Guests may browse all the site, but only registered users can post in the main forums.
Unregistered users may post in the Free Range Talk Forum

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
US embassy warnings - prelude to Wed naming of Jerusalem
#41
go on with yourself, Jimmy Carter!

I'm not so sure there is a solution, but in a tug of war, you have to give and get. Trump gave it all away - he could have leveraged the Jersulem capitol recognition into a ceasing of Israeli building in the West Bank, which buildings comprise just 1% of the land, but their jurisdiction and councils covers 42% of the land.
Its very, very difficult to dispel ignorance if you retain arrogance.
Reply
#42
Big Grin

Both sides would have to be willing to stop fighting and co-exist, for any real solution.  But I like my idea - it's simple and has a certain fairness/equity to it.  And it's a lot harder to govern yourselves than to be "anti" something - the Palestinians would have to be willing to shift from being "anti-Israel" to being interested in creating and maintaining their own country.

It looks like there are roughly the same numbers of Israelis and Palestinians (or Arabs living in Palestine/Israel) - about 6 million - which makes my idea seem eminently fair from that standpoint.

Also, those settlements are widely held to violate international law, and not disclosing how much Israel controls is one of the ways they make it seem better than it is.
Reply
#43
yah, but my idea - copped from Thomas Friedman - addresses the reality of 70 years of negotiating the issue to this point in time. Point is, Trump flubbed the chance. No pressure, just gift giving.

and what is now the result of that early gift giving?
Its very, very difficult to dispel ignorance if you retain arrogance.
Reply
#44
(12-07-2017, 05:29 PM)jafs3 Wrote: Big Grin

Both sides would have to be willing to stop fighting and co-exist, for any real solution.  But I like my idea - it's simple and has a certain fairness/equity to it.  And it's a lot harder to govern yourselves than to be "anti" something - the Palestinians would have to be willing to shift from being "anti-Israel" to being interested in creating and maintaining their own country.

It looks like there are roughly the same numbers of Israelis and Palestinians (or Arabs living in Palestine/Israel) - about 6 million - which makes my idea seem eminently fair from that standpoint.

Also, those settlements are widely held to violate international law, and not disclosing how much Israel controls is one of the ways they make it seem better than it is.

This all very nice Jafs and so is a golden toilet! There's just one little problem: A deep seated hatred here on both sides and there's no sign of it ever ending. Color me pessimistic but there it is.
You are the wind beneath my wings, otherwise known as turbulence.
Reply
#45
I know.

There's a lot of bad history.

But there are a lot of Israelis and Palestinians who would welcome a just and peaceful resolution - unfortunately extremists on both sides make that virtually impossible. Also, if they wanted to, they could keep fighting after my proposed solution was implemented.
Reply
#46
(12-07-2017, 05:59 PM)susnus Wrote: yah, but my idea - copped from Thomas Friedman - addresses the reality of 70 years of negotiating the issue to this point in time. Point is, Trump flubbed the chance. No pressure, just gift giving.

and what is now the result of that early gift giving?

Trump was interested in two results: starting a war, playing to his base. 

How did he do?
[-] The following 4 users Like chootspa's post:
  • Jessamine, PleaseReportToTheFrontDesk, Riverdrifter, susnus
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Our Amazon Picks


Donate With PayPal