Altered Maps XII: Not to Scale

In the end, logic will reign supreme. No thanks.
 
I spent a good 3 seconds making that avatar tailored perfectly for you! :(
 
Wow! Are you seriously this blinkered? Can you seriously only see things from one point of view?

I do see the other point of view, I just don't take it seriously. During the initial negotiations concerning the future of the British mandate, the Jews repeatedly accepted what they've been offered (much less than what they eventually won), while the Arabs fanatically opposed any deal that would have given the Jews but a square centimetre of land. Eventually, they ignored all that's been agreed in the UN, took up arms against the Jews, and lost.

Now they act as huge crybabies complaining about the results of actions they themselves have started.

So, "you people" can fantasize about returning Israel to pre-1967, pre-1948, or even pre-1947 borders, but it's not going to happen. Peace, if possible, requires pragmatic and realistic view of what the situation in the Near East is like today. Palestinians will never be sovereign and independent in the same way Jordan is - Israel's security interests won't permit that. AT BEST, they should ask for most of the West Bank, resign to the fact that the big Jewish settlements are going to stay, agree on a shared administration of East Jerusalem, and form a free-trade, free-movement of labour economic zone with Israel.

You surely appreciate that this will be hard to negotiate while Hamás shoots missiles at Israeli towns which are *inside* the internationally recognized Israeli borders and not subject to any future land-swap agreements.
 
Winner, this discussion is (a) classic chicken and egg and (b) liable to sidetrack the thread completely.
 
I do see the other point of view, I just don't take it seriously.
I would suggest that this "not taking it seriously" is symptomatic of not appreciating the other point of view.

Doesn't the difference between the map of Jewish settlement and the map of the 48 partition strike you as extraordinary?

Didn't the policy of ethnic cleansing instigated by the nascent Israeli state strike you as unjust?

During the initial negotiations concerning the future of the British mandate, the Jews repeatedly accepted what they've been offered (much less than what they eventually won), while the Arabs fanatically opposed any deal that would have given the Jews but a square centimetre of land. Eventually, they ignored all that's been agreed in the UN, took up arms against the Jews, and lost.

Now they act as huge crybabies complaining about the results of actions they themselves have started.

Characterizing an entire ~6 million people as crybabies doesn't reassure me that your point of view is objective, at all.

So, "you people" can fantasize about returning Israel to pre-1967, pre-1948, or even pre-1947 borders, but it's not going to happen. Peace, if possible, requires pragmatic and realistic view of what the situation in the Near East is like today. Palestinians will never be sovereign and independent in the same way Jordan is - Israel's security interests won't permit that. AT BEST, they should ask for most of the West Bank, resign to the fact that the big Jewish settlements are going to stay, agree on a shared administration of East Jerusalem, and form a free-trade, free-movement of labour economic zone with Israel.
"Me people"? Come now. All this indicates is your own partisan position. Why you've chosen this stance I can only speculate.

But yes, I agree, it's not going to happen. All I intend with taking the "discussion" back to 48 is to suggest the reason for the deep-seated resentment of the Israelis that seems to be coming from the Palestinians.

You surely appreciate that this will be hard to negotiate while Hamás shoots missiles at Israeli towns which are *inside* the internationally recognized Israeli borders and not subject to any future land-swap agreements.
I don't support armed conflict under any circumstances.

My own feeling on this conflict is that the injustice to the Palestinians is never going to be addressed.

I think it's the long term goal of the Israelis to steadily continue to erode both Gaza and the West Bank. And make it increasingly impossible for Palestinians to live there.

Their aim, I suggest, is to push the Palestinians into the sea, from Gaza, and into Jordan from the West Bank.

I wish Israel all the best of luck in every way. I think it a very great shame that the Palestinians have borne, and must bear, such a cost for this.

The price that Israel must bear, in the foreseeable short term, is continued terrorist attacks and loss of prestige in international public opinion. I think they know this very well.

Anyway, this discussion which I do thank you for, btw, interesting as it is, strictly belongs in one of the other current Israel-Palestine/Palestine-Israel threads.

I'd searched high and low in them for this particular debate, until stumbling on it here!
 
I can understand why they want the West Bank. I mean, large parts of ancient Judea and Samaria are there.
 
hm41g.png


A very rough first plan for a backpacking trip through Europe

A - Lisbon
B - Madrid
C - Barcelona
D - French Riviera
E - A hike in northern Italy or Switzerland, maybe this place
F - Munich
G - Prague
H - Berlin
I - Amsterdam
J - Rotterdam
K - Paris
L - London
 
I am surprised. Very surprised. The name of Zaragoza appears in Catalan. :wow:

But yeah, nice route. Tell me when you come to Barcelona. :D
 
I am surprised. Very surprised. The name of Zaragoza appears in Catalan. :wow:
I think that's just the original English transliteration of the name, until people started spelling it Zaragoza because that's the "proper Spanish name". At least that's how it is in German.
 
Ah, interesting. :think:
 
A very rough first plan for a backpacking trip through Europe

A - Lisbon
B - Madrid
C - Barcelona
D - French Riviera
E - A hike in northern Italy or Switzerland, maybe this place
F - Munich
G - Prague
H - Berlin
I - Amsterdam
J - Rotterdam
K - Paris
L - London
At E I would take Italy over Switzerland. Also I would definetely change F to Vienna, or put Vienna in after Munich.
 
At E I would take Italy over Switzerland. Also I would definetely change F to Vienna, or put Vienna in after Munich.
Exactly what I thought. Vienna > Munich, at least if you want to take that detour.
 
Back
Top Bottom