I mean I just never heard it's simple. Nothing in life is really simple, not in diplomacy and not in the Middle East. I mean there are countless jokes about a genie granting any 3 wishes except peace in the ME. In any case, it was a silly point on my part to debate.
I'll have to dig it up, but the Palestinian negotiators published maps of the Israeli proposal and it was roughly 70% of the land, with what Israel was keeping splitting the West Bank into three portions, with Israel also maintaining control of the Jordan Valley. There were some other provisions that made the proposal a complete non-starter: stuff like Israel having veto authority over all agreements the nascent Palestinian state could enter into, control over the airspace, EM spectrum, and water rights. Arafat made many bad deals (including Oslo), but he was absolutely right to turn down Camp David in 2000.
Takes about the Middle East being perpetually violent are ahistorical. Prior to the fall of the Ottomans, the Middle East was far more peaceful than, for example, Europe.
That probably depends how far you go in history. After all, we live in the least violent time in the history of the world.
This is a map of the supposed final proposal. It definitely looks more like 70-75% which is what has me confused about this 95% number. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/map-of-the-israeli-offer-for-west-bank-final-status
Israel is powerless when it comes to doing what is necessary for peace. I mean that's the dance they do. Isn't that what has been said so many times. If only the Palestinians truly wanted peace, if only they negotiated in good faith and everything else. Israel is to never yield the two most important pieces of the puzzle that will provide it peace. Arafat said I would be having tea with Rabin if I accept this deal. He refused to accept the deal stated that the big two things had to be part of any deal and he walked out. Call me crazy but maybe the people with all the power could you know present an offer that offer a partial concession of points one and two
Why do you refuse to believe the solution to peace is easy. It is easy in Korea too. The problem is never the what but the how. The answer to the question is easy, the execution is what is hard.
B/c if it was easy, it would have been done already. B/c multiple peace deals have failed. If either the what or the how was easy, then the entire process would be easy. If any of the components is hard, the whole thing is hard.
I see the equating of any and all pro-Palestine sentiment to antisemitism has now been extended to also include homophobia and transphobia. But yeah, I would totally worry more about people who don't think 13000 kids should die instead of say actual Nazis at CPAC.
I am a bit conflicted on this. On the one hand it's not Chad's job to call out all jew haters equally. But on the other hand the wider failure to say one word about the actual nazis around the likely next president calls me to doubt the good faith of some of the rhetoric - and if you actually vote for those people - well good night and good luck.
I get arguing about borders is popular in these parts but that is not what is under discussion in current talks. We are just nowhere near that place. What Biden is trying to pull off is something to de-escalate the current war and regional tensions, so that years from now, such discussions could even happen. It's important to realise there are. only bad options on the table right now - so they look for the least bad one The Biden deal places all the costs on the regional actors, but the problem really is the political pill that Bibi is unlikely to want to swallow Israel is thought to want the Saudi normalisation which is the carrot. The problem is a lack of offramp. Bibi needs a political win to declare victory and go home. Especially seeing as he can't deliver on his foolish maximalist war aims. There is a split in leadership on whether to free the hostages via a political solution (clearly the only way to do it). On the other side the deal requires a cease fire and a definitive pathway to statehood hence the early international recognition plan. I think people are confusing this with the idea that there would be a state anytime soon. Obviously there will need to be stability and security long before that becomes possible One of the big problems is that in reality, Hamas or some form of it, will remain and politically Israel's leadership obviously can't 'reward' them. As usual with wars, it is hard to get either side to face up to their strategic defeat.
Following up on my question from October - will Trump let Mike Johnson pass the Israel Aid through the house? Soon it will be 5 months of waiting. Seems bad. I guess the GOP isn't a great friend of Israel these days. Guess who is sending weapons to Israel. The leftists Biden and Scholz. As noted anti-semite Bill Kristol wrote, the left has never been more supportive of Israel.
Not sure about that guy, (not even sure who he is, tbh ), but the first part is the point I arrived at with that stuff. There probably ARE things that have been stated that are inaccurate or simply didn't happen but nobody should deny that NONE of that stuff happened. But it's worth asking the question, why does the NYT get given a pass for pro-Israel stuff but the BBC is given grief for early reports which turn out to be wrong that they then correct, particularly as it often happens because BBC journalists aren't allowed in to Gaza by the Israelis. Also I think people need to be reminded this is EXACTLY what these people are trying to achieve. They're deliberately trying to make it so that ALL news reports aren't believed. That way they're all suspect and they can carry on doing what they're doing.
It's hard because even if an Israeli leadership that is willing to do a 2 state solution, they'd need very good guarantees that all attacks from a Palestinian land would stop. Attacks from the West Bank would be hard for Israel to defend and leaves them exposed. Mind you, they are coming from a place where multiple Palestinian leadership (and the Arab neighbors) have stated that Israel should not exist. That was the starting point and status quo for a long time.
That's the only bit I'm not sure about... whether there needs to be complete stability before the west recognises a Palestinian state. The UN partition was in Nov '47 but the state of Israel wasn't recognised until 6 months later so it doesn't have to be at the same time. So, theoretically, it's possible for a Palestinian state to be recognised in the west bank and Gaza, based on the '67 borders, subject to further discussion which would happen afterwards. IOW it's recognised as a state but the precise details are to be decided. That way the issue of statehood has already been decided and the Israelis don't have a veto on them at the UN.
Yes but you heard Stefnik take those college professors to task and make them resign so there is nothing to say. Do you have video evidence of college students lockdown or running for their life, if not we can't call it anti-semitism.
I think that thinking of wars in terms of only victories and defeats ignores the third possibility: stalemates/inconclusive outcomes.
That's exactly what I mean. Many times there is no way to force political leadership to acknowledge strategic defeat - so it's easier for them to simply continue along even though they can't achieve their objectives via military means.
You've been following what happened in Cal and UCSB over the last few days? My niece (through 2nd cousin) is a student body president there and what she describes is pretty horrific.
Last night at @UCBerkeley, Jewish students were threatened, assaulted, and prevented from attending a speech by a Jewish speaker on campus. Campus police shut down this private event when it became clear that they could not protect the students. Multiple students reported being… pic.twitter.com/FKidts1FvZ— JCRC Bay Area (@SFJCRC) February 27, 2024 In California Jewish students were rushed to safety from pro-Pals protesting an IDF reservist giving a talk. One student was called “Jew, Jew, Jew” and spat at. The windows were smashed while the protesters chanted “long live the intifada”. Madness.pic.twitter.com/lrEUNhnsOE— Heidi Bachram 🎗️ (@HeidiBachram) February 27, 2024 https://www.latimes.com/california/...t-organized-by-jewish-students-at-uc-berkeley https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/east-bay/berkeley-gaza-protest/3465723/ I realize some posters here think all Pro-Palestinian protestors are only there to call out for peace and injustice, but the facts paint a completely different story. I'm not saying all of them are anti-semitic, but a LARGE portion of them are indeed that. There are incidents of pro-Palestine crowds invading synagogues in Florida and interrupting services. We kind of stopped posting these links here, but the amount of Semitic attacks hasn't decreased at all.
I don't think pro-palestine rallies are all candy and cake. I know there extremists and bad representatives of this movement. The disparity in outrage at those actions when one party is hanging out with people who can't wait for Holocaust 2: the sequel is what is wild to me. The left has its garbage people and I don't support them. The right is using this opportunity to tear down loads of gains that help everybody and it is being cheered on by Pro-Israel supporters. That is where my snark and glib responses come from.
I mean you have to be some type of mentally unwell to set yourself on fire. Sure he's a martyr to a bunch of people but it's not like it changed anything on the ground or has gotten people fed/sheltered/protected from Israeli bombs