Bibi Wins, Two State Solution Dies?

[basketcase]

OK and then ?...

And then you get caught in another lie but refuse to back down from your campaign.

And you're right. It is not for the Security Council to GRANT them a state. They need to negotiate for it. Most of us know what the deal looks like. '67 borders with agreed to swaps, Jerusalem shared, limited refugee return and compensation to the rest.

In fact Olmert offered that deal and Abbas walked away so what are we left with?

 

[basketcase]

we have to forgive the Boers for the apartheid, they were afraid that blacks would come out of their reserves and slaughter them

Huge difference. Blacks in South Africa were not openly promising to destroy the white presence in South Africa. Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Fatah's armed wing make those promises and have a long history of acting on those promises.

Another of your fails.

 

[basketcase]

... Now that Bibi is reelected, it is the will of the Israeli people that there be no 2 state solution, ....

Sorry but that is a gowest level of idiocy. Only 23% of voters support Netanyahu. As I listed earlier in the thread there is actually a majority that voted for parties that clearly support two states. In a democracy that means that even if Bibi actually wanted what you claim, he CAN'T get it done.

I always get amazed at how in these discussions a vague statement by an Israeli leader gets so much press but you guys couldn't care less about infinitely clear warlike statements from Palestinian leaders.


p.s. pretty fucking amazing that you can claim democracy is a negative here.

 

[Moviefan-2]

None means anarchy and that would open the doors to radical groups. No one would accept this situation including Israel and the international community

The Palestinians were twice offered statehood and rejected it.

Regardless of what the international community and others might think, the Palestinians are stateless. And they will continue to be without a state until they learn to accept the existence of a Jewish nation in the Middle East.

 

[fuji]

Because first Jordan and Egypt have no control over those territories unlike Israel,

So if Israeli unilaterally withdraws from the territory outside the wall?

In any case the above is just your OPINION. You tried to present a one state solution as the only logical possibility whereas there are lots and lots of other possibilities.

It does NOT logically follow that the alternative to a Palestinian state is a one state solution. I provided several other solutions.

 

[fuji]

UNRWA has an army ?

What for? Who are they going to attack?

But yes the UN is indeed capable of fielding an army and has done so many times.

 

[fuji]

Ahmadinejad is not a dictator, the guy with the big turban whatever he is called is the real dictator. What he says is maybe state policy, though it is state policy and not necessarily the will of the people. Now that Bibi is reelected, it is the will of the Israeli people that there be no 2 state solution, in a democracy the will of the people is the will of the state.

In any case, not a democracy.

And you fail at comprehending democracy if you think Netanyahu's opinion is the will of the Israeli people. Complete and total fail.

The Israeli PM does not have the authority to declare what territory is or isn't Israel. Only the Knesset can do that.

Moreover Netanyahu has said he supports a two state solution, just not under present circumstances.

 

[fuji]

None means anarchy and that would open the doors to radical groups. No one would accept this situation including Israel and the international community

Wrong.

None could mean that Jordan and Egypt are persuaded to absorb the territory, they currently don't want to, but their objection is likely less than Israel's objection and so it will be easier to persuade them to annex it than Israel.

Turning it into an enclave permanent administered by the UN is another plausible outcome that would not be anarchy.

Your claim is just wrong. You are trying to prop up your absurd notion that it should be Israel by ignoring far simpler and far more likely outcomes.

Israel would effectively have to decide to commit national suicide and if you think that is going to happen you are really an idiot. Jordan or Egypt can absorb the areas without any significant disruption. UNRWA growing into a permanent administrator is just a continuation of the status quo and therefore while unconventional is perhaps the most likely result.

Note that the above outcomes are what lefty thinkers like Chomsky believe will happen, and that aligns with Likud position papers as well. When Likud and Chomsky agree on something you might want to take it seriously.

 

[fuji]

are you asking what for ? who's going to keep the law and order when there is no state ?

Who keeps law and order in Gaza today?

And yes the UN has an army and it was deployed twice in Kosovo and in Bosnia.

UN peacekeepers have gotten involved in hundreds of conflicts, not only those two.

So if the UN gets involved, it would force israel to accept either one binational state like Bosnia or an independent state like Kosovo.

You literally just made that up, it is your fantasy with no basis in reality.

The no state option like you suggest would be anarchy that the UN wouldn't accept

There is no reason to believe it would be anarchy and no reason to believe the UN wouldn't accept it.

Your idea that the UN is going to go to war with Israel, defeat IDF, and force Israel to accept a result Israeli doesn't even remotely want is truly ridiculous.

, so the no state isn't an option and if you bring the UN troops they will create either an independant state or a binational state

No they won't. They will stand along the line of control and prevent war between Israel and whatever militant group exists in Palestine.

You have escaped from reality if you think the UN can or will refight the war the Palestinians and the Arab states already lost.

 

[fuji]

an if they still refuse to take them , what are you going to do ? does Israel have the authority to force a foreign country to accept a territory ?
There are more harms than benefits for Jordan and Egypt to accept those territories , so why would they accept them ?

And when Israel refuses to take them, what are you going to do?

There are FAR more harms to Israel than to Jordan or Egypt.

Your only argument is that Israel currently occupies the territory, but once Israel completes the security wall and iron dome then Israel can simply withdraw and have no more responsibility for the territory than any other nation.

You are fantasizing that some big daddy figure is going to force Israel to commit suicide and it will NEVER happen.

Israel is not apartheid South Africa, it has not and will not integrate that territory or those people into its system. They are outside the wall, outside the Israeli system, outside the Israeli economy, unlike in South Africa where the blacks were integral to the economy and lived inside the borders.

Israel doesn't want or need the Palestinians or their land, its only interest is preventing them from attacking.

Once the security wall is strong enough Israel simply withdraws, closes the border, and leaves the Palestinians to figure it out on their own. Settlements inside. Palestinians outside, and they become somebody else's problem.

 

[fuji]

The UN won't refight the war on behalf of Israel to keep the occupation.

IDF is perfectly capable no need for the UN to do that.

they will eventually withdraw and if a binational state option like Bosnia fails , they would choose to declare it an independant state like they did in Kosovo.

I agree. Just note that the border will follow the security wall, and what happens outside that security wall won't be Israel's problem.

Israel would only invade again if the Palestinians continued waging war on Israel.

 

[fuji]

You must read about Bantustans in South Africa, they are very similar to the enclaves Israel is creating in the west bank

Not even remotely similar. The bantustans were really an integral part of south africa, the black workers were the backbone of the economy. Nothing like that is true in the west bank: it is outside Israel, outside the Israeli economy, and if it vanished tomorrow Israel wouldn't even notice.

And yes Israel does want the palestinians territory

No, Israel wants the territory inside the security wall where the settlers live. Not the territory outside the security wall where the Palestinians live.

You keep pretending that wall isn't there but it is very real.

 

[fuji]

Netenyahu said there will be no state there

No he didn't, liar. Nor does it even matter what he said, his opinion is irrelevant.

Why do you continue to lie about what he said? Can't argue your side with truthful statements?

 

[fuji]

That means it would always stay part of Israel

Sorry liar it isn't part of Israel now so it can't "stay" part of Israel. You still totally fail at understanding the word "occupation".

 

[fuji]

That's even worse, palestinians live in the same state but aren't allowed to earn a living outside their enclave/reserve

They do not live in the same state. Whether you like it or not, it is occupied Palestinian state territory, not Israeli territory.

You are just doing some stupid clown dance now, repeating refuted nonsense. You are ignoring that every authority including the UN General Assembly, Security Council, the International Court of Justice, as well as Israel, Palestine, the Arab league, EU, US, and Canada all say it is not Israeli territory. Not ONE of your claimed facts turned out to be true and in desperation you even lied about what Netanyahu said.

 

[fuji]

Israel wants the maximum of territory with the minimum of arab population who are jailed tiny overpopulated enclaves while the settlements keep expanding. That was the same philosophy behind bantustans get the maximum of land possible for whites with the minimum of blacks who are forced to be jailed in small bantustans

In fact Israel has not moved the security wall. It has become more and more permanent.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Netenyahu said they won't have a state, they live in which state then ?

None. They don't live in a state.

I already did your so-called "math" and answered this question for you. Others have answered it, as well.

One might suggest it fits the definition of insanity to keep asking the same question with the expectation of receiving a different answer.

 

[fuji]

They don't live in the same state ? Netenyahu said they won't have a state, they live in which state then ?

You are a shameless liar. Netanyahu never said that.

As for which state they live in the Palestinian state. If you don't agree with the UN GA, UN SC, EU, etc, that there is a Palestinian state they they are stateless.

You hate the truth and love lying.

 

[fuji]

I already answered that the none state would never exist, if it's controlled by Israel it would evolve into one state, if israel withdraws it would be declared an independant state.

This is your fantasy, not reality. You cannot take you opinion and present it as fact. In fact they are not in Israel.

 

[Moviefan-2]

I already answered that the none state would never exist, if it's controlled by Israel it would evolve into one state, if israel withdraws it would be declared an independant state.
Israel ( Netenyahu ) refuses the second option ( to withdraw), which option is left ?

"Evolve"?

If it is going to evolve into a state, that means it isn't one now. So the correct answer at this time is None.

You started this nonsense by claiming that Arabs in the West Bank are living in the state of Israeli and should have had the right to vote in the national election. However, no one would earn the right to vote based on speculation that their territory might "evolve" into becoming part of an existing state.

It's pretty clear you're just making this stuff up as you go along.