Disengagement Plan

[JC1]

Comrades , i am interested in youre opinions on this qestion regarding the settlements in the occupied territorys.

As you know , the Israeli gov't is removing settlements in the Gaza Strip and some in Samaria (Northern West Bank). The rationale behind this is this it is requiried for the viability of a Arab state.

Qestions :

1) Is this not re-enforcing the apartied situation in israel/palistine ? We demand the Settlements be dismantled , why do we not demand that arab villigages in israel be dismantled ? Why cant the settlers be citizens of a Arab State ?

2) Why do we suppourt the Right of Return Movement ? If Israel is not the birth right of my people after 2000 years in exile ( And its not ) , why is it the right of the children of palistinians , most of hom have never been to palistine. Conversly , why dont we make demands for reperations for the Jewish Refugees living israel who were kicked out of arab countrys ? Why is it we never demand the cronies of European imperialism (EG Syria) Dismantle the Refugee camps and stop using the Refugees as political tools.

3) This qestion is a little more deep theoreticly speaking. Is Israel Imperialist
or Comprador ? Isreal does not exactly have a high standard of livinmg , and the economy and goverment are subordinate to US intrests. Also , what is the nature of the territorys ? there in a similar situation , except its seems Europe is pulling the strings ( France has historicly been the PA's biggest funder ).

[deathpasser]

"We demand the Settlements be dismantled , why do we not demand that arab villigages in israel be dismantled ?"

You don't need to demand that.

"Why cant the settlers be citizens of a Arab State ?"

They choose to be "settlers" and extend the stolen territory of "israel", they choose not to be citizens of a non-Israeli state and choose not to obey the laws of such a state. Otherwise, Jews had been welcome to come live there.



why is it the right of the children of palistinians , most of hom have never been to palistine.

The children have parents, these parents had homes. These homes were in villages, and these villages were in Palestine. Palestine is now Israel. Right now, many homes even in Jerusalem, were seized during the 6 day war.


why dont we make demands for reperations for the Jewish Refugees living israel who were kicked out of arab countrys ?


Can you name instances where this has actually happened, who was in leadership and your source for information?

[JC1]

They choose to be "settlers" and extend the stolen territory of "israel", they choose not to be citizens of a non-Israeli state and choose not to obey the laws of such a state. Otherwise, Jews had been welcome to come live there.

How is some farmer in Gush Katif " Extending the territory of a illegal state " ?


The children have parents, these parents had homes. These homes were in villages, and these villages were in Palestine. Palestine is now Israel. Right now, many homes even in Jerusalem, were seized during the 6 day war.


We are communists, we dont recognize inheritance. Let alone the inhertance of grandchildren of Refugees who cant point out what was taken. However , they do deserve restitution from both the Israeli and The states who imprisened them.


Can you name instances where this has actually happened, who was in leadership and your source for information?

Justice for Jewish Refugee's (http://www.jewishrefugees.org/JusticeForJews.htm) The Expulsions were instigated by British and French Imperialism , however. Before that , jews and arabs had a great fellowship.

[Reuben]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12 2005, 12:40 AM
Comrades , i am interested in youre opinions on this qestion regarding the settlements in the occupied territorys.

As you know , the Israeli gov't is removing settlements in the Gaza Strip and some in Samaria (Northern West Bank). The rationale behind this is this it is requiried for the viability of a Arab state.

Qestions :

1) Is this not re-enforcing the apartied situation in israel/palistine ? We demand the Settlements be dismantled , why do we not demand that arab villigages in israel be dismantled ? Why cant the settlers be citizens of a Arab State ?

2) Why do we suppourt the Right of Return Movement ? If Israel is not the birth right of my people after 2000 years in exile ( And its not ) , why is it the right of the children of palistinians , most of hom have never been to palistine. Conversly , why dont we make demands for reperations for the Jewish Refugees living israel who were kicked out of arab countrys ? Why is it we never demand the cronies of European imperialism (EG Syria) Dismantle the Refugee camps and stop using the Refugees as political tools.

3) This qestion is a little more deep theoreticly speaking. Is Israel Imperialist
or Comprador ? Isreal does not exactly have a high standard of livinmg , and the economy and goverment are subordinate to US intrests. Also , what is the nature of the territorys ? there in a similar situation , except its seems Europe is pulling the strings ( France has historicly been the PA's biggest funder ).
ok i will look one by one at your ridiculous attempts to defend the most indefensible aspectso of israeli policies:



We demand the Settlements be dismantled , why do we not demand that arab villigages in israel be dismantled ? Why cant the settlers be citizens of a Arab State ?

this is a misrepresentation of what the settlements are. They are not simply an example of jews living as citizens in arab state. They are armed encampments - established by force by an occupying power - which allow people belonging to a specific ethnic group to monopolise hugely disporoprtionate quatities of the natrual resources (ie land and water) in the west bank. Most People do not go to the west bank because they want to be 'jewish citizens in an arab state'. They go there because they believe it to be 'Judea and Samaria' and wis to establish it as part of greater israel.

2) Why do we suppourt the Right of Return Movement ? If Israel is not the birth right of my people after 2000 years in exile ( And its not ) , why is it the right of the children of palistinians , most of hom have never been to palistine.
Ok several points need to be raised here. Firstly the right of return is nto simply about hte children of palesitnians. There are palestianins still who own the front door keys to the houses from which they were personally forced to leve by Israeli/Zionist forces. Now you ask hwo we can support the right of return for palestinians but not support Israel' as a birth right. Well personally - like most true socialists - i do not beleive in immigration controls. People should be abele to travel and live where they wish. Jews and palestinians should be akkowed to goreturn to jewusalem tel aviv or watever. However establishing 'Israel' as a birthright is not comparable to aestablsihing the palestinian right of return. The latter is about the right of people made into refugees to return to their homes. The iea of Israel however does not simply relate to the rightof jews to live in jerusalem. It means establishing a jewish ethnic state - and one which in practice was established at the expense of indigenious palestiniabns. In this sense opposing the idea of Israel - as a jewish ethnic state in the middle east - is not contradictory to estabishing the right of palestinians to return.

Reuben

[JC1]

this is a misrepresentation of what the settlements are. They are not simply an example of jews living as citizens in arab state. They are armed encampments - established by force by an occupying power - which allow people belonging to a specific ethnic group to monopolise hugely disporoprtionate quatities of the natrual resources (ie land and water) in the west bank. Most People do not go to the west bank because they want to be 'jewish citizens in an arab state'. They go there because they believe it to be 'Judea and Samaria' and wis to establish it as part of greater israel.


Ok. The PLO dosent actualy demand the settlers leave ( There a bg part of the economy ). They just want the IDF to stop using the Settlements as posts.

And I agree.


Ok several points need to be raised here. Firstly the right of return is nto simply about hte children of palesitnians. There are palestianins still who own the front door keys to the houses from which they were personally forced to leve by Israeli/Zionist forces.


They left 57 years ago !

Listen , in 48' , the Jews fought an Anti-Imperialist war against British Imperialism and tried to cash the blank check self determination left. But the left refused to cash it ! What is the Deal ?

[Reuben]

by 1948 britain was already planning to levae. I hardly see how the dier yssian masscre, how tlelling palestinians to leve their villages, how forcing palestinians out by siezing their means of subsistence represented an anti-imperialist war.

[LSD]

Listen , in 48' , the Jews fought an Anti-Imperialist war against British Imperialism and tried to cash the blank check self determination left. But the left refused to cash it ! What is the Deal ?

The "deal" is that they imposed on another people's right to self-determination in the process.

[deathpasser]

How is some farmer in Gush Katif " Extending the territory of a illegal state " ?

See Reuben's response to settlements.



We are communists, we dont recognize inheritance. Let alone the inhertance of grandchildren of Refugees who cant point out what was taken. However , they do deserve restitution from both the Israeli and The states who imprisened them.

They don't deserve restitution, they deserve their homes back. That would be like someone killing you, your mother saying she wants her son back, she doesn't want 'restitution', not money, not food, she wants her son who's life someone else stole.



Justice for Jewish Refugee's The Expulsions were instigated by British and French Imperialism , however. Before that , jews and arabs had a great fellowship.

For one thing, the French and British imperialists who expelled these Jew's no longer exist, the empire of Birtain is long gone, if you want for those Jews to get back their land, you'll be asking people who are no longer alive.

Secondly, you yourself said you were Communist, whereas most of the "claims" I read are regarding inheritance. Why the sudden change?

EDIT:

Just read this:


They left 57 years ago !

No, most Palestinians hadn't left until Israel also stole East Jerusalem and annexed more territory.

[JC1]

by 1948 britain was already planning to levae. I hardly see how the dier yssian masscre, how tlelling palestinians to leve their villages, how forcing palestinians out by siezing their means of subsistence represented an anti-imperialist war.

1) Deir Yessin was the Irgun. The Israeli Goverment should appologize on there behalf.

2) Britian was leaving , but was planing on creating a Iraq Style puppet. And then they asked the Arab Countrys to intervene on there behalf. How is thaty not anti-imperialist ?


They don't deserve restitution, they deserve their homes back. That would be like someone killing you, your mother saying she wants her son back, she doesn't want 'restitution', not money, not food, she wants her son who's life someone else stole.


How can you compare a life to peice of land the effected has never seen ?


For one thing, the French and British imperialists who expelled these Jew's no longer exist, the empire of Birtain is long gone, if you want for those Jews to get back their land, you'll be asking people who are no longer alive.


Yes , they still exist.


Secondly, you yourself said you were Communist, whereas most of the "claims" I read are regarding inheritance. Why the sudden change?

They dont want there land , they want repertions for sending them tro a country they had no desoire to go to.

[deathpasser]

How can you compare a life to peice of land the effected has never seen ?

Let's put this in a more updated example. You have a happy life, nice home, nice car and I good piece of farming land with a close source of water. Someone comes over and steals it all, forces you to leave. You desire:

A) Reperations, gimme money

B) My home back, the one by that good source of water and fertile farming land since I'm a farmer. That Mercedes I used to have and basiclly, be able to live as I used to.

Geography is not the same everywhere, the Palestinains want their specific land back, their water supply, their farms and their lives as they were before. You can't just pick up someone's home who used to live and farm fertile land to say where ever they can find someone willing to accept their money.


Yes , they still exist.

No, what exists today is a different France and different Britain. It would be like me saying Germany is still Nazi and they should have to pay back the Jews, the current authority isn't responsible for that nor does it support it. If anyone is responsible, its the Nazis and if anyone supports it, its hicks in USA and skinheads in Europe.

[Reuben]

your initial statement was unspecific as to wh owas fighitngi an anti-mperialist war. You simply said 'the jews' were. Hence i made reference to the actions of the irgun. More to the point the mainstream zionist armed groups also carried out expulsions. I am prepared to accept that the war was mlti-faceted and had an anti-british element. Yet to say this cancelled that aspect o the war which was against palestinians , that the fact that they were fighiting britain mitigates the expulsion of refugees strikes me as a non argument.


The debate as to whether palestinains want money or the right ot return can perhaps be resolved by the UN policy on refugees and i think by the policy of many palesitnian groups that refugees should be offered the prospect of either compensation (reparations) or the right to return . that way those that wanted reparations andnot the right to return could have that and viasa versa.

[JC1]

Let's put this in a more updated example. You have a happy life, nice home, nice car and I good piece of farming land with a close source of water. Someone comes over and steals it all, forces you to leave. You desire:

A) Reperations, gimme money

B) My home back, the one by that good source of water and fertile farming land since I'm a farmer. That Mercedes I used to have and basiclly, be able to live as I used to.

Geography is not the same everywhere, the Palestinains want their specific land back, their water supply, their farms and their lives as they were before. You can't just pick up someone's home who used to live and farm fertile land to say where ever they can find someone willing to accept their money.


The fact of the matter is , most palistinian Refugees are no longer Farmers and the issue is not gona be resolved byu taking away the land some else owns now. Im not trying to justify the expulsions, im just saying thatis a non-solution to the issue.


No, what exists today is a different France and different Britain. It would be like me saying Germany is still Nazi and they should have to pay back the Jews, the current authority isn't responsible for that nor does it support it. If anyone is responsible, its the Nazis and if anyone supports it, its hicks in USA and skinheads in Europe.


How ? Its the same regime , and they do require restitution.

[deathpasser]

The fact of the matter is , most palistinian Refugees are no longer Farmers and the issue is not gona be resolved byu taking away the land some else owns now. Im not trying to justify the expulsions, im just saying thatis a non-solution to the issue.

They don't own that land, they didn't just flee Germany and come to Palestine finding homes and thinking nature provided them. They knew these were people's houses they were taking over, houses don't build themselves. In case they bought them from somebody else who happened to steal them, then the theif would pay back these people's money and the owners of the home should get their home back. It isn't just to take something from someone without their permission and give them something in return that they didn't want.

And of course they are no longer farmers, they have nothing to farm. Aside from this many are still farmers, they are simply having their olive trees and new houses bulldozed. And as for those who are no longer farmers, so what? They may still want to be farmers, a livlihood the Israelis who stole their homes in turn stole from them.


How ? Its the same regime , and they do require restitution.

My bad, I was thinking of the British monarchy. As for those that "deserve" restitution, many of these people are now where? IN homes they stole themselves, if they are practicing the same thing they are *****ing about, then why would they deserve any repayment? The only one's fit for restitution in such a case would be the ones who don't occupy land in Israel and live elsewhere like USA for example.

[il Commie]

1) The settlers doesn't want to be citizens of the palestinian state. Israelis who wanted that already got their palestinain passports (like Amira Has for instance), so it irrelevant.

2) The arab population of Israel are israeli citizens, and wish to stay like that, so we should not transfer them - it would be racism.

3) The palestinian refugees were exiled by Israel and never mingled (I hope that's the correct word) outside their homeland, in contradiction to the Jews who only kept religiouse customs after they were exiled by the roman empire. Israel is responsible to get the refugees out of their poverty and humilation by compensations or return.

4) There are organizations working for the jewish refugees from the arab countries. And ofcourse, Germany compensates Holocaust survivors. But that's irrelevant to the palestinian questions, who stands on it's own.

[bolshevik butcher]

Have you heard about the plan to destroy pailistinean houses in east jerusalem?

[JC1]

They don't own that land,

THEY HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 56 YEARS !


And of course they are no longer farmers, they have nothing to farm. Aside from this many are still farmers, they are simply having their olive trees and new houses bulldozed. And as for those who are no longer farmers, so what? They may still want to be farmers, a livlihood the Israelis who stole their homes in turn stole from them.


All the original palistians are in there 60's. The so-called " Palistinian" Refugee's are syrians , lebenonese, Jordanian , Eygptgian , ect. Compensaton , YES ! Shoving millions of grandkids into a small strip of land , no !


1) The settlers doesn't want to be citizens of the palestinian state. Israelis who wanted that already got their palestinain passports (like Amira Has for instance), so it irrelevant.

But if we just had all the Israeli troops leave the settlements and just left the settlers alone , there would be no problem.


2) The arab population of Israel are israeli citizens, and wish to stay like that, so we should not transfer them - it would be racism.


Of course, ut thats what everyone is doin with settlers. Albeit, im no freind of those cappo's in the settlement mov't.



3) The palestinian refugees were exiled by Israel and never mingled (I hope that's the correct word) outside their homeland,

GO TO BEIRUT. There totaly intergrated with there hosts.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 11 2005, 06:40 PM
1) Is this not re-enforcing the apartied situation in israel/palistine ?
You're against apartheid? So are you for a united, democratic, secular state for both Israelis and Palestinians?


We demand the Settlements be dismantled , why do we not demand that arab villigages in israel be dismantled ?

Because that would reinforce the apartheid character of the Israeli state. I thought you were against that.


Why cant the settlers be citizens of a Arab State ?

Do they want to be? They didn't go there to live alongside Arabs as equals, but to live in an apartheid setup within the occupied territories. Even the non-political settlers, who might not be racists, went to live as privileged Israelis physically separated from the Palestinians.

This whole "anti-apartheid" argument by the settlers, which you repeat, is truly ironic because of course there's nothing more apartheid-like than the settlements.

Hey, if the Israeli state wants to just leave 'em there, fine. I'm sure most of 'em will leave faster than a cartoon roadrunner. A few diehard fanatics will go down fighting. But nobody is going to stay with the intent to become a Palestinian citizen. Get real.


2) Why do we suppourt the Right of Return Movement ? If Israel is not the birth right of my people after 2000 years in exile ( And its not ) , why is it the right of the children of palistinians , most of hom have never been to palistine.

Apples and oranges. Claiming the right to return to your home country - which is a basic human right for all people - is not the same as claiming the right to take over a country and expel or dominate its inhabitants- because you're better than the indigenous people, whose existence you refuse to even admit. So: we support the right of return because it's a basic human right that's been denied the victims of ethnic cleansing.

As for "children of palistinians , most of hom have never been to palistine." that wouldn't be an issue if Israel hadn't denied the right of return for decades, would it? That argument's like killing your parents, then asking the judge for mercy since you're an orphan.


Conversly , why dont we make demands for reperations for the Jewish Refugees living israel who were kicked out of arab countrys ?

Some people do. There is justice to this demand -though I'd be reluctant to send more money into the Israeli economy. Even more justice to the demand to end anti-Jewish persecution in those countries, so that those Israeli Jews who choose, can return to those Arab countries. But please explain why Palestinians should be punished for the actions of the Arab regimes, most of which also have Palestinian blood on their hands.


Why is it we never demand the cronies of European imperialism (EG Syria) Dismantle the Refugee camps and stop using the Refugees as political tools.

Palestinians do raise demands for better treatment in these countries. I support these demands. But they do not give up their demand, and human right, to return to their own homeland, Palestine, nor should they.

This argument, frequently raised by supporters of Israel and al-Naqba deniers, is bizarre anyway, since the Palestinians wouldn't even be in Syria if Israel hadn't ethnically cleansed them. It's also like the argument raised by segregationists in the southern U.S.: "Them Yankees don't want to live next to N***ers either." So that makes your racism OK?


Is Israel Imperialist or Comprador ? Isreal does not exactly have a high standard of livinmg , and the economy and goverment are subordinate to US intrests.

Imperialist. Not high compared to who? Definitely high compared to the Palestinians. Probably roughly comparable to Greece, guessing offhand? A subordinate junior partner of the U.S.


Also , what is the nature of the territorys ? there in a similar situation , except its seems Europe is pulling the strings ( France has historicly been the PA's biggest funder ).

Israel is pulling the strings more. The occupied territories are Bantustans which are, for all practical purposes, part of the Israeli state. Israel pretends they ain't so as to avoid granting their inhabitants citizenship. The whole PA thing is in large part a way of avoiding Israeli responsibility for providing social services to the occupied Palestinians...while retaining all other aspects of Israeli state power over them, including the right to send in troops whenever Tel Aviv pleases.

Since you're opposed to apartheid, are you for citizenship rights for occupied Palestinians, then?

***

Il Commie: "3) The palestinian refugees were exiled by Israel and never mingled (I hope that's the correct word) outside their homeland"

The correct word might be assimilated. A true statement if that's what you mean. However "integrated", they remain Palestinians.

[il Commie]

Originally posted by "JC1"+--> ("JC1")But if we just had all the Israeli troops leave the settlements and just left the settlers alone , there would be no problem.[/b]

That's a nice thought. That's just like thinking one democratic state from the river to the sea is possible. It's not! There is too much hatred between the settlers and the palestinians and too much weapon running from hand to hand in both the settlements and the palestinian authority - if the israeli troops leave without the evacuation of the settlers it would bring an enormous amount of bloodshed!

That's also why we can't form one democratic state for both sides of the green line - after so much war and bloodshed, the possibility of Nablus and Ramallah residents being equal citizens of Israel seems like a fantasy.


"JC1"
GO TO BEIRUT. There totaly intergrated with there hosts.

Some are, some are not. Especially in Lebanon the refugees are still a seperated community and considers themselves palestinian refugees.

I'm not saying all historical refugees should leave their current homes and come running to Israel, I'm saying the right of return is important for several reasons:
1) The big improvement in the economical situation of the poor refugees.
2) The recognition of Israel in some of the crimes we comitted.
3) The moral justice of the refugees which would particially return to their homeland.

[JC1]

You're against apartheid? So are you for a united, democratic, secular state for both Israelis and Palestinians?


Yes. However , it is up to the masses of Israel and Palistine to decide.


Because that would reinforce the apartheid character of the Israeli state. I thought you were against that.


I am.


Hey, if the Israeli state wants to just leave 'em there, fine. I'm sure most of 'em will leave faster than a cartoon roadrunner. A few diehard fanatics will go down fighting. But nobody is going to stay with the intent to become a Palestinian citizen. Get real.

So the problem would resolve itself. See, I got the right idea.


As for "children of palistinians , most of hom have never been to palistine." that wouldn't be an issue if Israel hadn't denied the right of return for decades, would it? That argument's like killing your parents, then asking the judge for mercy since you're an orphan.

The Comprador regimes in arab countries are too blame aswell for keepin' the palistinians pinned in camps.


This argument, frequently raised by supporters of Israel and al-Naqba deniers, is bizarre anyway, since the Palestinians wouldn't even be in Syria if Israel hadn't ethnically cleansed them. It's also like the argument raised by segregationists in the southern U.S.: "Them Yankees don't want to live next to N***ers either." So that makes your racism OK?

This statement makes no sense.


Imperialist. Not high compared to who? Definitely high compared to the Palestinians. Probably roughly comparable to Greece, guessing offhand? A subordinate junior partner of the U.S.

Compared to palistinians, yes. But comparisons dont determine wether the country is imperialist or not. I would say the country is comprador, becuase its natinol bourgoise is strangled by US Capital in that country. And from what people I know have told me, the SOL in israel is over rated.


That's a nice thought. That's just like thinking one democratic state from the river to the sea is possible. It's not! There is too much hatred between the settlers and the palestinians and too much weapon running from hand to hand in both the settlements and the palestinian authority - if the israeli troops leave without the evacuation of the settlers it would bring an enormous amount of bloodshed!

That's also why we can't form one democratic state for both sides of the green line - after so much war and bloodshed, the possibility of Nablus and Ramallah residents being equal citizens of Israel seems like a fantasy.


This is not a materialist analysis. Sides' Israeli's and Arabs are easy goin people anyways.


1) The big improvement in the economical situation of the poor refugees.



reperations would accomplish that task.


2) The recognition of Israel in some of the crimes we comitted

Instead of crammin' people into a already over populated strip of land , why not a paper apology and aid ?


3) The moral justice of the refugees which would particially return to their homeland.

This ade no sense.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2005, 08:05 PM
Instead of crammin' people into a already over populated strip of land , why not a paper apology and aid ?
Israel...an overpopulated strip of land?

Excuse me, but Israeli agriculture is already dependent on Palestinian labor. Palestinians coming across the Green Line to work the land which was stolen from them in 1948. Why shouldn't they come back and live on the land, which they're working anyway

When they're not available, due to military closures and so forth, people are brought from Thailand or elsewhere to work the land. Guess Israel's not too overpopulated after all, huh?

In reality, the rural areas of Israel, from which most Palestinians were expelled, are sparsely populated today.

That leaves Area C, which is 86% of Israel. This is largely the land and the home of the Palestinian refugees. Who lives there today? Apart from the remaining Palestinians, the majority of the Jews there live in originally Palestinian, now mixed, cities and a few new towns. The average size of a new town in Area C is comparable to the size of a refugee camp. If Jabaliya camp were a town in Israel, its rank in terms of size would be in the top 8% of Israeli urban centers.

Who then controls the vast Palestinian land in area C? Only 160,000 rural Jews exploit the land and heritage of over 5 million refugees packed in refugee camps and denied the right to return.source (http://www.al-awda.org/debatewthtikkunonrefugees/)

Not surprisingly, Zionism has failed to turn Jews into a rural, agricultural people. Heck, why would they want that?

As the kibbutzim continue to decay from within, this reality is likely to become even more pronounced.

So the real reason for denying the right of return has nothing to do with "overpopulation" or there not being any room for Palestinians. It has everything to do with preserving a majority of Jewish voters. But that can't be preserved forever anyway unless there is a new expulsion.


The Comprador regimes in arab countries are too blame aswell for keepin' the palistinians pinned in camps.



This argument, frequently raised by supporters of Israel and al-Naqba deniers, is bizarre anyway, since the Palestinians wouldn't even be in Syria if Israel hadn't ethnically cleansed them. It's also like the argument raised by segregationists in the southern U.S.: "Them Yankees don't want to live next to N***ers either." So that makes your racism OK?
This statement makes no sense.

It makes perfect sense, and your refusal to come to grips with it is your main political problem.

You keep raising the misdeeds of the Arab states as excuses for Israeli racism. But there is and can be no such excuse.

[JC1]

Israel...an overpopulated strip of land?

In a lil' strip o' land we got 8 million people.

[Severian]

And only 160,000 people in 85% of it. Deal with my points please.

[il Commie]

Israel is not overpopulated. The Negev area is almost empty. Anyway, most of the refugees leave in the WB and Gaza.

[Phalanx]

Isn't the only overpopulated area the Plain of Sharon? But then again, most of that area is built up.

[JC1]

Do they want to be? They didn't go there to live alongside Arabs as equals, but to live in an apartheid setup within the occupied territories. Even the non-political settlers, who might not be racists, went to live as privileged Israelis physically separated from the Palestinians.

This whole "anti-apartheid" argument by the settlers, which you repeat, is truly ironic because of course there's nothing more apartheid-like than the settlements.

Hey, if the Israeli state wants to just leave 'em there, fine. I'm sure most of 'em will leave faster than a cartoon roadrunner. A few diehard fanatics will go down fighting. But nobody is going to stay with the intent to become a Palestinian citizen. Get real.


This is the crux of youre argument.


Originally posted by "http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/newscontent.php3?artid=11015"
Mr. Abbas, Let My People Stay

Stewart Ain

Ogen Drori wants to stay in the West Bank so bad, he’s asking Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas for that privilege.

Drori lives in one of four settlements slated to be dismantled and forcibly evacuated this summer, and is circulating a petition among fellow residents asking Abbas to grant them political asylum so they may remain in their homes. He said the petition has 10 signatures from five families.

“We are very serious about this,” said the 28-year-old private detective from Kadim. “This is not just something we are doing for the newspapers. The State of Israel has given us a knife in the back. We believe we should still live in this country. If the Israeli government doesn’t want us, we [believe we] can still stay here. We believe all the country is Israel.”

Drori said that from 1983 to 1985, he regularly visited Palestinians in the nearby Arab town of Jenin.

“I played soccer there for two years, and I ate in their restaurants and went to movies there,” he said. “We lived together.”

That ended when the first intifada erupted in 1988, but Drori said contact resumed after the Oslo Accords were signed between Israelis and Palestinians in 1993. It ended with the second intifada, which began in September 2000.

“I still have connections over there and I have friends over there,” he said. “Why not stay here? Why not live together?”

“I believe that Abu Mazen will provide good protection for us,” Drori said, using Abbas’ nickname. “I don’t believe we will have a problem.”

Drori said someone who knows Abbas has promised to bring him the petition before the end of the month. And if Abbas rejects the request, Drori said a copy will be sent to the United Nations to ask for refugee status.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 16 2005, 03:16 PM
(Settler quoted in the article)
"We believe all the country is Israel.”


Speaks for itself.

[viva le revolution]

The settlers want to hang on their land no matter what! They say that the state of Israel betrayed them, wasn't Israel the one that put them there in the first place?
If anything it is the Palestinians that have been stabbed in the back by the world. From the U.S's supposedly mediator role, A silent Europe(when it was actually Britain that created the whole mess promising the land to both jews and arabs), Money-hungry arab regimes who are silent(as long as the dollars flow in).
Trusting the developed first-world for any resolution to this conflict is just pointless since they created this mess. Trusting the United Nations is also pointless. The solution will be a land populated by jews AND arabs. A socialist government. a worker's state. The first step would be to kick all illegal settlers. all who use religion to justify their presence. You take religion out of the equation and the settlers don't have much of an arguement for staying there.
A religion-oriented state is the root of all evil, A jewish Israel, A muslim Palestine, A christian U.S.