General Israel/Palestine discussion thread

[A'isha]

Doctor Evil touched up on the core issues with Obama's speech here. No idea why this post is being glossed over as it states quite clearly how the Obama administration's ME policy is different from its predecessors.

I would, but I'm still trying to figure out what "refugee candy" is.

 

[Doctor Evil]

I would, but I'm still trying to figure out what "refugee candy" is.

Surprisingly, this can't be blamed on google translation.

What Caspit meant was that if Obama was to insert into his speech some kind of position on borders which is hard for Israel, he should compensate it with a position which would be hard for the Palestinians, but is also necessary for a successful conclusion of peace talks. This is the 'candy' which should have been in the speech.

 

[Puppycow]

The problem with that map is the sources its built on. B'Tselem and Passia.

Is there another more accurate one? Who are B'Tselem and Passia?

 

[Thunder]

Check out this map of the West Bank

Fascinating to look at. Hard to see any easy solution to this.

err....this map was made in 2003.

it may have been correct....in 2003.

what year is it now?

 

[Puppycow]

err....this map was made in 2003.

it may have been correct....in 2003.

what year is it now?

Here is a UN one from 2006. But it's harder to see some things with this map, like the Israeli military controlled roads.

 

[A'isha]

Surprisingly, this can't be blamed on google translation.

Darn. I was hoping for something like Peeps.

What Caspit meant was that if Obama was to insert into his speech some kind of position on borders which is hard for Israel, he should compensate it with a position which would be hard for the Palestinians, but is also necessary for a successful conclusion of peace talks. This is the 'candy' which should have been in the speech.

I assume he's wanting something direct and explicit? Or, at least, more direct and explicit than the statements in the speech regarding things (where he at least specifically called out Hamas and the upcoming UN proposal)?

I know at least Skeptic (I think it was Skeptic, and I apologize if it was actually someone else) wanted the statement "Palestinians will never realize their independence by denying the right of Israel to exist" to be a stronger condemnation of Hamas' active statements that they desire Israel's destruction and want to kill all the Jews in the region.


Or was he specifically talking about the refugee issue alone, saying that Obama should have made a statement about that (ie, tossing out the "right of return")?

 

[Thunder]

Here is a UN one from 2006. But it's harder to see some things with this map, like the Israeli military controlled roads.

everyone with an ounce of honesty and integrity understands that a fair and reasonable final border between Israel & Palestine will largely follow the 1967 line, with mutually-agreed upon land swaps equaling about 5% of the West Bank's land.

The Israeli Seperation barrier largely follows the 1967 line, and only takes in 8.5% of the West Bank. If its ok for the Seperation barrier, its ok for a final border.

 

[bigjelmapro]

So, I was hallucinating when the US gave $18 billion in emergency aid to Israel? Or is that a "minor infraction"?

You've stated that foreign aid goes to settlements. You have yet to prove this in addition to this $18 billion emergency aid bit that was added.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/foreign_aid.html

And more billions, as you say, for Israel to buy on the dollar, US hardware.

So, maybe Israel is receiving $3 billion a year from the United States government, in direct no-attachments aid, plus whatever it recieves in military aid.

What is this giving us? I've just been assuming you're a US citizen and thus have foremost in your mind national interests in our outlays. What interests is Israel giving us, at the tune of 6 (or 3, or 0.01) billion a year?

Did you miss it the first time I've stated it? The $2.5 billion per year from the US to Israel is in the form of military grants/loans, of which 24% goes into the Israeli weapons industry.
All this for the $30 billion + per year of Israeli purchases from the US weapons industries with significantly less offsets as compared to the Saudi's 35%.

Commented on this here: America's $2.75 billion dollar gift to Israel

There's no such thing as no-attachments, FYI. Never heard of it.

What I would like to see overall is a bit less emphasis put on the weapon industries and their rampant spending. I'm not American, but I'm assuming that you are and would like to see a bit less on your end as well. Albeit, unlike the mid to late 1990's, the Russians, Chinese and Koreans have picked up their weapons sales to Israel's enemies, so I don't see this happening any time soon.

All in all, this is business, and war is profitable.

 

[Doctor Evil]

Or was he specifically talking about the refugee issue alone, saying that Obama should have made a statement about that (ie, tossing out the "right of return")?

My understanding was that since Obama was going to make an explicit reference to the 1967 borders in his speech, then Netanyahu's people wanted him to also add an explicit reference to the fact that the refugees will not return to Israel. (To be more precise, they would have rather that he would not use an explicit mention of the 1967 borders at all.) I actually agree with this, since there is no chance for an agreement if one side is expected to concede so much before negotiations have started, while the other need not reciprocate. This will make the give and take needed for an agreement impossible. (It is close to impossible anyway.)

 

[WildCat]

You could just as easily say that most Americans wanted war in Iraq, they voted in Bush

Most Americans did want a war in Iraq. Not that Bush ran in 2000 on a "invade Iraq" platform.

Hamas, OTOH, is an openly anti-semitic terrorist organization founded on the principle of a genocidal war against Jews. Anyone who voted for them knew what they were getting.

 

[Thunder]

My understanding was that since Obama was going to make an explicit reference to the 1967 borders in his speech, then Netanyahu's people wanted him to also add an explicit reference to the fact that the refugees will not return to Israel.

do you REALLY think Obama expects Israel to take back even 1 million Palestinian refugees?

come on now. let's get real here.

 

[Matt Giwer]

Rubbish. The issue of economic aid, which has already been phased out for several years, that was transferred to the WB, had been solved even before the economic aid was phased out (solved predominantly during the Clinton administration). There have been minor infractions (2 occasions since post-Clinton), but reductions in loans/grants were made to adjust for these infractions.

The will to misrepresent the facts when it comes to Israel appears boundless. Carefully say economic knowing full well the previous total economic+military is now equalled by the military so there has been no change in the total. Then never point out that the amount of military it can spend on anything it wants now equals the previous economic.

Do that and you do not have address the fact that money saved one place can be spent another (money is fungible) and that nothing has changed except increases for inflation.

But never mention the inflation increases else someone might mention Israel's present whining that it is getting "weak" US dollars and it should get an additional amount to compensate for that.

Did someone call me Schnorrer?

U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel

Love it how people use this magical $6 billion per year (usually 3 billion FYI) with total disregard of where it goes and the convenient exclusion of the over $30 billion per year Israel uses to buy US military hardware. Details mentioned in this very thread...

Let the crickets commence...

Ribbit! Ribbit! (The frogs ate the crickets.)

The six billion comes from the imputed value of loan guarantees, tax deductions for charitable contributions to Israel, tax deductions for illegal contributions written off as charitable contributions, tax deductions for business investment in Israel (you don't think Intel would be there without them do you?), tax deductions for buying pissant companies in Israel which count as investments and a host of other scams in US tax law.

In addition to all that it includes the average value of the multi-billion dollar bonuses every few years. For example, when the Challenger disaster occurred NASA got an extra half billion. That same year Israel got a well publicized $10 billion plus and quiet increase to $13 billion four months later.

 

[Matt Giwer]

The only peace you are interested in is the peace of the grave. (For Jews that is.)

Jews went to Palestine knowing EXACTLY what they were doing.

Jews went to Palestine knowing full well they could never have both a jewish supremacist country and peace.

Jews went to Palestine knowing full well their victims would never give them a moment's peace.

Pointing out what Jews have known since the 1920s is nothing more than stating the facts.

Anyone suggesting Jews did not know what they were doing is saying Jews are stupid.

 

[Matt Giwer]

Really? Why do you think so?

What is the point of pretending to negotiate when there is no intention to ever offer even the minimum necessary to make them substantive negotiations?

 

[Matt Giwer]

No. I go back and forth on this issue because I try to set aside my own prejudices and think about it from the perpective of each party. But at the end of the day, I have a hard time working up a whole lot of sympathy for Hamas, certainly, but also Fatah. After all, instead of peaceful coexistence, they chose war and this is the result. It's not clear to me that ethics dictate I support them despite this.

Why should not the lawful owners of real estate do what they can to regain it from the thieves who stole it?

 

[Matt Giwer]

I read an interview with Olmert once, he said he couldn't believe that the above offer was rejected.
It seemed very generous, but he probably didn't give the whole story.

Does anyone know what the offer entailed, and why it didn't make it?

If you want to see why it was not accepted simply read the offer.

You can either go through the exercise or go directly to the fact of law, if it is not in writing it doesn't exist.

 

[Matt Giwer]

As it turns out, there are consequences when you elect an internationally recognized terrorist group as your government. Just because they were elected democratically doesn't make it OK to have a terrorist group as a government.

There have yet to be consequences for Israel for all the terrorists and terrorist governments it has elected. Why should it be different for the Palestinians?

 

[Matt Giwer]

The issue with the map was that it didn't allow millions of Palestinian "refugees" to "return" to Israel and destroy it demographically, which according to The Fool would cause Israel to nuke themselves.

What are called refugees are also called property owners.

Jews have known full well the demographic problem since at least the 1920s if not earlier. But by the early 1920s it was clear their country would have to be a democracy. The Palestinians could not be ruled as servants of the Jews. That was when expulsion or extermination became known to all Jews. It is then that Jews have known full well what they were doing in going to Palestine.

 

[Matt Giwer]

I know at least Skeptic (I think it was Skeptic, and I apologize if it was actually someone else) wanted the statement "Palestinians will never realize their independence by denying the right of Israel to exist"

Blacks will never get civil rights by denying the right of Whites to rule.

 

[Matt Giwer]

My understanding was that since Obama was going to make an explicit reference to the 1967 borders in his speech, then Netanyahu's people wanted him to also add an explicit reference to the fact that the refugees will not return to Israel. (To be more precise, they would have rather that he would not use an explicit mention of the 1967 borders at all.) I actually agree with this, since there is no chance for an agreement if one side is expected to concede so much before negotiations have started, while the other need not reciprocate. This will make the give and take needed for an agreement impossible. (It is close to impossible anyway.)

Property owners whether the property is in Israel, Poland or Germany have a right to their property.

Palestinians have the same rights in property as Israel claims for Jews.

Hypocrisy thy name is apparently jewish.