. Here's http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBureaus.asp?Page=\\ForeignBureaus\\archive\\200502\\FOR20050215c.html" :

In a January 2005 article in Le Figaro , Jeambar and Leconte said that when France 2 news director Arlette Chabot showed them the cassette, they were surprised that it did not contain any footage of the child's "agony."

They also found that the first 20 minutes or so of the cassette showed scenes of young Palestinians "playing at war" in front of the camera, falling as if wounded and then getting up and walking away.

Jeambar and Leconte told radio station RCJ that a France 2 official also present at the meeting had said in reference to the playacting, "You know it's always like that."

Israel has done "wrong", as has every other country, but your historical errors show for how much nonsense it is blamed.

and when did muslims conduct attacks on jews from al-aqsa mosque?

Not from the mosque, from the Temple Mount/Noble Sanctuary. One such account is in the source relating to Sharon's visit, but there were several other cases during the Intifadas.

what hapend at the cathedral was a siege that lasted for a few months. even the vatican pleaded for the israelies to stop it, but to no avail.

You mean the Church of the Nativity, which is in Bethlehem, not Jerusalem. Funny you should be so sensitive about weapons entering mosques, but you see no problem in armed fighters claiming refuge in a church, let alone stealing the church's valuables. The siege lasted 39 days, and everyone was free to come out unharmed.

digging near the fragile wall for construction, and digging tunnels under the mosque WITHOUT knowledge of the islamic wuqf.

There are no tunnels being dug under the mosque, despite what the Waqf claims. The digs outside the wall are salvation digs so that a replacement for a swept ramp can be built. Unlike the Waqf's digs, they are supervised by professionals. The Waqf never conducts any salvation digs, and http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=776922" .

and how will talking with only the current corrupt and minoroty fatah, while ignoring the majority hamas help? of course everything israel does is 'meant' for some reason, since israel is never in the wrong. and do you think that increased military activity is going to calm hamas down?
oh, and how about putting 2/3 of the parliment in prison?

I have explained the reasons why negotiations with Hamas under the current circumstances are futile.
The military activity is not meant to calm Hamas down, I have stated it is meant to occupy the militants and extract a toll from them - and it has achieved that. I don't see any point in calming Hamas down if they will only gather strength for an inevitable future confrontation.
Indeed, parliament members on behalf of Hamas are in Israeli prisons. Having witnessed what Hamas has done in Gaza, I believe it's in everyone's interests. Everyone but Hamas and their Iranian backers, that is.

 

[Yonoz]

Yonoz:

Well.. This is why it is good that US has come into the picture. Because they could say that israel have to go back to their original borders. They could help get about UN/nato resources to keep palestine peaceful. .I think that, what this thread started with, bush can make a change. But is he willing?

I believe Bush is willing, but there's a lot of elements in the equation. One rocket, one shell can tear down years of trust-building.

 

[Evo]

I think it's time to close this down as the discussion isn't progressing.