It's very clear that the Palestinians want it all or nothing. There will never be a two state nation. It will be all or nothing.

Anyone thinking otherwise is delusional at best.

The Arabs and Palestinians are locked into a zero sum game, that's why they are celebrating UNSCR 2334 as a "win".

for the strategic purpose of establishing an apartheid state in Palestine, by making ia Palestinian state physically impossible. They were too greedy and too driven by religious extremism to stay within their own borders.

And that will have long term consequences. Bibi is the incarnation of PW Botha.

Jews living in Jerusalem, a war crime.

What a bunch of vile racist trash.

Last edited Wed Jan 4, 2017, 09:25 AM - Edit history (1)

Let me state right up front I believe the only viable solution is a two-state solution, but let me be clear also that extremists on both sides have being doing everything in their power to see that doesn't occur.

and for those who would like to think Israel doesn't have its extremists one only needs to look at those with the mindset of Baruch Goldstein or Meir Kahane

Ehud Barak is of the view that the 'Majority of Israelis' agree with Kerry:

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/222451

regardless, the fact is Israel is divided, not unlike the divisions here in America.

Netanyahu has done tremendous damage to Israel. Not only by involving himself in U.S. politics, even going so far as to snub the President, and actively campaign in Florida for Romney, but by his continuous inflammatory rhetoric

That's the problem with Israel's harshest critics. Ignoring or always making excuses for fanatic Jew hatred.

?w=720

himself in the American election.

You put a poster up that say's "Israel needs a partner for peace".

It was Yitzhak Rabin who said "you don't make peace with friends. You make it with your enemies"

and Prime Minister Rabin NEVER made excuses for "fanatic Jew hatred" as you put it

That's a fact you're trying to ignore or explain away. It's the topic of the OP & it's undeniable.

You mentioned Rabin but are you familiar with where Rabin was on this topic just days before the assassination?

option. That, along with the fact that Jews were not even allowed into Jerusalem pre-1967, and its religious sites were desecrated, during the Jordon annexation.

However, in the end the parties need to be brought back to the negotiating tables

Hamas and the PLO want to keep killing Jews. They want to continue praising & rewarding murderers for their terror. How does Israel meet that half way? Only kill Jews on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays? Come on, what a waste of time.

The PA just doesn't want 2 states for 2 people. They will never recognize Israel as the homeland of the Jews. They want it all & they're very clear about this. Neither Rabin or anyone representing Meretz today could cut a deal with the Palestinians. No offer will ever be good enough. Olmert's offer from 2008 being proof of that.

I posted this article this morning...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1134134735

What do you think?

according to Bibi and the settlement builder's squad. No one is truly a patriot that doesn't support endless settlement expansion and attacking Iran, and that goes for the US Congress too!

I have friends who emigrated there years ago with their parents who now say they wish they could leave as it is not safe to publicly express ideas at odds with Likud policy. This is not the Israel their parents dreamed of nor the one they were promised.

Any objective observer could tell that pro-Israelis are far more likely to place blame on Israel than your side is to ever blame the Palestinians. The one sideness is just too obvious.

It's so obvious. The Palestinian propaganda machine sure had found a home here in the left. It's sad.

They are also relatively powerless.

And they bear zero culpability for Israel's abominable settlement project.

Palestinians can never be blamed for anything. Ever.

I view such a position as outright support for the Hamas platform.

often. And they find themselves suffering the consequences of this dysfunction, being governed by the corrupt and venal in one location and the corrupt and fanatical in another.

But, they are not responsible for Israel's decision to unilaterally implement the one-state solution via settlement construction.

It is very rare to see pro-Israel advocates actually accept the idea that Israel should be held accountable for its own misfeasance and malfeasance.

Also, indigenous Jews building on their ancestral land isn't anywhere near as bad as terror attacks against the Jewish population that Palestinian leaders incite, praise, and reward (with American tax dollars). It's atrocious that people equate the two or argue that Jews in Jerusalem is worse than Hamas/PLO sending kids out to blow up, stab, or run-over Jews. Talk about a broken moral compass.

No games, just a simple Yes or No.

Is the Kotel a settlement?

....it's telling you don't believe rejecting every 2 state offer for the past century in addition to continued terror attacks is at all blameworthy. I get it because like yourself, they don't believe the Jewish state has any right to exist in peace.

You can't find even one reason to blame the Palestinians since your goal is the same as theirs; meaning, the destruction of Israel which is more important than them having their own state.

the old city belong to Palestine?

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2016, 03:31 PM - Edit history (1)

What kind of revisionist, low-level info., fake news sources are you using today?

BTW, having permanent residency status is something all liberal democracies offer - just like Israel. IOW, it's not Apartheid or Martial Law.

Israel controlling the old city, not giving it to a Palestine, as long as everyone living in it gets Israeli citizenship?

That is a great idea. Everyone living in the old city should be offered Israeli citizenship.

at Ramallah. That is where the seat of their government is at.

He accepted after the offer was off the table.

I don't know why you act as if you prefer 2 states when it's crystal clear you want one, just like the greater Israel folk. The difference is you prefer an Arab majority after full RoR and with the fanatics of Hamas/PLO in charge.

been a capital of Palestine, or even a major city (other than for religion) in the Arab world. with the partition after WW2, it wasn't going to be the capital of Palestine. It was only after Israel was established that the PA leadership decided that they wanted Jerusalem to be their capital.

A state would mean they would have to actually give up terrorism and govern. I've seen ZERO proof they have the desire to do either of those things.

On their terms. Compromise is not an option yet.

"First, the Palestinians have rejected one offer after another for a peaceful settlement in the past nearly 70 years."

True, but disingenuous.

One example.

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/07/08/opinion/fictions-about-the-failure-at-camp-david.html

...which was a better offer than Camp David. Not only Ehud Barak but the Israeli cabinet agreed to it.

Arafat rejected both offers. Then regretted it later but after they were off the table...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jun/22/israel

Couldn't have been such a bad offer if Arafat embraced it afterwards.

Entitled to your opinion.

Hope you are having a nice evening. 🙂

The continued expansion of settlements have ensured a two state solution will never be achieved. Isreal says that it has extended "generous" offers to the Palestinians in order to reach a peace yet they continue with the settlement expansion knowing fully the detrimental effect of the action on any peace accord. Netanyahu himself said a two state agreement will never happen during his campaign. So it is pretty clear where Isreal stands on the issue in both actions and word.

That's the problem.

Seriously, look into the Clinton Parameters offer.

....and Arafat rejected the Parameters. News reports state the same thing. There are no sources out there stating Arafat accepted the Parameters & Israel didn't.

This article shows Arafat only accepted after the offer was pulled...
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jun/22/israel

You can pretend the terms are unacceptable but Arafat didn't think they were in 2002.

The fact is you reject any offer of 2 states for 2 people because you're against the existence of Israel altogether. You want to deny the right of self-determination and sovereignty to Jews, meaning you advocate the destruction of Israel, which is after all the BDS platform you support.

...which goes to show he was an enemy of peace.

Nice try with the revisionist history.

Meanwhile, there's no evidence whatsoever the Palestinians want 2 states for 2 people. They'd rather see Israel destroyed, like the BDS movement.