The day Israel used a boy aged 13 as a Human Shield

In spite of their best efforts most of the Islamic terrorists are pretty incompetent.

 

Yeah the Israeli's seem much better at killing civillians I agree.

 

you can tell yourself that this is a special situation as much as you want but it is not.
you have a choice. live in peace or live at war. if you think that they are going to love you before making peace with them you have to wait for a long time. you need to reevaluate the situation logically.
you have already made peace with arabs and it has worked out.
you have palestanians inside of israel
you have been living with them.
they are not going away.
you have the better hand than them
arabs have put a united offer.
peace or not what is the difference?
in two years you can have
egypt falls to extremists
iran going nuclear
you are forced to kill 100,000 palestanians and lose support of the world
palestanians can get their hand on biological weapons and kill 100000 israelis.
saudi arabia falls to the extremists
pakistan falls
just a few possibilities
now ask yourself
how can it get better? what do you want to wait for? you had 8 years of bush. he agreed with everything you wanted. what that get you? hizbollah is stronger. hamas is in control of gaza. iran has gone forward with their plans.

 

I know you think its possible and achievable. It is not as easy as you think.
Let me summarize the situation:
1) As I explained and you "forgot", the maximum we can give are the 1967 territories. This is not enough in the eyes of the MAJORITY of the Palestinian people.
2) Who are the Palestinians? the Hamas? the Fatah? the Islamic Jihad? they do not have a single centralized authority which is in control of everything.

We can not withdraw unilateraly without assurance in advance that it will end the conflict for ever! or else we will find ourself in a country with a minimal width of 15km! and rocket launchers on its border.

They are educated, their children do not suffer from crime against humanity of their parents, by indoctrinating and inciting them.

Then Egypt is doomed, I don't see how this relates with the palestinian problem.

Then Israel is doomed, I don't see how this relates with the Palestinian problem.

Hizbollah is weak as never before.
Hizbollah was pushed from the border 40km up north. The UN is stuck in its ass it can not move freely. The moderate forces in Lebanon despise Hizbollah more than ever. Hizbollah leader lives in a bunker in fear of Israeli assassination. Syria might break its support to Hizbollah if negotations with Israel will start to advance, hopefully soon. When Hizbollah thinks its strong: it attacks! no attack by Hizbollah since two years, the longest interval in history with no hostile actions on Hizbollah's side!

I asked you not to fall for doom day prophecies, so you do exactly the opposite?

the future is looking better, trust me, I know a thing or two.
The next 1-5 years will not solve the conflict completely, but move the region a few big steps forward. It is moving forward very very slowly starting from 1993 until today. Maybe we will even see a major breakthrough, who knows.

 

If you want, lets play a game.
Imagine that you are the Israeli prime minister. What will be your next move?

 

ok. lets play
i will officially turn over the islamic sites in east jureselum to the arab league or saudi arabia or jordan or egypt[in this order and publicly]. ask them to send a group of unarmed policeman to protect the sites. in some honorary uniform under some honorary flag.

 

Good job you're not in charge then lol.

 

i would like to propose some rules for the game.
a-anyone can join. they must declare which side they support and can not talk for the opposing side. if you do not want to declare a side then you can not reject a proposal and can not talk for either.
b-the scope of the game is limited to finding a solution, not the solution or the best solution.
c-no attempt shall be made in regard to finding the reasons for the problems, nor its origins.
d-no disrespecting of other side
e-if an offer rejected. the reason must be given [from your side without speculation on what the other side might do]
f-conditional acceptance is good,counter offer is welcome.
people please join in

 

The problem is in trying to legalize the illegal, each according to his own law, religion.. common sense

Arabs sees in Palestinians, a nation whom before 1948 never harmed anybody else, and whom been punished for being so peaceful, so do not try to even ask Palestinians to be peaceful now as long as this occupation is alive eating them like a cancer.


Give them what you stole from them by force and silence, and they will not have a problem with you, proof, is they did not have problem with Jews before.

Israelis, who are mostly atheists whom could not stand their own religion, but also could not give it up, found a solution in making Judaism a race instead of a religion, despite there are black, and even Asian Jews, and claimed that this land belongs to them, since like 3000 years ago, and now they came to get it back,


they came with Zionism, which was the first one who came with the idea of a national home for Jews, even if they have to steal it from somebody else, and they had Palestine, and other countries as targets including Argentina,


see


this is the problem,

I found Palestinians more flexible, because they agreed to give those Zionists, half what they stole, by giving them their lands, which been occupied in 1948, but of course Zionists, wants more always, they started to put obstacle in the way of any peaceful solution, to delay it as much as possible, so they can then build their illegal settlements, later, the negotiations instead of being about lands, it became about settlements, which spread in west bank like cancer,

so, I believe, if you study the events since they started, till now, you will find that Israel left no chance for any peaceful solution, and Palestinians, have no other solution except fighting back,

if other Arabs wanted to help them, they should not be disallowed, if Muslims also wanted to help, they should not be disallowed, infact, they should be encouraged, because they are also involved.

 

imad. we are playing a game. the purpose of this game is trying to approach this from a different angle. both sides have discussed why we are here for decades and they have not achieved anything to solve the issue. my proposal is talking about the solution only.
we can leave the cause for the historians to figure out.

 

Solution, was in Palestinians giving up most of their country lands (1948), and they were willing to stop demanding for 1948 lands, the so-called Israel right now,

and they accepted for the sake of peace to have their own state in 1967 territories,

later this became not enough, and they been demanded to go find elsewhere, and give up all their country.

we will have two states then, a legal Israel and Palestine, with sovereignty, on its own lands, and up to Palestinians then if they want to have their own army or not, which includes east Jerusalem, Arabs in Israel then, should be left free to stay or move to Palestine, israelies in Palestine then, should be left free to go to Israel or stay in Palestine, in both cases, each will be considered a citizen of his country and should follow its laws.

I know you are playing a game to find a solution and not to have fun over Palestinian pain, but anything less than 1967 territories, will stay a game that will not result in anything, even if Palestinians accepted, others won't accept and will fight back.

 

you can put this in a form of proposal.
like israel should go back to the 1967 borders. in return palestanians would give up the claim for the rest of the land.
then someone from the other side can say no and why not.
then we see if there is a point that can be reached to find peace.
no talk of past and no talking for the other side.

 

i do not propose israel to do something that is not to her benefit and the same for palestanians.
so i am going to explain.
i might be wrong but most of the operations of the islamic mosques in east Jerusalem is with the muslem clerics and i think jordan is somehow involved. please people correct me if i am wrong.
they can do it like what clinton proposed. from ground up .

the return of the sovereignty of the islamic sites to these enteties achieves a few things.
a the rest of the issues of east Jerusalem becomes a basic land issue and easier to solve
b-it allows for palestanians and muslems in general to make a non emotional decision in regard to the city and will make compromises easier for them also.
c-it will create a goodwill atmosphere that is priceless.
for example the saudi king can take possession himself by coming to Jerusalem. i do not think he would be able to refuse.

 

The Islamic sites in east jerusalem are under islamic religious rule already. Its called the jerusalem islamic waqf, and it is the decision maker in the temple mount.

Jews and Israeli citizens are not allowed to enter the temple mount at all. The temple mount is the only territory in the world where everybody is allowed to enter except the citizens of the country in which it is located
I once visited the temple mount - got up with a large group of European tourists which I hosted, and fooled the soldiers who were guarding the entrance. However, neither of my friends were allowed to enter the mosque itself - only muslims may enter. Islam is very tolerant.

And lets not forget that the Western Wall, judaism's most sacred place, is exactly at the same place (and as you can imagine, this is not by coincidence...)
In Jerusalem today, all religions practice their religion freely. Before 1967, Jordanians barely allowed jews to access the wall.

so you can mark it as check. East jerusalem is under Islamic control. Whats next?

p.s. Regarding Arab Intervention from the "outside":
If you think that any of the Arab countries would be happy to seize power of the east jerusalem area - no chance that this would happen. No country wants trouble. Jerusalem is nothing but trouble.
Besides, when Israel offered Egypt to take Gaza "on the house" in the 1978 peace agreement, Egyptian sadat warned Israeli PM Beggin that if he will suggest it once again, Sadat will withdraw from the negotiantions. Only 30,000 palestinian "refugees" live in Egypt, with 60 million residents. They have absolutely no chance to make it to an Egyptian passport - the Arab world is doing everything it can to make the Palestinian problem permanent, it is very good for the dictatorships to further secure their existence.

p.s. 2 Since ThraXed is in my ignore list, I have trouble to follow when you answer its questions.

 

i said that the offer must be made publicly. i do not think the arabs can reject taking the control of their holly sites. regardless the issue would become nonreligious one way or other.
2-i would come up with a design for two cities in westbank and one in gaza, that can house 5-7 million people. this is for the palestanians that would want to come back. arabs and european and US can help with the money. . israel should help with know how and help put pressure on the donors to provide financing. refugees can trade the deeds to their old property in israel for new apartments in new palestine. apartments should be nice of course. the old deeds would be returned to israel at a ceremony at the end. estimate time 7-10 years. start time 6-12 months. benefit jobs for palestanians. momoney for their economy. compensation for refugees. remove of the claims against israel.

 

Great plan. Problem: Majority of Israelis say today: "Yes! Gladly!", the majority of the Palestinians say today - " NO ! ". This is a fact, not my opinion!
At the present stage, the Palestinian right of return stands in the core of the dispute.

[sup]**[/sup] To my best memory, Arafat is also quoted to have said: "If I sign this (=give up on the right of return), I am a dead man". Couldn't find it in Wikipedia though.
Read also this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit#Refugees_and_the_right_of_return
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit#Reasons_for_impasse

Anybody who can think clearly understands that the fact that the Palestinians refusal to give up the "right of return" is equivalent to rejection of Israel's (=home of the jewish people) right to exist.

This is the main obstacle in the peace process. Israelis are willing to make a lot of compromise in Jerusalem, financial compensations, west bank, whatever. We will not make any compromise in the "right of return". Implementing the right of return would mean that history will be reversed like it didn't happen. It did happen: the Palestinians did not accept our right on any piece of this land in 1948, just as they do not accept it today. They attacked us,

and of course, they lost. They should pay the price, history DID happen.

 

ok. lets see if we can solve this problem. now the question is to imad
imad do you think palestanians can agree to concenterating their right of return to inside of the new palestine, provided that the borders can be agreed on and housing would be built to compensate for the property inside of israel, and other issues are resolved? if it was up to you.
yes ,no, why and counter proposal if you have.

 

please. each side answer for your side only.
and again do not blame each other. do not look at past. past has been managed badly and the only hope you both have is to manage the future better.
remember that you are both going to be living with each other for the foreseeable future. the only choice you have is if it is in peace or at war.

 

well, it is hard to say, even though I believe strongly that Israel is not interested in any solution that can limit their ability to steal more, but I will try to think loud here, please note that this can work only if all parties, Israel, Palestinians, and International community were serious in finding a solution,

Palestinians already showed great seriousness when they declared that they will accept an Israeli state despite it was established illegally on lands that been stolen from them, Arabs too showed great seriousness in their initiatives, international community showed some seriousness but it was not enough to convince Israel to get serious, and Israel never been serious at any point of time, even when they went to negotiations it was as a tactic only, to show, throw blames for the biggest crime they started in 1948, or to delay any real solution, but not to find a real solution, in the contrary, they showed great seriouness in launching wars under the excuse of granting security, when only peace can give security on the long run,

the three major problems are in:

1- The supervision over Islamic holy sites
2- Refugees and the right of return
3- Settlements in Palestinian territories.

it must be noted that:

for 1, any solution that does not grant complete supervision on Islamic holy sites to Muslims, will be illusion.

for 2, any solution that does not at least compensate refugees for their properties, and the years in which they lived in refugee, and the family members who been killed by the Zionist occupation to Palestine, will be illusion.

in general any solution that does not take into consideration all Palestinian refugees, will be an illusion, a questionnaire should be done here in which all Palestinians refugees (48 or 67) will be asked to choose an option of:

1- return to their original properties + get compensated.

2- get compensated and return to a future Palestinian state in 1967 lands, and not to their original properties.

3- get compensated and stay in their current locations (hosting countries) if these countries were willing to keep them on its lands as normal citizens, and not as refugees.

4- get compensated and choose a new location from a list of locations that are willing to receive them as normal citizens, which are not their current location and neither Palestine.

5- a blank field to write any other option or suggestion if none of the above was chosen.

the same should be done to Israelis who immigrated to Palestine, to see if there are some who wish to return to their original countries, or stay.

once this is done, then the numbers will be known, and will be easier to know on what to concentrate.

if the number of those who wish to return to Palestinian lands occupied in 1948 - was too big, then the two states solution will not be implementable, a new solution should be discussed, for example, a one state solution where all should be given equal representation and equal rights within this state borders.

if the numbers were not too big, then those who decided to return no matter what, should be asked the following question:

- if returning was not possible, do you accept any other option from the rest ( options 2 to 4 ) or another option else than 1 which is not listed?

a new number will result after this, it should be then discussed with the illegal (so far) state of Israel and see if they are able to receive them, or part of them, or none of them, Israel should not be left alone to decide if they will allow them, or not, if they said they do not allow them, they should give good reasons, else than ( we are a racist state), some diplomatic work will be needed,

if they can receive all then good, if part, then those refugees should be checked to see who have a good reason to return, like part of family are still there, and the others should be asked to sacrifice their right of return to allow some who have families there to get back and unite with them, and to make a solution available where others who live under Israeli occupation get their freedom in an independent Palestinian state,

this is mostly regarding refugees, in short, the right of return is a right, it can't be taken from them, but there can be some tries to convince them with other solutions, for the sake of peace that will end suffer for many on both sides.

 

i have a question.how many palestanians are now living in the arab countries as refugees in camps and other centers. not integrated?
my thoughts.
my first stage of plan solves imad's one and it is doable pretty quickly.
my housing plan would solve the refugee problem as they would be compensated with new apartments in new palestain cities.
it also can resolve the right of return to the satisfaction of both sides.
more thoughts!!
i bet a large percent will agree to return to new palestine if there were provided with adequate housing.
i think a very large project should start as soon as possible to make such housing available.
i do not think that the new palestine can possibly be an agriculture based society. in my opinion it should use its natural advantage and be a tourist based economy.
considering densly populated areas in the world i do see a possibility to make this work. it probably will take 7-10 years to implement such plan but it is doable.
the next question is the settlements.
i propose a step by step solution to this.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
if i was the pm of israel i would start by freezing the settlement activity, not for sake of peace or palestanians but for israel. chaos you might not see it but it is not that settlers are holding peace hostage but they are holding israel hostage.
a freeze will face some opposition but it might also free israel to think more long term outside of the parameters that the settlers allow her.
so i would first freeze
but more important in my opinion are the roadways between these settlements. they should be consolidated into one going north to south with one connection to israel at each end. all the other roads between settlements should become open and handed over to the palastanians within one to two year.
since israel wants to keep a few settlements, then palestanians would get a land that would connect gaza to west bank with an elevated highway.
remaining settlements will become palestanian territory. settlers should have the followinng option
a-become palestanian citizen
b-remain israeli citizen but have permanent resident status
c-return to israeli territory and compensated
if they choose a or b then they must abide by palestanian laws.pay taxes and so on. if they choose "a" they would have right to vote in palastanian elections and "b" they do not. they will loose all their privilages that they currently have.
of course their lives becomes much harder but if they want to do for their religion then they have to tolerate the hardship also. they the settlers have to make their decision by 2011 or 2012 and register their choice. they have to start paying taxes as soon as the peace agreement is reached[2 years]
opinions are welcome. please only about your side. i am not interested to know how you feel about each other. just about the proposal