Israel ðŸ‡®ðŸ‡± State of Israel Thread

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
The problem us that a one state solution is also a no-go, because it means Israel will no longer be a Jewish country (plus all the inherent problem of doubling your population with extremely hostile immigrants that also have some of the most active, experienced and armed terrorist organizations in the world), or, alternatively, it will become an actual apartheid in reality (as opposed to the fake "apartheid" of Palestinian propaganda), and I don't like that either.

There's no good solution at the moment either way. My preference is a two state solution, but only after decades of deradicalization of the Palestinian population.
Yeah, there is no solution as things stand. The closest thing to a solution would be to talk one of the nearby more pro-western Arab countries into taking Palestine with all its problems because they sure won't deradicalize themselves, but on the other hand their leadership would have to be crazy, stupid or desperate to volunteer to take that smoking hot potato.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Yeah, there is no solution as things stand. The closest thing to a solution would be to talk one of the nearby more pro-western Arab countries into taking Palestine with all its problems because they sure won't deradicalize themselves, but on the other hand their leadership would have to be crazy, stupid or desperate to volunteer to take that smoking hot potato.

mass expulsions, thats where I see all of this ending.

the palastinians as a people have pretty much used up all of their chances and once things hit the fan the Isralies will just kick them out enmass, by this time all of the people who would care about such things wouldn't because it would be a much uglier dog eat dog world.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
mass expulsions, thats where I see all of this ending.

the palastinians as a people have pretty much used up all of their chances and once things hit the fan the Isralies will just kick them out enmass, by this time all of the people who would care about such things wouldn't because it would be a much uglier dog eat dog world.
That runs into a very similar problem.
To where? What country is going to be dumb enough to take them?
And which Israeli politicians will be willing to take the local and western whining about it?
 

ATP

Well-known member
Palestine is NOT a country. They're NOT going to be an independent country and with all due respect to Biden: FUCK the two state solution!
They are country,but not independent.They are too weak,so they would always be somebody vassal.Poor dudes.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
They are country,but not independent.They are too weak,so they would always be somebody vassal.Poor dudes.
>they
What they?
Look at these quotes i dug out there:
A huge part of the issue is that they are plain Arabs but a lot of people for various reasons are either willingly pretending otherwise for their side's benefit or get fooled into it, which makes a lot of negotiations and dealmaking even more confusing than they need to be.
In European terms they are a lot like a sort of Arab's Transnistria.
The PLO guy says it most clearly:
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality, today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."
Zuheir Mohse, high ranking PLO official, 1977
 

ATP

Well-known member
>they
What they?
Look at these quotes i dug out there:
A huge part of the issue is that they are plain Arabs but a lot of people for various reasons are either willingly pretending otherwise for their side's benefit or get fooled into it, which makes a lot of negotiations and dealmaking even more confusing than they need to be.
In European terms they are a lot like a sort of Arab's Transnistria.
The PLO guy says it most clearly:
"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality, today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."
Zuheir Mohse, high ranking PLO official, 1977

The same panarabs are saing about syrians,egyptians,etc.

And palestinian are descendents of the same people who lived there from bronze age to 1948.
In other worlds,they were pagans who become jews,then pagans again,then christians,and now are muslims.If jews were stronger,they would become jews again.

Poor dudes,destinied to always follow those who conqered them.And their religion.
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
The same panarabs are saing about syrians,egyptians,etc.
Yes, they are, and that doesn't mean they don't have a point. Most Arabs, after their long history with various islamic empires don't have specific and strong national identities formed, which is also why movements like panarabism and islamism get a foothold easily with them.
And palestinian are descendents of the same people who lived there from bronze age to 1948.
In other worlds,they were pagans who become jews,then pagans again,then christians,and now are muslims.If jews were stronger,they would become jews again.

Poor dudes,destinied to always follow those who conqered them.And their religion.
Where did you get that info? Some weird political site grinding an axe?
This implies that, same as the PLO guy says, that genetically all the Arab populations of the region don't have major differences between them, so a claim that they can be so precisely attributed to the very small, specific area is very suspicious.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
That runs into a very similar problem.
To where? What country is going to be dumb enough to take them?
And which Israeli politicians will be willing to take the local and western whining about it?

If Israelis behaved like Russians, then they could start a war with Jordan over this. Wouldn't be moral by any means, of course. And sanctions would likely hit Israel harder than they would Russia, perhaps even much harder.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
The problem us that a one state solution is also a no-go, because it means Israel will no longer be a Jewish country (plus all the inherent problem of doubling your population with extremely hostile immigrants that also have some of the most active, experienced and armed terrorist organizations in the world), or, alternatively, it will become an actual apartheid in reality (as opposed to the fake "apartheid" of Palestinian propaganda), and I don't like that either.

There's no good solution at the moment either way. My preference is a two state solution, but only after decades of deradicalization of the Palestinian population.

Give Palestine to Jordan. Seriously. It worked before 1967. It can work again, at least in theory. Have Jordan annex 90+% of the West Bank, with Israel keeping the main Jewish Israeli West Bank settlements near its borders and outright annexing them. East Jerusalem's Arab neighborhoods can also be given to Jordan. Heck, this can even be done in the form of a Jordan-Palestine confederation or even federation. Even Gaza can eventually join it once Hamas is gotten rid of and if an extraterritorial road between it and the West Bank will ever be built. This would give this Jordanian-Palestinian (con)federation Mediterranean Sea access, quite a luxury for a poor state such as this.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member



@GoldRanger I have a question for you: Do you believe that Israel conquered too little territory back in 1948-1949? Should Israel, for instance, have aimed to conquer the West Bank or at least the southern West Bank back then?
 

Cherico

Well-known member
Give Palestine to Jordan. Seriously. It worked before 1967. It can work again, at least in theory. Have Jordan annex 90+% of the West Bank, with Israel keeping the main Jewish Israeli West Bank settlements near its borders and outright annexing them. East Jerusalem's Arab neighborhoods can also be given to Jordan. Heck, this can even be done in the form of a Jordan-Palestine confederation or even federation. Even Gaza can eventually join it once Hamas is gotten rid of and if an extraterritorial road between it and the West Bank will ever be built. This would give this Jordanian-Palestinian (con)federation Mediterranean Sea access, quite a luxury for a poor state such as this.

The palastinians have already burned pretty much all of their bridges with Jordan, if anything they would just strait up slaughter them if given the region back.

The Palastinian leadership has pretty much back stabbed and been horrible to all of their friends so now they have much fewer of them.
 

History Learner

Well-known member
Ultimately it will be resolved when the existing Pro-Palestinian trends within the U.S. play out; there is no other sponsor for Israel to turn to, they've burnt their bridges with Russia and I don't foresee China sacrificing it's growing leverage in the Middle East as a whole to become solely an Israeli benefactor like the United States did. Without American money, Israel is ultimately in a numbers game it cannot win against its Arab neighbors.

It has already started, really; I noted last May the events of the Gaza conflict had opened up a can of worms that the Israelis must now deal with in the form of revived Pan-Arab unity among the Israeli Arabs with their co-ethnics in both the West Bank and Gaza. IDF has now admitted they will have to withhold reserve formations from the front in future major conflicts, simply because otherwise they won't have secure logistics.

It's going to be a death of a thousand cuts building up over time, and without Israel seriously changing its behavior there's nothing they can do to stop it.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
Ultimately it will be resolved when the existing Pro-Palestinian trends within the U.S. play out; there is no other sponsor for Israel to turn to, they've burnt their bridges with Russia and I don't foresee China sacrificing it's growing leverage in the Middle East as a whole to become solely an Israeli benefactor like the United States did. Without American money, Israel is ultimately in a numbers game it cannot win against its Arab neighbors.

It has already started, really; I noted last May the events of the Gaza conflict had opened up a can of worms that the Israelis must now deal with in the form of revived Pan-Arab unity among the Israeli Arabs with their co-ethnics in both the West Bank and Gaza. IDF has now admitted they will have to withhold reserve formations from the front in future major conflicts, simply because otherwise they won't have secure logistics otherwise.

It's going to be a death of a thousand cuts, and without Israel seriously changing its behavior there's nothing they can do to stop it.

IMHO, Israel should do a unilateral withdrawal to the territories west of the West Bank barrier. Then the final borders can be negotiated over later. (FWIW, I would support giving Ariel to the Palestinians since it's located too deep inside of the West Bank.) Land swaps can also be negotiated over later.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
e2b28253-1029-34aa-895b-a072b1d4ed24.png
 

History Learner

Well-known member
IMHO, Israel should do a unilateral withdrawal to the territories west of the West Bank barrier. Then the final borders can be negotiated over later. (FWIW, I would support giving Ariel to the Palestinians since it's located too deep inside of the West Bank.) Land swaps can also be negotiated over later.

I just say 1967 to keep it easy.
 

Cherico

Well-known member
IMHO, Israel should do a unilateral withdrawal to the territories west of the West Bank barrier. Then the final borders can be negotiated over later. (FWIW, I would support giving Ariel to the Palestinians since it's located too deep inside of the West Bank.) Land swaps can also be negotiated over later.

They did that with Gaza....it did not end well. You don't give up major concessions like that with out getting something major in return.
 

WolfBear

Well-known member
They did that with Gaza....it did not end well. You don't give up major concessions like that with out getting something major in return.

It did end well; Gaza is no longer Israel's problem and Israel can invade and/or bomb the place anytime that Hamas causes trouble. Gaza is already the de facto western Palestinian state.

@History Learner Take a look at just how many Jewish neighborhoods there are in East Jerusalem and nearby:

Jerusalem-barrier_June_2007-OCHAoPt.jpeg


I myself actually lived in Pisgat Ze'ev from the late 1990s until March 2001. It was a nice place, if it wasn't for all of the terrorism nearby.
 

GoldRanger

May the power protect you
Founder
IMHO, Israel should do a unilateral withdrawal to the territories west of the West Bank barrier. Then the final borders can be negotiated over later. (FWIW, I would support giving Ariel to the Palestinians since it's located too deep inside of the West Bank.) Land swaps can also be negotiated over later.
2005 flashbacks. Hell no.

Gaza is no longer Israel's problem

Bwhahahahaha!
 

Marduk

Well-known member
Moderator
Staff Member
If Israelis behaved like Russians, then they could start a war with Jordan over this. Wouldn't be moral by any means, of course. And sanctions would likely hit Israel harder than they would Russia, perhaps even much harder.
To do what? Jordan is one of less hostile to them countries now.
If they wanted to be assholes over this, they would have pushed to unwanted population out in the direction of Syria and Lebanon.
IMHO, Israel should do a unilateral withdrawal to the territories west of the West Bank barrier. Then the final borders can be negotiated over later. (FWIW, I would support giving Ariel to the Palestinians since it's located too deep inside of the West Bank.) Land swaps can also be negotiated over later.
And what problem does that solve? It gives PLO a free political victory, but how does that help anything?
I just say 1967 to keep it easy.
As above, what problem does that solve?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top