And the lobbing of hundreds of rockets, don't forget that. Oh and the fact that Hamas is tunneling in to Israel to kidnap and kill it's citizens.
That's the problem. Each side keeps moving the goalposts further and further into the past. "We wouldn't be attacking you guys if you didn't attack us" "Well we wouldn't be attacking if you never attacked. "
This goes on an on an on until we're arguing the idea of whether or not either side should even exist.
Quote:
Originally Posted by undercoverbrother
The Palestinian security forces should have lead the charge and investigation. Instead the head of Hamas praised the action of those the committed the murders.
Again you're talking about Hamas, not Palestine. Abbas was willing to fully cooperate with Israeli investigations, but stated that his police force has no jurisdiction over Area C, which is the majority of the West Bank.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to _Q_ For This Useful Post:
If the Palestinians ever want peace they have to stop backing and protecting Hamas.
This is likely very true. However, I don't think they just want peace, they also want land and sovereignty.
Unfortunately, that is not something that Israel is going to allow, so they're in a bit of a bind. Stop supporting Hamas and receive peace under the rule of Israel, or continue holding on to what little they have in the misguided hope that they will ever be free in their own land.
Anything less than the 67 borders isn't enough for Palestinians, and frankly they deserve that much, so while they'll never get that at this point you can see the strong desire to hold on to what little they have.
Again you're talking about Hamas, not Palestine. Abbas was willing to fully cooperate with Israeli investigations, but stated that his police force has no jurisdiction over Area C, which is the majority of the West Bank.
My apologies.
But is Palestine, and the Palestinian people want to be accepted and treated as a State, they should act like a state.
Your post, unless I miss read it, sounded like you expect Israel to investigate the murders and then give the evidence over to the appropriate authorities. When, IMO, it should have been run by Palestinians.
The only solution is one neither side wants. Foreign solutions and peacekeeping. Hamas does not want to lay down weapons and Israel does not want it's sovereignty lost. I say tough titties, get the Arab League and NATO to work together here.
That's interesting and I can totally get behind that.
NATO occupies Israel and tells them that any unauthorized use of their military will be dealt with aggressively. The Arab League or Turkey occupies the West Bank and Gaza and tells them any rockets launched at Israel or breach into Israeli territory will be dealt with aggressively.
Then tell both sides that the occupation will not end until both sides sit down and come up with a solution to all the issues they have. Upon this resolution, the international community fully recognizes both Palestine and Israel. Foreign troops will start leaving only after a prolonged period of peace between both sides.
Easier said than done though. This would either cause lasting world peace or the beginning of World War 3.
The Following User Says Thank You to _Q_ For This Useful Post:
What most of the general public don't want to acknowledge is that neither Hamas nor Palestinians nor even Israel are the major players in this conflict. They are all pawns in the geo-political influence peddling between the two superpowers fighting for control over Middle East.
Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia could have come out publicly and declare peace with Israel long time ago. This would include establishing diplomatic relationships and complete withdrawal of their government support for terrorist factions (Hamas, Hezbollah etc.). They could also order revision of the hateful teachings in their religious schools to stop brainwashing their youth.
Egypt could have granted citizenship to all Gazans long time time ago, as it was initially assumed they'd do in 1959. Instead, Egypt keeps them orphaned without any hope for political or economic governmental support – resulting in generations over generations hating everything about their surrounding and having nothing to lose.
All of these countries are not doing a thing to change the situation, because having a hotspot in Israel is too useful and convenient outlet for diverting people's pressure over their own internal economic and political issues. Brutally sad and seemingly unresolvable conflict.
The Following User Says Thank You to CaptainYooh For This Useful Post:
That's interesting and I can totally get behind that.
NATO occupies Israel and tells them that any unauthorized use of their military will be dealt with aggressively. The Arab League or Turkey occupies the West Bank and Gaza and tells them any rockets launched at Israel or breach into Israeli territory will be dealt with aggressively.
Then tell both sides that the occupation will not end until both sides sit down and come up with a solution to all the issues they have. Upon this resolution, the international community fully recognizes both Palestine and Israel. Foreign troops will start leaving only after a prolonged period of peace between both sides.
Easier said than done though. This would either cause lasting world peace or the beginning of World War 3.
The more I think about it, the less I like it. NATO countries and the Arab League do not fully trust each other and sabotage would be fairly easy. That would lead to a much more widespread conflict. Plus there is absolutely no way Israel would EVER let this happen. Sovereignty is their biggest issue
But is Palestine, and the Palestinian people want to be accepted and treated as a State, they should act like a state.
Your post, unless I miss read it, sounded like you expect Israel to investigate the murders and then give the evidence over to the appropriate authorities. When, IMO, it should have been run by Palestinians.
And I agree, but part of the problem is the majority of the West Bank is "Area C" which means it's under Israeli control. Palestinian presence of any sort in that area is prohibited. What I'm saying is Israeli police should have investigated what they could have in coordination with the Palestinian police. They could have been like "Hey it looks like these guys might be responsible for the murders. As of right now they are the only suspects we have identified. Here's the evidence. It looks like they're in Bethlehem or Ramallah. That's under your jurisdiction, so please go get them for us and we promise to give them a fair trail. "
Instead, what we got was a 6 hour investigation, Israel proclaiming it was Hamas and then the bombing of Gaza.
The Following User Says Thank You to _Q_ For This Useful Post:
All of these countries are not doing a thing to change the situation, because having a hotspot in Israel is too useful and convenient outlet for diverting people's pressure over their own internal economic and political issues. Brutally sad and seemingly unresolvable conflict.
This is a very important note. I don't think enough people realise how useful this conflict is to multiple parties, and how few (outside of civilians) want this over with. If the end of this conflict was truly wanted by anyone close to it, it would be over. Instead it could likely roll on through the rest of our lifetime, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it did.
Also, I wanted to just say I appreciate the lack of antagonism happening in this thread right now. This is a much more calming and productive way to have an honest conversation about these things. It's nice to see, let's not ruin it! lol.
The Following User Says Thank You to Chill Cosby For This Useful Post:
That's interesting and I can totally get behind that.
NATO occupies Israel and tells them that any unauthorized use of their military will be dealt with aggressively. The Arab League or Turkey occupies the West Bank and Gaza and tells them any rockets launched at Israel or breach into Israeli territory will be dealt with aggressively.
Then tell both sides that the occupation will not end until both sides sit down and come up with a solution to all the issues they have. Upon this resolution, the international community fully recognizes both Palestine and Israel. Foreign troops will start leaving only after a prolonged period of peace between both sides.
Easier said than done though. This would either cause lasting world peace or the beginning of World War 3.
The Mavi Marmara incident ruined it between Israel and Turkey. Also, Turkey's ruling party is not entirely secular as ruling parties of the past.
The Mavi Marmara incident ruined it between Israel and Turkey. Also, Turkey's ruling party is not entirely secular as ruling parties of the past.
The reason why I suggested Turkey is because the Palestinians seem to love Turkey these days, are part of NATO and have relations with Israel. If not Turkey then maybe Jordan or Saudi Arabia, but Jordan's military is pretty weak and Saudi Arabia doesn't have official relations with Israel.
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by undercoverbrother
The Palestinian security forces should have lead the charge and investigation. Instead the head of Hamas praised the action of those the committed the murders.
As much as that would've been nice, the PA walks a very fine line these days. Any investigation by them would've made them appear even more like Israeli stooges than they already do, and would've further destroyed their already pathetically low credibility with the Palestinian people.
It is too easy to forget that support for Hamas comes out of Occupation. For years now, the PA has negotiated with Israel and received nothing in return. They are holding on by the skin of their teeth.
This is a very important note. I don't think enough people realise how useful this conflict is to multiple parties, and how few (outside of civilians) want this over with. If the end of this conflict was truly wanted by anyone close to it, it would be over. Instead it could likely roll on through the rest of our lifetime, and I wouldn't be at all surprised if it did.
Also, I wanted to just say I appreciate the lack of antagonism happening in this thread right now. This is a much more calming and productive way to have an honest conversation about these things. It's nice to see, let's not ruin it! lol.
If there was actual peace, Hamas would not have any power. Their entire power comes from anger and a desire for revenge. They're tops in my list for needing to cling to conflict and putting their civilians in harms way.
Israel comes in a close second. They have a long term strategy of colonization and control here, and the current Palestinian state interferes with it. The only way to move boundaries, is to do what Russia did in Crimea. Create conflict in order to move borders under the guise of human interest. Israel is only second here because it would survive if peace was found, though it's long term goals would have to change.
The Following User Says Thank You to Street Pharmacist For This Useful Post:
If there was actual peace, Hamas would not have any power. Their entire power comes from anger and a desire for revenge. They're tops in my list for needing to cling to conflict and putting their civilians in harms way.
Israel comes in a close second. They have a long term strategy of colonization and control here, and the current Palestinian state interferes with it. The only way to move boundaries, is to do what Russia did in Crimea. Create conflict in order to move borders under the guise of human interest. Israel is only second here because it would survive if peace was found, though it's long term goals would have to change.
Without trying to divine motives, I do think it fair to say that Israel is interested in having an increased presence in areas that are not currently Israeli territory. This strategy is generally described in relative tame and obscure ways. Here is an article about a family having decided to move; note that the article never says that the family is moving into occupied territories. Rather, they're merely moving back to "Israel" to live in a "settlement" south of Jerusalem. Even the couple addresses it as living in "Israel" but they understand that there are "other" people living there.
Just one of the myriad of ways that both sides mess with each other.
The reason why I suggested Turkey is because the Palestinians seem to love Turkey these days, are part of NATO and have relations with Israel. If not Turkey then maybe Jordan or Saudi Arabia, but Jordan's military is pretty weak and Saudi Arabia doesn't have official relations with Israel.
The issue that I have is it could easily backfire and widen the geographic scope of the conflict. Having 2 separate peace keeping forces increases the chances that those 2 forces could come into conflict with each other.
I think the peace keepers would need to be all from the same source. Multi-national, with the EU and Turkey being key members could potentially work.
Would either side accept peace keepers in their territory though?
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Without trying to divine motives, I do think it fair to say that Israel is interested in having an increased presence in areas that are not currently Israeli territory. This strategy is generally described in relative tame and obscure ways. Here is an article about a family having decided to move; note that the article never says that the family is moving into occupied territories. Rather, they're merely moving back to "Israel" to live in a "settlement" south of Jerusalem. Even the couple addresses it as living in "Israel" but they understand that there are "other" people living there.
Just one of the myriad of ways that both sides mess with each other.
Most of the time I agree about not divining motives as we don't have access to thought process, sometimes things are so incredibly apparent you have no other logical conclusion.
That's my point. Abbas can agree to whatever he wants and renounce all the violence he wants, but if Hamas is still there lobbing rockets over the border....
.... Israel will keep killing Palestinian non-combatants.
The issue that I have is it could easily backfire and widen the geographic scope of the conflict. Having 2 separate peace keeping forces increases the chances that those 2 forces could come into conflict with each other.
I think the peace keepers would need to be all from the same source. Multi-national, with the EU and Turkey being key members could potentially work.
Would either side accept peace keepers in their territory though?
Good point. Cannot the NATO and Arab League trade in for a new common uniform for this crisis? If they are all in the same uniform, mixed up together with the same command structure, it would be harder to sow the seeds of mistrust. Call it the Joint Effort for "insert-bland-geographical-non-political-area-description Peace Brigade" ?
AltaGuy has a magnetic personality and exudes positive energy, which is infectious to those around him. He has an unparalleled ability to communicate with people, whether he is speaking to a room of three or an arena of 30,000.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: At le pub...
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
The issue that I have is it could easily backfire and widen the geographic scope of the conflict. Having 2 separate peace keeping forces increases the chances that those 2 forces could come into conflict with each other.
I think the peace keepers would need to be all from the same source. Multi-national, with the EU and Turkey being key members could potentially work.
Would either side accept peace keepers in their territory though?
The Palestinians would welcome it with open arms. They are used to checkpoints, soldiers, and walls in their every day lives.
Israel would never, ever allow it. I'm not even going to blame them for that, but it's the hard truth. It's such an impossibility that it's not really even worth discussing.
