Thread: Israel declares settlement freeze-- and keeps building in West Bank

Well we have been through this I believe. This whole mess on settlements in this contect started back in apil/may. Settlements are and where part of THE negotiations before this, NOT pre qualifiers FOR negotiations, Obama and Hillary thought that up months ago, Abbas jumped on it, now that Netanyahu finds it impossible to do that OUTSIDE negotiations, which he has been calling for, and Abbas is losing standing for not standing his ground on the freeze, are we surprised there are no negotiatians?

IF the israeli supreme ccourt tells them to stop or curtial they should of course abide by that but its more complicated than that obviously, some have been goiven status as 'natural exapnsion' and others declared illegal etc.

Originally Posted by Imperator

Well we have been through this I believe. This whole mess on settlements in this contect started back in apil/may. Settlements are and where part of THE negotiations before this, NOT pre qualifiers FOR negotiations, Obama and Hillary thought that up months ago, Abbas jumped on it, now that Netanyahu finds it impossible to do that OUTSIDE negotiations, which he has been calling for, and Abbas is losing standing for not standing his ground on the freeze, are we surprised there are no negotiatians?

IF the israeli supreme ccourt tells them to stop or curtial they should of course abide by that but its more complicated than that obviously, some have been goiven status as 'natural exapnsion' and others declared illegal etc.

Settlements have been the issue of negotiations already decades ago. And since Yitzhak Rabin several israeli governements have promised to remove settlements but with few results. And while the relatively few in Gaza were removed more were built on the West Bank.
But anyway, moderate Palestinians have also already years ago declared that an agreement on at least a considerable number of the settlements would not be out of the question. For example by Israel providing monetary and/ or territorial compensation ( for example by allowing arab communities on the border join a palestinian state. Or by settlers agreeing ( admittedly very unlikely) to become dual israeli/ palestinian citizens and live in a palestinian state like Arabs do in Israel. But to reach an agreement would also require the israeli side to move and to stop measures that are weakening their only moderate partner for such negotiations ( Abbas). And that is why we are not surprised, right :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Voland

Settlements have been the issue of negotiations already decades ago.

I am not sure you are understanding the point; obama and hillary decided that in order to START negotiations, the Israelis would freeze settlements first, in effect forcing Israeli to accept a freeze for nothing, BEFORE negotiations.

And since Yitzhak Rabin several israeli governements have promised to remove settlements but with few results. And while the relatively few in Gaza were removed more were built on the West Bank.

Relatively few or not, pulling out of Gaza and uprooting Israeli families etc. with virtually no negotiations amongst them was preformed, and precious little negotiation there after resulted. Just more of the same.

But anyway, moderate Palestinians have also already years ago declared that an agreement on at least a considerable number of the settlements would not be out of the question. For example by Israel providing monetary and/ or territorial compensation ( for example by allowing arab communities on the border join a palestinian state. Or by settlers agreeing ( admittedly very unlikely) to become dual israeli/ palestinian citizens and live in a palestinian state like Arabs do in Israel. But to reach an agreement would also require the israeli side to move and to stop measures that are weakening their only moderate partner for such negotiations ( Abbas). And that is why we are not surprised, right :rolleyes:

Abbas weakened himself, in the aftermath he could not hold on to power because he was seen as corrupt and venal…….if as the moderate he cannot effectively be a partner, whos fault is that?

Originally Posted by Imperator

I am not sure you are understanding the point; obama and hillary decided that in order to START negotiations, the Israelis would freeze settlements first, in effect forcing Israeli to accept a freeze for nothing, BEFORE negotiations.



Relatively few or not, pulling out of Gaza and uprooting Israeli families etc. with virtually no negotiations amongst them was preformed, and precious little negotiation there after resulted. Just more of the same.




Abbas weakened himself, in the aftermath he could not hold on to power because he was seen as corrupt and venal…….if as the moderate he cannot effectively be a partner, whos fault is that?

1. Since the Israelis have not been building on THEIR land and it is completely clear that NO palestinian leader, regardless how moderate can accept the settlements in their present form that seemed a prudent thing to do.
And anyway Israels measures are not seriously a freeze.

2. These israeli families that were "uprooted" have occupied the most fertile parts of the Gaza strip with about 9000 people while 1,5 million Palestinians had to share the rest. Gaza was just not worth the effort, strategically and economically irrelevant and tens of thousands of soldiers necessary to keep the settlers away from the Palestinians and vice versa.
And after the removal Israel sealed Gaza off. If the Palestinians had been given a serious chance to build their own state and create their own economy you would have a point.
Israel has built little or no settlements since the Gaza withdrawal ? not even the Israelis are claiming that ( OP)


3. No, Abbas has been weakened because he is the palestinian leader standing for negotiations but has few points to convince his countrymen of their value right now. The ongoing confiscation of palestinian land continues to be a boost for Hamas, not for him

One thing is obvious, negotiations can't start while country is still invading the other.

The 'Natural Expansion' is an horrendous policy... It is the equivalent of me getting you shifted off your land because my son want to built close to my house.... It breaks human rights treaties, is inhuman and should be a shame on the Israeli Government for letting it happen and defending the people who do it...

Relatively few or not, pulling out of Gaza and uprooting Israeli families etc. with virtually no negotiations amongst them was preformed, and precious little negotiation there after resulted. Just more of the same.

Imp looks like a fair comment until I was drinking with a Israeli one night who does his 6 weeks a year in the army. He called them spongers, they got compensation to the tune of a high apartment in Tel Aviv. He didn't like them, a good few were foreigners and weren't naturally born Israelis. And he was asking himself why he was been asked to risk his life and considerable financial sacrifice for people who no right to be there in the first place. He questioned the morals of any parents that would deliberately place there children in a place where they know they are going to get shot at. He was a proud Israeli and loved his country and wanted to defend his country but these settlers are just freeloaders. He asked why they could go buy land and pay mortgage like he and everyone else did.

Ray Hanania is a palestinian/ american journalist, comedian, married to a jewish woman and has filed a bid to succeed Mahmoud Abbas as president of the PA. Hanania has also come up with his very own peace plan :

A Palestinian peace plan Israelis can live with - Haaretz - Israel News

Quote : /

1. I support two-states, one Israel and one Palestine. As far as I am concerned, I can recognize Israel's "Jewish" character and Israelis should recognize Palestine's "non-Jewish" character.

2. I oppose violence of any kind from and by anyone. I reject Hamas' participation in any Palestinian government without first agreeing to surrender all arms and to accept two-states as a "final" peace agreement. But I also reject allowing Israeli settlers to carry any weapons and believe Israelis must impose the same restrictions on them.

3. I can support some settlements remaining - given the reality of 42 years of time passing - in a dunam-for-dunam land exchange. If Ariel is 500 dunams with a lifeline from Israel, then Israel gives Palestine 500 dunams in exchange.

4. Jerusalem should be a shared city and Palestinians should have an official presence in East Jerusalem. The Old City should be shared by both permitting open access to the city to all with a joint Palestinian-Israeli police presence.

5. Palestinian refugees would give up their demand to return to pre-1948 homes and lands lost during the conflict with Israel. Instead, some could apply for family reunification through Israel and the remainder would be compensated through a fund created and maintained by the United States, Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia and the United Nations.

6. I also think Israelis should find it in their hearts to show compassion and offer their apologies to Palestinians for the conflict.

7. I support creation of a similar fund to compensate those Jews from Arab lands who lost their homes and lands, too, when they fled.

8. I think the Wall should be torn down, or relocated to the new borders. I have no problem separating the two nations for a short duration to help rebuild confidence between our two people.

9. All political parties, Palestinian and Israelis, should eliminate languages denying each other's existence, and all maps should be reprinted so that Israeli maps finally show Palestine and Palestinian maps finally show Israel.

10. A subway system should be built linking the West Bank portion of the Palestine state to the Gaza Strip portion of the Palestine State. Palestine should be permitted to build a seaport access to strengthen its industry, and an airport to permit flights and too and from the Arab and Israeli world.

11. I would urge the Arab World to renew their offer to normalize relations with Israel if Israel agrees to support the creation of a Palestinian State.

12. And I would ask both countries to establish embassies in each other's country to address other problems.

13. While non-Jewish Palestinians would continue to live in Israel as citizens, Jews who wish to live in settlements surrendered by Israel could become Palestinian citizens and they should be recognized and treated equally.

14. If Jews want to live in Hebron, they should be allowed to live in Hebron and should be protected, just as non-Jews. In fact, for every Jewish individual seeking to live in Palestine, a Palestinian should be permitted to live in Israel. In fact, major Palestinian populations in Israel could be annexed into Palestine (like settlements).

15. Another concept is to have non-Jews living in Israel continue to live there but only vote in Palestinian elections, while Jews living in Palestine would only vote in Israeli elections. A special citizenship protection committee could be created to explore how to protect the rights of minorities in each state.

16. Israel and Palestine should create joint-governing and security agencies working with the United States to monitor the peace, and establish an agency to pursue criminal acts of violence.

Has some similarities to the Saudi Deal that was proposed a few years ago and was back by Iran.

Iran ask for a couple more things (apology for supporting the dictator and promise of not to invade Iran) and they in return would stop supporting Hezbollah and Hamas. Support for Palestine would be allowed non military. Would allow Nuclear inspections and recognize Israels right to exist. Help hunt down Al Queda. Obviously Iran comes off the 'axis of evil' list....

Came from the Supreme Leader not the joke president.... It was one worth looking at...

Originally Posted by Voland

1. Since the Israelis have not been building on THEIR land and it is completely clear that NO palestinian leader, regardless how moderate can accept the settlements in their present form that seemed a prudent thing to do.

that is why you engage IN negotiations, they are not engaged in such for the reasons I have stipulated, 3 times now. The rest of your comment has zero to do with it right now.

And anyway Israels measures are not seriously a freeze.

I never said they were.

2. These israeli families that were "uprooted" have occupied the most fertile parts of the Gaza strip with about 9000 people while 1,5 million Palestinians had to share the rest. Gaza was just not worth the effort, strategically and economically irrelevant and tens of thousands of soldiers necessary to keep the settlers away from the Palestinians and vice versa.

so they didn't pull out for the right reasons so it matters not, I see.

And after the removal Israel sealed Gaza off. If the Palestinians had been given a serious chance to build their own state and create their own economy you would have a point.
Israel has built little or no settlements since the Gaza withdrawal ? not even the Israelis are claiming that ( OP)

and, if fatah and hamas could have demonstrated effective control there would have been a great deal more latitude, smuggling of arms, violence etc. reared its head immediately. Allowing that to continue unabated is a non starter.

3. No, Abbas has been weakened because he is the palestinian leader standing for negotiations but has few points to convince his countrymen of their value right now. The ongoing confiscation of palestinian land continues to be a boost for Hamas, not for him

Abbas/fatah was weakened before the election even started, he may not have been as egregiously corrupt as Arafat but the occupants of Gaza saw him as such and hamas won election, he was given a ready made propaganda coup by claiming he and fatah had been running things and Israel had withdrawn, he misused his clout and here we are.

Blaming Israel for his ineffectiveness or duplicity in playing with funds and pulling his own internal shenanigans is a straw man.

It has gotten to a point where neither party truly believes there will ever be peace. Ultimately, the Palestinians and the Israelis should just continue fighting until one side obliterates the other.

Originally Posted by CowboyTed

One thing is obvious, negotiations can't start while country is still invading the other.

The 'Natural Expansion' is an horrendous policy... It is the equivalent of me getting you shifted off your land because my son want to built close to my house.... It breaks human rights treaties, is inhuman and should be a shame on the Israeli Government for letting it happen and defending the people who do it...


Imp looks like a fair comment until I was drinking with a Israeli one night who does his 6 weeks a year in the army. He called them spongers, they got compensation to the tune of a high apartment in Tel Aviv. He didn't like them, a good few were foreigners and weren't naturally born Israelis. And he was asking himself why he was been asked to risk his life and considerable financial sacrifice for people who no right to be there in the first place. He questioned the morals of any parents that would deliberately place there children in a place where they know they are going to get shot at. He was a proud Israeli and loved his country and wanted to defend his country but these settlers are just freeloaders. He asked why they could go buy land and pay mortgage like he and everyone else did.

Your part time soldier sounds a bit , uhm loosely wrapped or ignorant of his own history, or he could just simply be tired of it all, which I would understand and was just venting ala free versing.

His argument is an indictment of his countries past and how it came to be; one could say same for every jew who came from another place to settle there, in what was formerly Turk occupied & ruled Levant. They came from far away places, foreigners, settled in areas that could be considered or were dangerous for them to be in.

The events that transpired ala the British rulings, etc. it came ot pass that it became dangerous for jews and yes, arabs to occupy the same space in many instances.

There were a number of wars fought, Nasser kicked out UNEF peacekeepers from Gaza, not the other way round, Gaza then being used as a launch pad for Egyptian, they fought and occupied it. If his contention is that they should give back and all land that they have conquered, well, hes daft, to give back Golan for instance would be strategically and grand tactically committing a form of delayed suicide.

Gaza indeed became a running sore. Sharon saw that and was at the same time conducting an experiment. Gaza has become what the arab non Jewish settled areas were before the withdrawal, a terrorist controlled collective for terrorists whom have no wish to engage in negotiations in earnest. The easiest answer is to say the jews made it that way and keep it that way, no, that’s to easy and not altogether true.

Sharon’s experiment as I suspected he thought it would, has failed. There are NO moderate Palast. voices in Gaza. Abbas was, but he blew it and the extremists, the ones they are supposed to be negotiating with……good luck on that.


further;

I'd question anyone's sanity whom believes that a high calling is too willfully or be forced to suffuse their kids with hate via cartoons, priint material etc., encouraging them to strap on bombs and blow themselves up, ingrain and imbue hate beyond sane proportions. He have anything to say about that?