Bibi Wins, Two State Solution Dies?

[fuji]

Come on, you can not give him a pass by saying it is just his opinion, he has stated publicly that he does not support a two state solution. A newspaper/magazine interview in which he states that he is in favor of a 2 state solution is much less convincing than his public speech.

Netanyahu is a sack of crap, everything wrong with politicians is embodied in this jackass, I pity any people under his rule.

Gowest was trying to claim the West Bank of part of Israel based on random statements made by Netanyahu as opposed to acts passed by the Knesset.

And Netanyahu himself backed off of what he said, because it was politically costly for him to keep saying it.

The Knesset isn't going to abandon the two state solution anytime soon. It isn't ever clear the Knesset has t power to annex land without holding a referendum, and no mere PM can do it with a campaign speech.

Even if they did kill the two state negotiating that wouldn't make Area A part of Israel. A no state solution is more likely than the one state fantasy.

 

[AdamH]

For great clarity: So long as the Palestinian goal is to ethnically cleanse all the Jews, Likud is right not to make peace.

Now respond properly this time -- if you rat hole into another misreading claiming that statement refers to every Palestinian individually rather than their leaders then you deserve the disparaging remarks about your English comprehension that will follow.

Sorry pal.. You've since clarified it and that's fine, but the original statement on it's own does appear to indicate you feel all Palestinians are homicidal (hellbent on ethnically cleansing Jews from their lands). I wasn't misleading anything. I was responding to what you wrote. What you wrote didn't properly communicate what you thought (and mistakenly still think) it did.

 

[fuji]

Sorry pal.. You've since clarified it and that's fine, but the original statement on it's own does appear to indicate you feel all Palestinians are homicidal (hellbent on ethnically cleansing Jews from their lands).

Would you have gone on that rant if someone had written "The Americans started the 1812 war"?

No, it is obvious what it means and there is nothing unclear about it. The determinative always refers to collective political representation when used that way in English.

You were being a cad.

So long as the Palestinian goal is to ethnically cleanse all the Jews, Likud is right not to make peace.

 

[AdamH]

Would you have gone on that rant is someone had written "The Americans started the 1812 war"?

No, is is obvious what it means and there is nothing unclear about it.

You were being a cad.

What if I were to claim "American's don't support higher minimum wages"? I guess, according to you, I'd be accurate in that statement.

It's not obvious what you wrote.

 

[fuji]

What if I were to claim "American's don't support higher minimum wages"? I guess, according to you, I'd be accurate in that statement.

It's not obvious what you wrote.

Everyone who speaks English would understand the grammatical difference between "the Americans don't support it" and "Americans don't support it". What do you think the word "the" does there?

Get a life.

 

[AdamH]

Everyone who speaks English would understand the grammatical difference between "the Americans don't support it" and "Americans don't support it". What do you think the word "the" does there?

Get a life.

Very well, "As long as The Americans don't support higher minimum wages, they'll never get it".. Correct now?

 

[fuji]

Very well, "As long as The Americans don't support higher minimum wages, they'll never get it".. Correct now?

Are you a native English speaker? Have you a highschool diploma?

If you are struggling to understand how the word "the" functions in English, or determinative articles and pronouns in general, I recommend you hire a tutor.

Using a determinative communicates that you are talking about some people in particular, in the case of a political discussion, political leaders or negotiators as representatives. If it is a conversation about a sporting event "the Americans won the bobsled" means the team representing that country, not every single American.

It is your issue that you don't grok English.

 

[basketcase]

I was talking about jewish israelis, if you exclude the arab list a majority of jewish israelis voted for parties that support one state solution

Do you have a breakdown of the ethnic nature of votes that aren't available to the public at large? Besides, Israel doesn't segregate voters based on religion (the way Iran does and the way that binational states like Lebanon do).

Ignoring the fact that two-state wasn't the prime issue in the election - the economy was - you might be surprised at the number of Arab Israelis who voted for parties other than the joint list. You would also be surprised at the number of Israelis that are as Jewish as I am Christian (which is to say do nothing religious other than get together with family at the big holidays). Only 20% of Israelis attend religious services.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Arabs living in the west bank aren't foreigners to that territory to be compared to foreigners living in Canada also Canada isn't keeping part of the population stateless

I never made such a comparison. What I pointed out to you is that every country has rules that disqualify some people living in a jurisdiction from having the right to vote.

More significantly, you acknowledge that the area in question is a territory, which means most of the people in that area wouldn't be expected to have the right to vote in national elections. As was previously stated, you don't understand the difference between a state and a territory.

 

[basketcase]

90% of arabs ( the ones who voted) voted for the arab list , so the vote was ethnically divided.

What data do you base that on? Israel doesn't tabulate votes based on ethnicity. That would be racist.

The fact that you act like there isn't differences of opinions amongst any of Israel's population is ridiculous. The fact that Israel is significantly secular doesn't seem to bother your ethnic separatist views either. As it is, the Knesset has a clear majority that opposes annexing the West Bank. Should be simple enough for even you to get.

To add, there are to be 17 Arab members of the Knesset. 5 of them are not from the Joint List (and one Knesset member of the Joint List is Jewish).

 

[basketcase]

... anyone who is born in Canada has the right to vote regardless of his ethnicity.

Anyone born in the West Bank has the right to vote in the West Bank (if the Palestinians ever hold an election again).

Actually that statement is not true. Jews born in the West Bank don't have the right to vote in West Bank elections. They are ethnically prevented from being a citizen or owning land under Palestinian law. Meanwhile 20% of Israel's citizens are Arabs (including the Supreme Court judge who oversaw the elections).


And FYI, Israel actively encourages Arabs in East Jerusalem and the Golan to become citizens so it clearly isn't based on ethnicity.

 

[Moviefan-2]

So if natives in Canada who also live in a territory wouldn't be allowed to vote in federal elections, would you consider that to be fair ?
Also Israel disqualify people living in the west bank from voting based on ethnicity because jewish settlers in the west Bank have the right to vote, anyone who is born in Canada has the right to vote regardless of his ethnicity.

Your analogies make no sense.

Arabs in the West Bank do not consider the West Bank to be part of Israel. And I don't know the basis for your claims that they sought -- and were denied -- the right to vote in Israel's election.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Have you ever talked to a native person here in Canada ? They don't consider themselves canadians , they call themselves Cree, Ojibwe, Mohawk.. Are you suggesting to revoke their canadian citizenship ?

So now you're claiming the Arabs in the West Bank had Israeli citizenship and their citizenship was revoked?

When did that happen?

 

[Moviefan-2]

Their territory part of Israel and they are kept stateless on purpose to keep a Jewish majority in Israel. Israeli government is responsible of keeping them stateless

I don't think you answered my question.

No matter. Let me see if I understand your latest position correctly: You believe the Arabs in the West Bank feel the West Bank should be recognized as part of the state of Israel.

That's news to me.

 

[fuji]

So if natives in Canada who also live in a territory wouldn't be allowed to vote in federal elections, would you consider that to be fair ?
Also Israel disqualify people living in the west bank from voting based on ethnicity because jewish settlers in the west Bank have the right to vote, anyone who is born in Canada has the right to vote regardless of his ethnicity.

Natives in Canada are in Canada, and they are citizens of Canada, a country they were born in. Totally unlike Arabs outside Israel who were born outside Israel have never set foot in Israel and aren't Israeli citizens.

 

[fuji]

Their territory part of Israel and they are kept stateless on purpose to keep a Jewish majority in Israel. Israeli government is responsible of keeping them stateless

The West Bank and Gaza are not part of Israel. You crazy argument that they should be went down in flames.

You argued it should be considered Israel because Netanyahu refused to negotiate a two state solution, as if that one guy had some omnipotent power to declare random parts of the world Israel.

The alternative to a two state solution is a no state solution. The territory gets absorbed by neighboring Arab countries or just transitions to some UN administration.

There is no legal basis for calling it Israel, and no way to force Israel to annex territory that Israel doesn't even want.

Particularly when there are literally dozens of UN resolutions formally stating that it isn't Israeli territory.

 

[AK-47]

Israel actually wants this territory but doesn't want its palestinian population, to achieve this goal the best way is to keep them stateless

Its kinda hard to live side by side peacefully with a bunch of people who wanna suicide bomb you out of existence

 

[fuji]

Why are they building settlements and expanding them in Wets Bank then ? I have never seen a country building settlements in a foreign territory.

Even if you think that Israel has annexed the parts of Area C that are contained by the security wall (i.e., where the settlements are) there is no basis for your claim that the majority of Palestinians, who live in areas A and B, would be included in that.

In answer to your question, Israel has a strategic imperative to change the border between Israel and Palestine, and is essentially attempting to create facts on the ground that redefine the border. Towards that end Israel has offered the Palestinians equal land in a less strategic location. The line between Israel and Gaza was not drawn up by anybody--it is literally just where the front was when fighting stopped, and it is not a very sensible line. It creates the "wasp waist" around Netanya that would allow some future Arab armored column stationed in the West Bank to bisect Israel very quickly. The settlements are strategically placed to thicken Israel's defense in depth around that point, and to claim militarily strategic areas around Jerusalem.

We can debate whether that is a right or wrong policy, but it would help if you started with an objective understanding of what Israel has done. You talk as though there were settlements in Areas A and B, and as if all those people in A and B should somehow be considered part of Israel. The BEST CASE you could make is that all the people in Area C should be considered part of Israel -- but even that claim is dubious, because large parts of Area C are outside the security wall.

 

[fuji]

Come on , since when Israel gives a shit about US resolutions ?

If your argument is that all that matters is what Israel wants, then you will lose this debate very quickly. I think it's in your interest to try and establish some basis in international law for your claims. That would tend to start with looking at what UN resolutions say, and so on.

But if you are happy to say that all that matters is what Israel gives a shit about, then we can end the debate right now: The land outside the security wall is not Israel, the land inside the security wall is Israel. End of debate. That's what Israel gives a shit about.

Now if you want to talk about the UN, or what people outside the Israeli government think, the general consensus is that the territory outside the 1967 line of control is not Israel.

NO-ONE inside or outside of Israel thinks that Areas A and B belong to Israel, as you are claiming. Israel doesn't think so, Palestine doesn't think so, the UN doesn't think so, the US and the EU and Canada don't think so. So what's your actual argument?

 

[fuji]

Israel actually wants this territory but doesn't want its palestinian population, to achieve this goal the best way is to keep them stateless

What territory do you mean by "this territory"? You keep talking as though you mean the entire West Bank, but any objective look at the situation would conclude that Israel only wants the territory inside the security wall. Otherwise, why has Israel set up a Palestinian government on the other side of that wall, and handed out different citizenship cards to people depending on which side of the wall they're on? It seems that Israel is establishing a lot of precedents that the people outside the wall, who get Palestinian ID cards, and are governed by a Palestinian Authority, are something other than Israel.