Israel accelerates plans that imperil two-state solution

[sabbat hunter]

http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/02/middleeast/israel-jerusalem-law-intl/index.html

The way Bibi is going, he might as well annex all of the WB, declare anyone living there israeli citizens. Ugh Bibi is so scummy.

[Mosby]

1. I think this is good

The Palestinians need to understand that their intransigence has consequences.

Have elections.

Sit down and negotiate.

Or go away.

[sabbat hunter]

2. I don't think

that the Palestinians have a partner to negotiate with in Bibi.

[Mosby]

4. I'm not a big fan of bibi

But the Likud is not going anywhere, it's the single largest party in Israel and mostly represents secular Mizrahi Jews.

There are more than 3.5 million Mizrahi Jews in Israel, and they are barely a generation away from the Jewish Nakba where their assets, businesses and homes were stolen from them by the Arabs during their forced exodus from their home countries to Israel.

[sabbat hunter]

6. Likud maybe

mostly secular, but the linchpin to Bibi's coalition are religious and extremist parties. With Shas, United Torah, and Jewish home holding all that power, the coalition is anything but secular.

I wish Kulanu would withdraw from this coalition, causing it to fall, new elections to happen.

Israel needs to move away from the right wing governments towards center/center-left.

[Fred Sanders]

3. Simple. No negotiations until two state and Jerusalem on the table. Full stop.

[Jake Stern]

5. Israel never had the intention of allowing a sovereign Palestinian state

This is not a real change - they simply stopped giving a shit about what people thought about it.

Funny thing though whenever I ask one of these rabid JNF boosters at shul whether they will be consistent and donate their homes and land beck to the Cheyenne and Arapaho peoples, they balk. So it's okay for them to donate big $$$$ to push Arabs off the land claiming they're squatting on land that rightfully belongs to the Jewish people yet they refuse to give back land that was robbed from the Native peoples of this continent.

Hypocrites.

[Igel]

7. The same could be said of the other side.

At least one side had rhetoric and public pressure against it.

The other side had rhetoric and public pressure in favor of it.

Had the pressure been equal, I suspect each side could have been put in a position where they thought they might lose, and possibly in positions where they thought they might gain. As it was, one side kept winning in spite of the pressure and the other losing in spite of support.


Your analogy doesn't work, btw. It's a red herring. Parve, but still fishy. If it did work, you'd have to ask why places like Syria and Sa'udiyya didn't donate money to Indian tribes to buy back their land, or support the return of Jews to Trans-Jordan. Group boundaries matter, and in this struggle group boundaries both prevented a solution early on, made solutions mid-point impossible, and continue to stymie any progress. Of course, one group helped its own far, far more than the other. So the first thing that has to change are attitudes.

The scant personal interactions I've had with Israelis and Palestinians or Arab supporters is that Jews are just plain bad by nature and deed, and for the religious the Qur'aan is right; while Palestinians are bad because they've been trying to kill Jews for 70 years and they just need to stop it. In other words, some attitudes need more changing than others.