Bibi Wins, Two State Solution Dies?
- Thread starter onthebottom
- Start date
The PLO and Hamas have publicly committed to ethnically cleansing Israel of Jews. Therefore, in a final peace deal, they must recognize that Israel is in fact a Jewish state, or no one can be sure that have abandoned their goal is eliminating Jews.That is related to your repeated calls that Israel be recognized as 'the Jewish State', isn't it?
If they say "we recognize Israel (we just want it to be an Arab majority Muslim state with no Jews in it)", that isn't really peace.
They have to recant their opposition to Israel being a Jewish state or it is only a matter of time before they attack again.
Why limit yourself to the middle east? If you want Israel to get rid of nukes, I would expect the same for India, Pakistan, China, Russia, the US, ....agree. I support a middle east without nuclear weapons, what about you ?
Of course you are only interested in disarming one of those countries.
Shit. Now you're lying about another thing.That accusation of lying is just one more thing you need to apologize for.
I never said any such thing.
Apologize for such outright lying and learn to debate honestly.
Black and white - you think Palestinians renouncing violence is an impossible condition....
I see you also have impossible conditions, yours being all Palestinians must renounce Hamas and violence?
...
You think that a country with more than 10,000 centrifuges for one civilian reactor is pushing for a nuclear free zone? Are you gullible or just intentionally blind?I understand that Iran is making a push for a nuclear free middle east.
...
Are you purposely muddling your arguments, incapable of reading, or just lost in the discussion.If there is no need for any disarming then there is no reason to wait 20 or 30 years or until Netanyahu is out of power, to negotiate a peaceful settlement.
Then we both agree, both sides need to refrain from violence then there is no reason a peaceful settlement couldn't be reached?
No condition on talks starting but renouncing violence is by definition a requirement for a peace deal.
You're back to this losing argument again?Israel isn't a modern western democracy because jews living in the west bank have the right to vote but arabs living in the same area don't.
Israel is probably comparable to 19 century Canada where natives, women and non-whites ( mostly chinese) didn't have the right to vote, and the system of Palestinian bantustans is similar to the Canadian system of indian reserves in the 19 century especially the checkpoints system as canadian natives weren't allowed to be found outside of their reserve without a pass ( during 19 century).
So Israel is 200 years behind modern western democracies.
The West Bank is not part of Israel. Palestinians in the West Bank don't want to be part of Israel. Why do you feel you should force them to be?
The region isn't problematic, the leadership of many countries is.A world without nuclear weapons would be the ideal, but the Middle east is the most problematic region, so it makes sense to start from there.
Besides that, India and Pakistan are still on a warlike footing, having fought four wars and had numerous skirmishes and violent incidents. Several of those skirmishes took place in the last 5 years. Seems worth of being disarmed.
And the US and Russia have also been involved in military conflicts over the past couple decades. The US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. Russia has invaded Ukraine and Georgia. Maybe they should be disarmed as well.
Whether you like it or not, Israel has had nukes for almost 50 years and has shown they have little interest in using them, even when Syrian tanks were driving on Tel Aviv.
Controlled by Israel, not part of Israel.If the west bank isn't part of Israel , why Israeli settlers are allowed to live there ? The west bank is controlled by Israel
Northern Cyprus is under Turkish military control but is not part of Turkey. The people there have no expectation of voting in Turkey.
Try reading the history of that war.When did that happen ? syrian tanks didn't go far beyond Golan in 1973
No, but you said 'ethnically', not 'ethically' and you were describing Israel, not democracy.It is not racist to say that democracy is morally and ethically superior to terrorism you fucking idiot.
And you said it twice, it wasn't a typo.
Israel on the other hand is a modern Western democracy, infinitely ethnically and morally superior to the terrorists they defeated in 47 and the tyrants they defeated in 67.
Building states on racial or 'ethnic' superiority is so 1930's.3. Israel is a western democracy, and is morally and ethnically superior in every conceivable way to the forces of tyranny that it opposes
You got your ass kicked spewing this bullshit before, how exactly do you dare and come back here and repeat again? You can't just come along, spew this bullshit, and run out when you are exposed, then come back later and spew it again.Israel isn't a modern western democracy because jews living in the west bank have the right to vote but arabs living in the same area don't.
The West Bank areas where the Palestinians live are not part of Israel, they are not Israeli citizens, there is no reason why they should ever be Israeli citizens, or why that territory should ever be considered part of Israel. There is a wall between the areas which are included in Israel, where people vote, and the areas under Palestinian control, where people vote in Palestinian elections.
The UN and everybody else recognizes it as occupied territory, there are even court rulings form the ICJ saying it is illegal to consider it part of Israel.
Utter hate spew horse shit. Was there a border between white areas and non-white areas? No. There wasn't. It was nothing like that, and you now it -- which makes you a liar, like groggy/frankfooter.Israel is probably comparable to 19 century Canada where natives, women and non-whites ( mostly chinese) didn't have the right to vote, and the system of Palestinian bantustans is similar to the Canadian system of indian reserves in the 19 century especially the checkpoints system as canadian natives weren't allowed to be found outside of their reserve without a pass ( during 19 century).
So Israel is 200 years behind modern western democracies.
They don't. There is a wall between where the Israeli settlers live, and where the Palestinians live. Your best possible argument is that Israel has annexed the territory inside the wall. There is no argument whatsoever that Israel has annexed the territory outside the wall.If the west bank isn't part of Israel , why Israeli settlers are allowed to live there ? The west bank is controlled by Israel
I have edited my posts to remove the typo, I had no intention anywhere of saying "ethnically superior" it appears my phone "autocorrect" replaced the word I meant.No, but you said 'ethnically', not 'ethically' and you were describing Israel, not democracy.
Under no circumstances do I consider any group, anywhere "ethnically superior" to anyone. Ever. I don't believe that is even a valid concept and if that post inadvertently offended anyone I apologize, it was not my intention to write "ethnically" there.
I was comparing Israel to Hamas, not Israelis to Palestinians. I believe Israel is ethically and morally superior to Hamas. I certainly do believe that Palestinians are capable of building a vibrant democracy of their own, but it will unfortunately never happen while they are under the thrall of terrorists like Hamas and despots like Fatah. The Palestinians have bad leaders, they are not bad people.
Israel doesn't apply a dual system of laws either. The Palestinian areas are not part of Israel.The difference is that Turkey doesn't apply dual system of laws there like Israel does in the west bank ( civilian law for settlers and military law for palestinians), also Turkey didn't settle civilian Turks ( from Turkey) in Cyprus.
And Bravo for comparing Israel to Turkey which is a military dictatorship known for oppressing minorities especially kurds and denied joining the EU for that reason.
B'Tselem loves writing that sort of thing, only problem is they're wrong: There is a wall between where the settlers live, and the rest of the West Bank. They touch on that with the phrase "not been formally annexed", which leads directly to the actual argument that works here -- the territory inside the wall has been de facto annexed.
Canada in fact claimed SOVEREIGNTY over the reserves nitwit.Yes there was, the indian reserves were created in the 19 century for that reason.
Meanwhile no matter how many times you spew your bullshit there is still a wall between the Israeli and Palestinian areas of the West Bank, and they are NOT integrated into the Israeli economy.
What are you going to do? Run away from this debate like you ran from it last time? Then come back and post your nonsense again hoping we forgot you already got your ass kicked?
You still have no reply to this:
1. They are separated by a defended wall
2. The UN recognized Palestine as a state
3. It is occupied territory
4. The UN, ICJ, EU, US Canada, etc., all recognize it as occupied territory
The Palestinian territory is not part of Israel and no matter how long you hold your breath and even if you stamp your feet it still won't be.
Nope. You surely aren't the world government, you do not make up rules like that. The security wall very clearly divides the Israeli from the Palestinian areas.so any territory under Israeli control is de facto annexed.
There is no reason to think that area A is annexed by Israel.
None.
Its an apology I will grudging accept, you did use the word twice, once more after it was pointed out and knew you had used it.I have edited my posts to remove the typo, I had no intention anywhere of saying "ethnically superior" it appears my phone "autocorrect" replaced the word I meant.
Under no circumstances do I consider any group, anywhere "ethnically superior" to anyone. Ever. I don't believe that is even a valid concept and if that post inadvertently offended anyone I apologize, it was not my intention to write "ethnically" there.
I was comparing Israel to Hamas, not Israelis to Palestinians. I believe Israel is ethically and morally superior to Hamas. I certainly do believe that Palestinians are capable of building a vibrant democracy of their own, but it will unfortunately never happen while they are under the thrall of terrorists like Hamas and despots like Fatah. The Palestinians have bad leaders, they are not bad people.
But this is an apology, so I will accept it, though I will continue to watch your posts should you tread that line again.
That's the first apology you've given on this thread, I now expect you to apologize for accusing me of lying.
Take Israel and the US out of those lists.1. They are separated by a defended wall
2. The UN recognized Palestine as a state
3. It is occupied territory
4. The UN, ICJ, EU, US Canada, etc., all recognize it as occupied territory
The Palestinian territory is not part of Israel and no matter how long you hold your breath and even if you stamp your feet it still won't be.
The US and Israel have both argued that Palestine is not a state, including Netanyahu.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middl...reject-palestinian-bid-20151117815257173.htmlIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has urged the International Criminal Court (ICC) to reject the Palestinians' request for a membership because they did not rank as a state.
"We expect the ICC to reject the hypocritical request by the Palestinian Authority, which is not a state but an entity linked to a terrorist organisation," he said in a statement on Thursday, referring to Hamas.
And the US.
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-C...te-does-not-qualify-for-ICC-membership-387031
I'm glad you at least admit that the world recognizes Palestine as a state, however since Israel doesn't and Israel controls all of the occupied lands then as far as Israel is concerned there is only one state. Netanyahu has confirmed the two state solution is dead in the water and Israel is now only left with one state.
