What do you think the US's policy towards Israel should be?

WolfBear said:
FWIW, the number of Jewish settlers in Palestine should end up being much less than 500,000 since most of the Jewish settlers in the West Bank will become a part of Israel through mutually agreed land swaps.
Click to expand...
Even it only 50k remain, that's still plenty enough to tempt spectacular enough incidents.
WolfBear said:
Your other points here are pretty valid, though it's worth noting that Israeli Arabs have overall been relatively peaceful.
Click to expand...
Lots of self-selection, outright natural selection, being raised under Israeli culture and education, and subtle group allegiances among Arabs (like Druze or Bedouins not really caring much about Palestinians as that's not them, and even down to clan membership and relations among Palestinians).
For any right of return Palestinians, completely different group dynamics would play out.
 
Exactly the same as toward other allies,as Poland or Japan.Which mean do not pay them,only let them buy stuff for slighty less money.
 
WolfBear said:
@History Learner What are your thoughts on this plan? It's from some of the same people who previously brought us the Geneva Initiative in 2003, if I recall correctly:

www.npr.org

Israeli and Palestinian figures propose a plan for an independent state of Palestine

An independent Palestine and Israel would coordinate on issues that affect both populations in a two-state confederation. The plan by former officials will be submitted to the U.N. and U.S. next week.
www.npr.org www.npr.org
Click to expand...

Honestly, I'm just going to start saying 1967 borders + International Control of Jerusalem because these proposals usually have a poison pill or invite one side to make complaints, etc.
 
History Learner said:
Honestly, I'm just going to start saying 1967 borders + International Control of Jerusalem because these proposals usually have a poison pill or invite one side to make complaints, etc.
Click to expand...

Didn't the Arabs insist in 1949 that Israel's borders during this time should only be viewed as being provisional rather than permanent, though?
 
WolfBear said:
Didn't the Arabs insist in 1949 that Israel's borders during this time should only be viewed as being provisional rather than permanent, though?
Click to expand...

At the same time, the Jews were considering expanding the war into all of Palestine; I tend to dismiss both sides in this regard and take the international position.
 
History Learner said:
Honestly, I'm just going to start saying 1967 borders + International Control of Jerusalem because these proposals usually have a poison pill or invite one side to make complaints, etc.
Click to expand...
>International Control
That touches upon the greatest problem in solving this conflict.
Everyone wants to virtue signal and seem enlightened and legal and moral and shit...
But that doesn't change the fact that as far as facts on the ground are a total mess that no one sane wants to stick their appendages into, for they are certain to be hurt in short order.
There is a reason that even Israel has voluntarily withdrawn from directly occupying Gaza and West Bank.
The security situation and related political stability is the elephant in the room really.
Regardless of how and who obsesses about tiny adjustments to borders and grand gestures, and which side gets the upper hand in this handover, if this doesn't get solved, no solution can move forward.
Who's going to be the idiot to provide "international control" here and take responsibility of dealing with wannabe suicide bombers, kidnappers, improvised mortar shooters etc?
If somehow a sufficiently naive yet stable government could be found to do the same to Gaza and West Bank too, that would in fact have a chance of getting Israel to greenlight a deal.
But that's precisely why it won't happen, everyone in the region is too smart to stick a hand into this grinder.
 
Marduk said:
>International Control
That touches upon the greatest problem in solving this conflict.
Everyone wants to virtue signal and seem enlightened and legal and moral and shit...
But that doesn't change the fact that as far as facts on the ground are a total mess that no one sane wants to stick their appendages into, for they are certain to be hurt in short order.
There is a reason that even Israel has voluntarily withdrawn from directly occupying Gaza and West Bank.
The security situation and related political stability is the elephant in the room really.
Regardless of how and who obsesses about tiny adjustments to borders and grand gestures, and which side gets the upper hand in this handover, if this doesn't get solved, no solution can move forward.
Who's going to be the idiot to provide "international control" here and take responsibility of dealing with wannabe suicide bombers, kidnappers, improvised mortar shooters etc?
If somehow a sufficiently naive yet stable government could be found to do the same to Gaza and West Bank too, that would in fact have a chance of getting Israel to greenlight a deal.
But that's precisely why it won't happen, everyone in the region is too smart to stick a hand into this grinder.
Click to expand...

I mean, if you really want to push the issue, I'm all for more IDF soldiers going home in body bags for their illegal actions. Bringing in outside peacekeepers-who don't have the accumulated racial and religious hate the Israelis have managed to build up for themselves over the decades-would be a good way to ease tensions however, especially given you could use Pakistanis and Nigerians, who have good records overall as peacekeepers and are fellow Muslims. We also have plenty of precedent in history for internationally administered territory.
 
History Learner said:
At the same time, the Jews were considering expanding the war into all of Palestine; I tend to dismiss both sides in this regard and take the international position.
Click to expand...

Well, why did the international community approve of the land grabs that Israel made in 1948-1949 through the use of force? Why not insist on a return to the borders in the 1947 UN Partition Plan, for instance?
 
History Learner said:
I mean, if you really want to push the issue, I'm all for more IDF soldiers going home in body bags for their illegal actions. Bringing in outside peacekeepers-who don't have the accumulated racial and religious hate the Israelis have managed to build up for themselves over the decades-would be a good way to ease tensions however, especially given you could use Pakistanis and Nigerians, who have good records overall as peacekeepers and are fellow Muslims. We also have plenty of precedent in history for internationally administered territory.
Click to expand...

FWIW, Pakistan doesn't exactly have a clean record on the terrorism front either: Kashmir comes to mind.
 
WolfBear said:
Well, why did the international community approve of the land grabs that Israel made in 1948-1949 through the use of force? Why not insist on a return to the borders in the 1947 UN Partition Plan, for instance?
Click to expand...

Largely because of facts on the ground, the 1947 Plan was already kinda difficult and then you have the Cold War heating up at the same time. Until the settlements took off in the past 20 years too, the 1967 lines largely matched the ethnic/religious reality on the ground.
 
History Learner said:
Largely because of facts on the ground, the 1947 Plan was already kinda difficult and then you have the Cold War heating up at the same time. Until the settlements took off in the past 20 years too, the 1967 lines largely matched the ethnic/religious reality on the ground.
Click to expand...

That's partly but not completely correct: There's a huge part of central northern Israel that still remains Arab-majority even today:

Arab_population_israel_2000_en.png


That's due to the ethnic cleansing there (and near the Beesherba area) being much less severe in 1948:

MapOfofTheDestroyedAndExsistingPalestinianTownsInIsrael-SoonAfter1948.GIF


But Yeah, AFAIK, these Arabs want to remain a part of Israel rather than to become a part of a Palestinian state. So, Yes, point taken.
 
History Learner said:
I mean, if you really want to push the issue, I'm all for more IDF soldiers going home in body bags for their illegal actions. Bringing in outside peacekeepers-who don't have the accumulated racial and religious hate the Israelis have managed to build up for themselves over the decades-would be a good way to ease tensions however, especially given you could use Pakistanis and Nigerians, who have good records overall as peacekeepers and are fellow Muslims. We also have plenty of precedent in history for internationally administered territory.
Click to expand...
>Pakistanis and Nigerians
>Good record as peacekeepers
You have an odd sense of humor. Or a vendetta against Palestinian children...

And yet again you touch on an issue yet don't hit it. Peacekeepers need to be neutral, not clearly biased for one side. Pakistanis and most Muslim countries for that matter aren't any more acceptable than Americans. If anything, i'd suggest some place like Vietnam, Namibia or Sweden, not easily accused of supporting either side.
Still, this doesn't solve the issue that those who would need to do it aren't stupid enough to volunteer, for soon they would become the next scapegoat for the mess, hated by one or both sides, and get no benefit out of it.
 
Last edited:
Marduk said:
>Pakistanis and Nigerians
>Good record as peacekeepers
You have an odd sense of humor. Or a vendetta against Palestinian children...

And yet again you touch on an issue yet don't hit it. Peacekeepers need to be neutral, not clearly biased for one side. Pakistanis and most Muslim countries for that matter aren't any more acceptable than Americans. If anything, i'd suggest some place like Vietnam, Namibia or Sweden, not easily accused of supporting either side.
Still, this doesn't solve the issue that those who would need to do it aren't stupid enough to volunteer, for soon they would become the next scapegoat for the mess, hated by one or both sides, and get no benefit out of it.
Click to expand...

Tens of thousands of Pakistanis and Nigerians have been deployed as peacekeepers, if you want to use three as an example of what they will do to Israeli children, then perhaps we should start talking about the Stern Gang or Lehi in relation to the Israelis as a whole, no? As for your opinion, didn't ask, don't care. If you want to force the issue, I'm all for the IDF going home in body bags by the tens of thousands, which is where this will lead to.
 
History Learner said:
Tens of thousands of Pakistanis and Nigerians have been deployed as peacekeepers, if you want to use three as an example of what they will do to Israeli children, then perhaps we should start talking about the Stern Gang or Lehi in relation to the Israelis as a whole, no? As for your opinion, didn't ask, don't care. If you want to force the issue, I'm all for the IDF going home in body bags by the tens of thousands, which is where this will lead to.
Click to expand...

I suspect that ultimately with enough international pressure the ultimate outcome will be a unilateral Israeli withdrawal from most of the West Bank.
 
History Learner said:
Tens of thousands of Pakistanis and Nigerians have been deployed as peacekeepers, if you want to use three as an example of what they will do to Israeli children, then perhaps we should start talking about the Stern Gang or Lehi in relation to the Israelis as a whole, no? As for your opinion, didn't ask, don't care. If you want to force the issue, I'm all for the IDF going home in body bags by the tens of thousands, which is where this will lead to.
Click to expand...
Either way, they don't fit the conflict as neutral party. Why not Serbs while at it? :cool:
 
History Learner said:
Honestly, I'm just going to start saying 1967 borders + International Control of Jerusalem because these proposals usually have a poison pill or invite one side to make complaints, etc.
Click to expand...

Take a look at this 2020 compromise Israeli peace plan by former Israeli peace negotiator Shaul Arieli:

www.shaularieli.com

Negotiations - Shaul Arieli

A Stable Border- Proposal for land swaps 2020 Annapolis 2008 Israeli Proposal Annapolis – Israeli Proposal – Jerusalem Annapolis 2008 Palestinian Proposal Annapolis – Palestinian Proposal – Jerusalem Taba 2001 Israeli Proposal Taba 2001 Palestinian Proposal Camp David 2000 Israeli Proposal Camp...
www.shaularieli.com

A-Stable-Border-Proposal-for-land-swaps-2020-scaled.jpg


No Swiss cheese like in Trump's Plan!
 
WolfBear said:
Take a look at this 2020 compromise Israeli peace plan by former Israeli peace negotiator Shaul Arieli:

www.shaularieli.com

Negotiations - Shaul Arieli

A Stable Border- Proposal for land swaps 2020 Annapolis 2008 Israeli Proposal Annapolis – Israeli Proposal – Jerusalem Annapolis 2008 Palestinian Proposal Annapolis – Palestinian Proposal – Jerusalem Taba 2001 Israeli Proposal Taba 2001 Palestinian Proposal Camp David 2000 Israeli Proposal Camp...
www.shaularieli.com

A-Stable-Border-Proposal-for-land-swaps-2020-scaled.jpg


No Swiss cheese like in Trump's Plan!
Click to expand...
That looks reasonable as long as Jerusalem has partial control at least the Muslim quarter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top