Jerusalem as an international city (state)

[NorthStarRepublicML]

the idea here is that if peace is ever to be achieved between Palestinians and Israelis the governing status of the city of Jerusalem will be a major point of contention ....

anyway ... the question is, aside from the legitimacy of a two state agreement or the other issues .... should Jerusalem be governed as an international city through power sharing on the part of Islamic, Jewish, and Christian players?


Most of the Christian Arabs, according to the polls, favor Jerusalem becoming an international city, run by the UN. Israeli and Palestinian leaders reject that idea.

would the UN really be the best way to pursue this? or would a Holy See styled city-state be a better option? perhaps some other international body?

in any case is this a viable solution?

here are a couple of sources on the topic:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/1638968.stm

http://geography.about.com/library/weekly/aa080300a.htm

[Dr Mindbender]

Why not? Wasnt Berlin an international city once? (west and East Germany)

I watched a documentary once and they nearly nailed this around the time that Yitzak Rabin was assasinated. They were going to split the holy area 50/50. Aparently they werent able to agree on the ownership of a wall underneath the great dome. Oh well.

[Cooler Reds Will Prevail]

No.

Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinian people. Not the Israelis, not anybody else. Until we reach a point where it can be assured that the Palestinians will not be continually oppressed and taken advantage of by Israelis and others, the city cannot be "shared". Sharing Jerusalem would signify near-slavery for the Arabs and complete hegemonic domination by foreign interests. I suppose in a future socialist society, this would be a great idea. But not now. A free, independent nation in all of historic Palestine, run by the Palestinian people, is the only fair solution.

http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photos/news_photos_ii/pflp3.jpg

[pusher robot]

Originally posted by I chicorazon [email protected] 23, 2007 09:39 am
No.

Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinian people. Not the Israelis, not anybody else. Until we reach a point where it can be assured that the Palestinians will not be continually oppressed and taken advantage of by Israelis and others, the city cannot be "shared". Sharing Jerusalem would signify near-slavery for the Arabs and complete hegemonic domination by foreign interests. I suppose in a future socialist society, this would be a great idea. But not now. A free, independent nation in all of historic Palestine, run by the Palestinian people, is the only fair solution.

http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photos/news_photos_ii/pflp3.jpg
I'm starting to think the only solution is to nuke the whole place to kingdom fucking come, with lots of "dirty" nukes, rendering it totally inhabitable for at least 500 years. That ought to give everybody a nice "cooling off" period.

[spartan]

jerusalem dosent belong to any one group of humans it belongs to all the proletarians in the world. some peoples tribalism makes me sick especially from so called leftists.

[Dean]

Originally posted by pusher [email protected] 23, 2007 03:00 pm
I'm starting to think the only solution is to nuke the whole place to kingdom fucking come, with lots of "dirty" nukes, rendering it totally inhabitable for at least 500 years. That ought to give everybody a nice "cooling off" period.
I'm glad the Israelis / Palestinians don't agree with you.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinian people. Not the Israelis, not anybody else.

well good luck with that .... as i understand it that fight has been happening in one form or another since biblical times ...

Jerusalem has changed hands more times then a thai hooker ...

i agree that any one group or people has claim, many have claim, and many are legitimate claims ....

what would be the harm in making Jerusalem an international city governed by an equal numbers of Jews, Christian, Muslims and any other groups (Mandaeism) that have holy sites within the city?

maybe similar to Lebanon, where the President, for example, has to be a Maronite Catholic Christian, the Prime Minister a Sunni Muslim, the Deputy Prime Minister an Orthodox Christian, and the Speaker of the Parliament a Shi’a Muslim.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by I chicorazon [email protected] 23, 2007 02:39 am
No.

Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinian people. Not the Israelis, not anybody else. Until we reach a point where it can be assured that the Palestinians will not be continually oppressed and taken advantage of by Israelis and others, the city cannot be "shared". Sharing Jerusalem would signify near-slavery for the Arabs and complete hegemonic domination by foreign interests. I suppose in a future socialist society, this would be a great idea. But not now. A free, independent nation in all of historic Palestine, run by the Palestinian people, is the only fair solution.

Warning!!!:

Post contains graphic Images depicting death.













Do us all a favour and remove the word "Communist" from your title.

Communists don't bother with ultra-nationalist wars among oppressive religious fundamentalists.

I know that young men thing it's fascinating to dress up in costumes and play war but in the real world most of the people like the one you posted end up dead.

And not of natural causes in the Hospital at 94 years old. They end up dying from massive physical trauma to their bodies in their teens and early twenties.

http://www.hategun.com/blog/images/suicideBomberKid.jpg

http://sfgate.com/c/pictures/2005/06/14/mn_tikritcarbombkk9014.jpg


Still wanna play dress up kid?

[Cooler Reds Will Prevail]

Let me rephrase what I meant.

All people have right to live in historic Palestine, regardless of ethnicity or religion. All people would have a right to participate in the civic structure of a new Palestinian state. However, given that we live in a capitalist world, creating an international city would only augment the suffering of the Palestinian people economically by opening up the city to foreign businesses and imperialist powers even further. More Palestinians would be kicked out of their homes by extreme gentrification of the city that would logically ensue. I don't support tribal factionalism and believe the Jews have a right to live in the region as well as Arabs. However, this doesn't give them the right to rob the Palestinians of their land and livelihood by doing so. I do not support the existence of the state of Israel in any form or fashion and believe that all Palestinians have a right to return to their land... If this requires that Israelis currently living on these stolen lands move, so be it.

And the picture was of the PFLP... Secular, Marxist, offering basically the same solution to the problem as myself. Please don't insult your own intelligence by posting pictures of Hamas.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Originally posted by chiquito
Let me rephrase what I meant.

Keep rephrasing and rephrasing until you finally get it right son.

[Tower of Bebel]

Both the Palestitnians and the Israelites have the right to live in this region, and have the right to visit or live in the city of Jerusalem. Jerusalem does not have to be ruled by the UN, by the Palestinian government or the Israeli government. The city should be owned by its inhabitants.

[Vinny Rafarino]

and the picture was of the PFLP... Secular, Marxist, offering basically the same solution to the problem as myself. Please don't insult your own intelligence by posting pictures of Hamas.


Since you're confused about the PFLP, let me sort it out for you:

February 20, 1969 -- The bombing of a Jerusalem supermarket on killing two Israelis and wounding twenty others.

February 10, 1970 -- Attack on a bus containing El Al passengers at Munich airport, killing one passenger and wounding 11

February 21, 1970 -- The bombing, with a barometric pressure device, of a Swissair flight bound for Israel, killing 47

And most recently:

A suicide bombing in a pizzeria in Karnei Shomron, on the West Bank on February 16, 2002, killing three Israeli settlers.

A suicide bombing in Ariel on March 7, 2002, which left wounded but no fatalities.

A suicide bombing in a Netanya market in Israel, on May 19, 2002, killing three Israelis. This attack was also claimed by Hamas but the Abu Ali Mustafa Brigades have identified the perpetrator on their website as one of their members

A suicide bombing in the bus station at Geha Junction in Petah Tikva on 25
December, 2003 which killed 4 Israelis.

A suicide bombing in Bikat Hayerden on May 22 , 2004 , which left no fatalities.

A suicide bombing in the Carmel Market in Tel Aviv on November 1, 2004 , which killed 3 Israeli civilians.


I think it's much more insulting to ones intelligence to pretend that these wackos are even remotely a communist organization.

I hope it makes you feel proud to see your buddies here blowing up children.

[Phalanx]

You forgot to mention the Ma'alot Massacre.

DPLF members (the DFLP was the terrorist faction PFLP belonged to before the split) infiltrated a Ma'alot highschool and held hostage 100 teenagers and teachers. The Israeli army tried to eliminate the terrorists, but not before the terrorists had gunned down 26 children.

Now, I know you'd probably condemned the Beslan massacre, so what's with the double standards here, "communist extraordinaire"?

[NorthStarRepublicML]

I hope it makes you feel proud to see your buddies here blowing up children.

yo, stick to the topic of the thread ... Vinny, Phalanx, if you want to turn every thread into Islam=Terrorism=Imperialism discussion you are not going to get very far ... you just end up looking like an asshole ...

anyway here is the topic:

anyway ... the question is, aside from the legitimacy of a two state agreement or the other issues .... should Jerusalem be governed as an international city through power sharing on the part of Islamic, Jewish, and Christian players?

with your continued slander of Muslims (in this thread and in every other one you seem to post in) you have become quite boring ....

what do you think of the topic?

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 23, 2007 05:02 pm

Jerusalem belongs to the Palestinian people. Not the Israelis, not anybody else.

well good luck with that .... as i understand it that fight has been happening in one form or another since biblical times ...
You understand wrong. The Israelis and Palestinians were not always at odds; about a century ago, militant Zionism started to take hold in many Jewish circles, the belief being that the Jews had a right to a theocratic or exclusive state in Palestine. Before this, there had been a lasting peace in the "holy lands," with different groups like the Christians and Romans having meddled there for various reasons. Of course, in 1948 the Israeli state was formed, starting the current mess. That doesn't mean the Palestinians have an exclusive right, but I think the issue of states needs to be resolved before the consideration of Jerusalem can take place.

[NorthStarRepublicML]

You understand wrong.

you misunderstand ... and as the following line of the quote says


Jerusalem has changed hands more times then a thai hooker

i was not specifically speaking to the Jews and Palestinians ... the Levant has been held by many different peoples, Hittites, Crusaders, Sumerians, Canaanities, Muslims, Jews, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, Persians, Ottomans ... on and on .....

yes, in one form or another ... just like many places on earth, the place has been a battlefield since biblical times ... the idea that any one people have claim to a specific land because of historical reasons is petty much bullshit ...

[LSD]

Jerusalem has changed hands more times then a thai hooker ...

Are hookers in Thailand particularly promiscuous? I would think that by the nature of their job, pretty much all prostitutes would have their fair share of sex partners.

Speaking of non sequiturs, what's this doing in Religion?

Moved to OI!

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 01:08 am
Speaking of non sequiturs, what's this doing in Religion?

Moved to OI!
Probably conflation of Judaism or Islam with the Palestinians and Israelis.

But the fact that Zionism is religious, and so are many of the oppositional groups, adds that context to it anyways...

[RNK]

Vinny, mind informing us gawking masses what the PFLP has to do with Islam? Surely one like you must know that the PFLP is a secular entity, and was infact started and headed by a Palestinian christian. If I didn't know better, I'd say that blows your anti-"jihadist" bullshit out of the water. How can something be jihadist, ie, a movement of warriors of Allah, if it isn't even Islamic in nature? I mean, I could even go so far as to surmise that your renunciation of the PFLP is on the basis of its racial makeup, which is, afterall, primarily Arabs. But then I'd be hinting at your latent racism -- and as we all know, Islam isn't a race.

But Arabs are.

[spartan]

im starting to think that nuking this place would not be such a bad idea after all. at least then we would not be wasting are breath argueing over these reactionaries for thats what all sides in this fucking fucked up land are reactionaries.

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 10:45 am
im starting to think that nuking this place would not be such a bad idea after all. at least then we would not be wasting are breath argueing over these reactionaries for thats what all sides in this fucking fucked up land are reactionaries.
Yeah, because no one involved in the conflict is a human being, nonetheless a worker. :rolleyes:
We get it, you don't like Arabs. Get over it.

As for the original topic; I like this idea. Would solve plenty for all sides.

As a sidenote:

Speaking of non sequiturs, what's this doing in Religion?

Moved to OI!
He originally moved it to politics, until I told him you posted it in Religion cause you were restricted, NSRML. :P

[NorthStarRepublicML]

Are hookers in Thailand particularly promiscuous?

never been to Bangkok eh?


Speaking of non sequiturs, what's this doing in Religion?

Jerusalem is holy to the three major monotheistic religions, this Religious issue is one the major points of dispute between the current combatants ...

[spartan]

come on rev0lt i didnt just say arabs i said all sides and i meant the whole of the holy land not just jerusalem. i hate zionists, islamists, etc, etc. fuck them all i say! we can only trust our own which i sadly dont think includes you rev0lt seeing how your pro religious extremism :D

[EwokUtopia]

Good luck trying to impliment this idea. I seem to recall that the UN proposed the same thing in '47, and we all know how well that went over.

Lets take things one step at a time, for the moment, Jerusalem isnt the most important issue in Palestine, the colonization of the west bank is, thats what has to be stopped, thats what has to end as soon as possible, we can worry about Jerusalem, and the greater problem at large once we see that the Palestinians are not being forced out of the last bits of land they have left.

In North America, all we can really do is work against the Zionists here (which I find are mostly Christian) and try to cut at least some funds, but this is a slow matter and it will not be overturned overnight.


I think that we also must fundamentally not look at the issue at large as the issue of Jews vs. Arabs. Remember that this city is holy to three faiths, not two, and one would have to be insane to think that the third faith, the largest and wealthiest by far, is not responsible for this. Israel is a Christian formation as much as it is a Jewish one, lets not forget that the bastard who signed that land over to the Zionists in 1917 was a Christian, or that Israel recieves extremely vital support from the only developed state in the world that is still majority religious. As this is in the religion subforum, I felt that this was necessary to note.

[spartan]

hey how about we set up and fund a new crusade made up of christians who are both anti zionist and anti islamist and send them to the holy land? that would sort this shit out and the jews and arabs would never see it coming!. one minute the jews and arabs would be fighting to death and over the hill comes thousands of christian crusaders! the jews and arabs might find they have something common then a common enemy!

edit:dont take seriously :D

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 03:15 pm
come on rev0lt i didnt just say arabs i said all sides and i meant the whole of the holy land not just jerusalem. i hate zionists, islamists, etc, etc. fuck them all i say! we can only trust our own which i sadly dont think includes you rev0lt seeing how your pro religious extremism :D
If we can only trust our own(atheist communists/anarchists) then we'll never get anywhere; not to mention nuking every single group of people you don't agree with.

Oh well, I guess it's to be expected of a Utopian communist who's 17 years old. Believe what you will, because frankly, I could care less anymore.

[spartan]

fair enough rev0lt but i am not going to ally myself with groups that could bring us down stab us in the back and endanger the worldwide global proletarian revolution. thats all im going to say. perhaps we should agree to disagree? oh and dont be ageist.

[Faux Real]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 03:52 pm
fair enough rev0lt but i am not going to ally myself with groups that could bring us down stab us in the back and endanger the worldwide global proletarian revolution.
They are proletarian! We can help "show them the light" through example. We should critically examine each one of these groups on a case by case basis and not generalize over what they do or what their goals are instead of being dismissive. Also, if we treat them well and see them as valuable allies(rather than merely human resources) it would lower the chances of them stabbing us in the back and maybe even pull them to our side. ;)

thats all im going to say. perhaps we should agree to disagree?
Yes, sir. Just please don't go around nuking everywhere.

oh and dont be ageist.
My bad, that was low of me. :lol:

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 12:13 am

You understand wrong.

you misunderstand ... and as the following line of the quote says


Jerusalem has changed hands more times then a thai hooker

i was not specifically speaking to the Jews and Palestinians ... the Levant has been held by many different peoples, Hittites, Crusaders, Sumerians, Canaanities, Muslims, Jews, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, Persians, Ottomans ... on and on .....

yes, in one form or another ... just like many places on earth, the place has been a battlefield since biblical times ... the idea that any one people have claim to a specific land because of historical reasons is petty much bullshit ...
So has Rome, but I don't see anybody concerning themselves with the legitimacy of Italy's right to control it.

Maybe no people have a legitimacy to the land, at least in regards to excluding others. But that doesn't mean we need to think of it in terms of internationalism in any different sense than any other land.

If it is in regards to disputed lands, then a lot of lands that are currently disputed might need to be international. But that means something bad for those it was taken, usually some kind of oppression, and something counterintuitive about historically disputed lands which are now peaceful.

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 26, 2007 05:45 pm
im starting to think that nuking this place would not be such a bad idea after all. at least then we would not be wasting are breath argueing over these reactionaries for thats what all sides in this fucking fucked up land are reactionaries.
you're pretty fucking fucked up for your bigotry and interest in "nuking" entire populations.

Goddamn it's hard to see myself a communist and think people like you call themselves the same. We are communists, not bigots, and especially not murderers.

EDIT: Maybe I just care about not nuking them because I know people who live there. Or maybe you know people there too and don't give a shit.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 03:17 am
So has Rome, but I don't see anybody concerning themselves with the legitimacy of Italy's right to control it.
You forget the Catholic Church, they have occupied a hill in Rome since Mussolini's days ;) .

[Dean]

Originally posted by EwokUtopia+August 27, 2007 04:57 am--> (EwokUtopia @ August 27, 2007 04:57 am)
[email protected] 27, 2007 03:17 am
So has Rome, but I don't see anybody concerning themselves with the legitimacy of Italy's right to control it.
You forget the Catholic Church, they have occupied a hill in Rome since Mussolini's days ;) . [/b]
But then, is that a big point of contention? I don't think most people care, the Italian police even control security there.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Vinny, mind informing us gawking masses what the PFLP has to do with Islam?

Read the thread son.

[EwokUtopia]

Originally posted by Dean+August 27, 2007 06:05 am--> (Dean @ August 27, 2007 06:05 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 04:57 am

[email protected] 27, 2007 03:17 am
So has Rome, but I don't see anybody concerning themselves with the legitimacy of Italy's right to control it.
You forget the Catholic Church, they have occupied a hill in Rome since Mussolini's days ;) .
But then, is that a big point of contention? I don't think most people care, the Italian police even control security there. [/b]
I wasnt being super serious, I just can never pass a shot at the Catholic church.

[Dean]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27, 2007 06:48 pm
I wasnt being super serious, I just can never pass a shot at the Catholic church.
Who can?

[EKOLYT3]

Originally posted by Dean+August 27, 2007 03:17 am--> (Dean @ August 27, 2007 03:17 am)
[email protected] 26, 2007 12:13 am

You understand wrong.

you misunderstand ... and as the following line of the quote says


Jerusalem has changed hands more times then a thai hooker

i was not specifically speaking to the Jews and Palestinians ... the Levant has been held by many different peoples, Hittites, Crusaders, Sumerians, Canaanities, Muslims, Jews, Greeks, Romans, Parthians, Persians, Ottomans ... on and on .....

yes, in one form or another ... just like many places on earth, the place has been a battlefield since biblical times ... the idea that any one people have claim to a specific land because of historical reasons is petty much bullshit ...
So has Rome, but I don't see anybody concerning themselves with the legitimacy of Italy's right to control it.

Maybe no people have a legitimacy to the land, at least in regards to excluding others. But that doesn't mean we need to think of it in terms of internationalism in any different sense than any other land.

If it is in regards to disputed lands, then a lot of lands that are currently disputed might need to be international. But that means something bad for those it was taken, usually some kind of oppression, and something counterintuitive about historically disputed lands which are now peaceful. [/b]
Humans are never satisfied are they? Make Jerusalem an international state and it'll just open up a Pandora's box of trouble.