How much of Palestine should the Arabs get back? - <MOD WARNING>

Excellent reply. The poll is a nonsense, since there is no option for the only option which makes sense: NONE

 

57% voted for the 1967 borders.

this is excellent!!

 

lol. your poll didn't even have an option for those who don't want to give any land at all.

Do you think elections where it's only allowed to vote for one candidate are fair also?

 

Fair enough.

We've got your vote for none.

How many others? Let's have people speaking up.


I think so far its about three.

Vastly outnumbered but your argument is worth exploring.

On what basis do you think Israel can't be defended and why is this more important than giving people their neighborhood free from Israeli control?

 

There are things like cities and major roads that Israel needs to defend, otherwise the country would be crippled by an attack. In order to defend, they need to control areas from which attacks could be launched, such as gaza, west bank, and golan heights. If israel didn't control those areas, terrorists coud just shoot rockets from there and reach most of Israel. The 1967 borders are not an option, because it leaves most of Israel undefended. I don't care about what autonomy the arabs might have in these regions. What matters is that the israeli military must be able to control them. As I've said, if we say Israel can exist, then it also follows they should have defendable borders. it's very stupid to say that israel can exist, but they must also be defenseless.

 

57% say return to the 1967 borders.

this is an excellent and wise choice.

such a move would bring peace to the Middle East for all peoples.

 

Nah, it did not bring peace before 1967 when arabs had 1967 borders for 20 years. All arabs did was attacking Israel trying to wipe it off the map and murder as many Jews as they possibly could.

A return to 1967 borders will lead to immediate demands on Israel to return to 1948 borders (your poll's option #3) and if that is accomplished, the demands will be a return to 1920 borders i.e. no Israel (your option #4).

 

It is strange that the UN...

... which set up the nation of Israel...

... is not more forthcoming in it's support...

... against Arab encroachment.

 

The UN set up Israel? When?

 

Interesting post. Thank you.

How about a mutual defence agreement?

And what about the simple fact that Israel has had cooperation and good relations with its eastern and southern neighbour for decades?

And surely if israel had a problem it could reinvade at any time and can expect the full support of the West?

You still think that with all that the Palestinians still can't have their homes and land back?

Lastly do you think well of Jewish people? How well? And how in comparison do you think of arabs? Better? Worse? The same?

- - - Updated - - -

Can you explain please?

- - - Updated - - -

They've changed already they'll change again.

 

This is the logical progression of Zionism

There has been a logical progression to the development of Zionism, leading inevitably to general acceptance of the sense that, because Jewish needs are paramount, Jews themselves are paramount. Zionism grew out of the sense that Jews needed a refuge from persecution, which led in turn to the belief that the refuge could be truly secure only if Jews guaranteed their own safety, which meant that the refuge must be exclusively or at least overwhelmingly Jewish, which meant in turn that Jews and their demands were superior, taking precedence over any other interests within that refuge. The mindset that in U.S. public discourse tends to view the Palestinian-Israeli conflict from a perspective almost exclusively focused on Israel arises out of this progression of Zionist thinking. By the very nature of a mindset, virtually no one examines the assumptions on which the Zionist mindset is based, and few recognize the racist base on which it rests.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/11/05/zionism-as-racist-ideology/

Since this article was written we can see how it has progressed still further, with buffer zones, security walls and even the present policy of extrajudicial killing of "terrorists"

 

You mean defence treaties with neighboring arab states? There are problems with this. This means that Israeli security would directly be dependent on the good will -and ability- or arab armed forces. In my view, some arab states only have good relations with Israel because of Israel's relative strength. If Arab countries were to have control over the strategically important areas for Israel, it would be the arab countries which would have relative strength over Israel, which would be vulnerable. arabs and muslims are do not really like Israel very much, as you you probably know. What's to stop them from pressuring a vulnerable Israel? There'd be enormous pressure from the population in arab countries to do so, and since Israel would be weaker, it would be easier to do so. Israel would essentially be held hostage to arab good will, and arabs don't have much good will towards israel.

secondly, even if arab countries are friendly to israel, they are not very capable. their countries are unstable, their militaries corrupt and ineffective. They might not be able to properly keep terrorists out of these vital areas, so terrorists could attack israel. The bottom line is that these areas are of vital interest for Israel, and it's only Israel itself which is fully commited, and capable, to defend them.

"a problem" means that terrorists have killed israeli civilians, and a reinvasion means the death of many israelis and arabs. Sure, you could "test" wheter it would work, but if it doesn't work it comes at a cost of lives on both sides. And, we can already be pretty sure it wouldn't work. So, that seems like a very stupid thing to test.

not as a sovereign state. Palestinians could live in Israel. there could even be autonomous arab regions. What matters is that the Israeli army controls the important areas.

Don't get the wrong idea of me. I am not a zionist. I think the word "judeo-christian" is silly. I'm not one of those who believe Israel is the best country in the world, never does anything wrong. But, I like them because they have a democratic and modern state. I respect and admire their military skill and strength. Their other achievements in science are also laudable. That they are jews doesn't matter to me, for good or for bad. I have no feeling that "we owe" them, since I am from Sweden.

Arabs though, are quite a sad sight at the moment. They are confused, angry, dissappointed, desperate.. They have good reason to be that. But as I see it, this is their own fault, not the fault of others, neither the fault of jews or europeans. Arabs are angry because they used to be the leading civilization of the world, but they have seen themselves surpassed by the europeans, and even by asians. and they don't understand why, but they know they have to try something. They try old style monarchies, they try socialism, they try nationalism, nothing works. now they're trying islamism. Frustrated at their own shortcommings, the natural human response is to look for scapegoats. honestly, I think much of the hatred of Israel is due to jealousy. Here comes the jews, who used to be second class citizens in muslim countries, and they take land from arabs, who are supposed to be the masters and powerful. But the jews defeat the arabs in battle, take their land, and then even go on to build a rich and well function society. Of course arabs are mad! it's humiliating for them. They've been defeated and outdone by a people they thought was weak and irrelevant. I of course wish arabs well, but progress can only start when they stop blaming others, and fix their own problems.

 

I am really enjoying reading the intelligent responses to this thread, even though the poll itself deeply flawed.

I agree with the intelligent posters here who correctly assert that the Palestinians should get nothing and should go back home to Jordan.

The heroic and patriotic allies, the famous IDF, will help to cleanse the region of Palesterrorism, in order to liberate the Illegal Palestinian Occupiers (IPO) from their terroristic elements. The non-terroristic elements of the IPO will be given safe passage back to Jordan. The terroristic elements of the IPO will of course be liberated, so there is no need for them to go anywhere; they are welcome to stay in their liberated form on Israeli soil; a special place will be reserved for this purpose in the Gaza Strip.

 

Oh, if Arabs get the very same rights and priviledges as the Jews, your solution would be utopia indeed. However, there are a couple of more concrete problems about utopia: First, passions; On both sides, hatred and segregationnism runs deep, exacerbated by decades of hostility where they (the extremists) had all the spotlight. It wold then take ONE tiny petty offense from one side or the other to slap the whole thing to the ground as the extremists throw themselves at each other's throats.

Second; The Arab population in all of Palestine grows faster than the Jewish one: If that new entity is still a democracy, that means no more jewish nation in a few years from now.

 

Thanks. We managed that in spite of one persistant, childish poster whose only goal was to troll around, and to give his own side (yeah right) a bad name.

 

I am not aiming for utopia, but for the best solution among the option available. utopia isn't available. No, arabs would probably not be given same rights. Not in every area atleast. As you say, there is hatred on both sides. It is simply not feasible to extend all freedoms jews have to arabs en masse, because there are terrorists among them, and one wouldn't be able to stop them. Unfair to the arabs who are not terrorists perhaps, but tough luck, such is the situation. The freedom of arabs isn't worth jewish lives, especially not according to the jews, which are the ones who make the final decision. Jews are not going to share power with the arabs. Such an arrangement would never work anyways. It will be the jews who have the power. What I mean by that isn't the individual arabs are banned from power -there are already arabs in power in israel. What I mean is that there will not be any kind of parallel and equal political structures beside the israeli ones. There can be autonomous arab regions, but not on equal power to the main israeli entity.

and as you say, arabs grow faster. This is concerning for Israel, which wants to maintain it's jewish character for many reasons, not least for security. Probably, this might mean that most arabs would be confined to autonomous arab regions, so that a majority jewish israel is maintained.

 

Yes however the latent racism is present even in Sweden it seems. But I'm willing to listen. Maybe I'm wrong.

 

So, finally, what you propose is status quo. Status quo doesn't work.

 

It has nothing to do with zionism. It's very simple, as I've said. I see it as just a few logical steps.

IF we think Israel has a right to exist, THEN it follows that they also have a right to security.

Just what the hell is that supposed to mean?

Why wouldn't it work?

no, I'm not proposing status quo. As i've said, I'd like to see the west bank, gaza, and golan heights be formally annexed by Israel. Why? To avoid unnecessary misunderstandings about the sovereignity of those areas, and to finally settle the question. Palestine will not get independence, just end their hopes already and move on. But other than that, pretty much the status quo yeah.

 

It means that although you claim to be willing to treat humans equally you instead seek to treat them differently on the basis of their ethnicity.

So what would you call it?

What do you think an Arab in palestine would think of your views?

The status quo you seek is a nightmare for the inhabitants. And a headache for Israelis.

And it's evil.

 

How dissapointing. I thought you were a reasonable person asking me a reasonable question. But instead you don't even understand what I'm saying, and accuse me of ridiculous things.

IF I said, arabs are inferior because they are arabs, therefore discriminate them, that would be perhaps be racist. I have not said that. I said that the reality of threats require that there be a certain amount of discrimination.

A palestinian arab would probably not like my views.

Despite the problems with the status quo, it's most tolerable situation. What would you do? Give arabs the same rights as jews? There'd be endless terrorist attacks. Make palestine a country? There'd be endless rockets shot at a defenseless Israel. Get rid of Israel entirily? Lots of dead jews, and a war because the israelis would never agree to it. I am not saying the status quo is perfect, but it's the least bad option. There are no good options here.

 

Because it is unjust. Would you accept it, if you were Palestinian?

 

The Palestinians should get all the land currently occupied by Israel and the Jews should be returned to the country they came from.

 

Jeez, your presence in Canada is unjust. The land was Jewish, Jews were expelled from Israel and never lost connection to their land, Jews lived in the land legally in 1947, a UN resolution partitioned the land into one Jewish and one Arab states. The existence of Jewish Israel is infinetely more just than you presense in Canada. Why don't you go back to where your invading ancestors came from, France, Poland or whatever.

 

most Jews were not expelled from Palestine.

they remained the majority population through 800 AD