Israel/Palestine: one state or two

[Elponitnatsnoc]

I tentatively voted two states. The Palestinians have a LOT of work to do before they're ready for an actual country. We can't let them follow in the footsteps of Africa and give them independence when they're blatantly not ready for it.

 

[warpus]

Yeah and how many are there? How many "white jews" that have no blood line back to the days of Jesus are there?

Uhm.. a lot.

 

[skadistic]

Uhm.. a lot.

Quantify a lot. In proportion to Jews who can trace linage back. And what % of that is in Israel?

You make it sound like the religion with the fewest converts is made up of mostly converts?

 

[Neonanocyborgasm]

Heard a neat little debate this morning an a CBC series called The Current on the fate of Israel in the future vis-a-vis the situation with Palestine. It involved two scholars, one palestinian and one israeli, that agreed that the status quo is not working, but had very different solutions as to how to proceed.(I don't have a transcript, or even the names of the participants, unfortunately, but I'll try to sum up the viewpoints as best as I can recall).

The first argued that partitioning Israel is not feasible, simply for the fact that the palestinian territories are not self-sufficient on thier own, and that in spite of land deals, no one, israeli or palestinian, wants to move. The only way to achieve peace, he stated, is by a reform of the Israeli governmental system so that both sides are represented, and that a national campaign of reconcilliation be started, not unlike what has happened in SOuth Africa and Northern Ireland.

The other argued that palestinians and israelis were simply too different to lump together in a single state. The state of Israel, he argued, is tied to much to the jewish faith and jewish nationalism to be able to change that much, and that trying to incorporate the two people into a single state would result in the end of Israel as we know it, and misery for both parties. In his words, "we [israel and pesltine] just need a good diveroce lawyer".

It was an interesting debate, and I was wondering what people might think here. In short:

How will peace in Israel/Palestine be achieved: through a one state or two state solution?

Both positions are irrelevant. There is simply nothing in it for the state of Israel to marry Palestine into a single coalition state. Doing so would bring along all of the divisive factions and conflicts that the current Palestinian Authority struggles with. It would be like marrying someone whose entire family is nothing but drunks and thieves, and hoping to reform them.

 

[warpus]

Quantify a lot. In proportion to Jews who can trace linage back. And what % of that is in Israel?

You make it sound like the religion with the fewest converts is made up of mostly converts?

No, I'm just saying that not all Jews are ethnic Hebrews.

 

[Che Guava]

Both positions are irrelevant. There is simply nothing in it for the state of Israel to marry Palestine into a single coalition state. Doing so would bring along all of the divisive factions and conflicts that the current Palestinian Authority struggles with. It would be like marrying someone whose entire family is nothing but drunks and thieves, and hoping to reform them.

I've got a surprise for you: they're already married! By both claiming the same little strip of land in the middle east and identifying with it, their fates are already intertwined.

The only problem is that israel is married to someone they, rightly or wrongly, keep locked in the back room. The choice has to be to free them to choose thier own destiny, or formalize a fair and equitable partnership.

And if both positions are irrelevant, why did you vote for the second one?

 

[Ecofarm]

I've lost the will to care about Israel/Palestine. Neither side seems willing to compromise, which is understandable, since they both have legitimate claims to the same territory. But with neither side willing to give, I just don't see how 1 state can ever work.

That's why Israel needs to negotiate, but also why it's so damn hard to give anything up for peace. since there is a feeling of entitlement for winning the wars. But it's the rare exception when a war removes the underlying cause of a conflict.

Israel gave back war winnings already: the Golan Heights and the Sinai Peninsula. Remember that? Israel "won" those in war, and gave them back for peace. Also, Israel has removed their own people from settlements - representing the voluntary internal displacement of Israelis.

Now if Israel is willing to give back two VERY important (strategically) pieces of land won in war AND voluntarily displace their own citizens for the benefit of Palestinians, how can you say that Israel has not been "willing to give"?

Now, what did Israel get in return for these concessions? More suicide bombers...

If the Palistinian people had used the very expensive greenhouses that Isael left behind when they internally displaced (instead of destroying them in mindless riots) then they might have some semblance of agriculture and self-reliance. It's not Israel's fault that Palestinians destroyed those greenhouses. It is just another example of Israel giving and Arabs not giving a damn. Arabs want Israel "wiped off the map" no matter how many concessions or gifts the Israelis present.

I voted other (2 states, different reason); as much as I would like to see one state - I just do not think it is possible. The reason I vote other is that it is not the differences between the people that makes unity impossible - it is the lack of a sectarian government. My idea is the installment of a sectarian government.

 

[angrybellsprout]

Quantify a lot. In proportion to Jews who can trace linage back. And what % of that is in Israel?

You make it sound like the religion with the fewest converts is made up of mostly converts?

You make it sound like there have never been any large scale conversions to Judiasm.

 

[Elponitnatsnoc]

No, I'm just saying that not all Jews are ethnic Hebrews.

Well it's nearly impossible to tell, but because Judaism does not actively seek converts, most of the current Jews are likely decended from the Hebrews.

 

[Elponitnatsnoc]

You make it sound like there have never been any large scale conversions to Judiasm.

That's because there hasn't!

- with the only exception being the Khazars and the Ethopian Jews (not too many of them) that I can think of.

 

[skadistic]

You make it sound like there have never been any large scale conversions to Judiasm.

Large scale? I highly doubt it. Can you site some?

 

[angrybellsprout]

Large scale? I highly doubt it. Can you site some?

Since my entire point has been about the slavic / turkic jews, then I'd simply point out the Khazar conversion.

 

[skadistic]

Since my entire point has been about the slavic / turkic jews, then I'd simply point out the Khazar conversion.

And how many was that? Everything I've ever read about it is they can't say how many. So if a bunch of experts can't say how many how can you say it was large scale? Some scholars say it was only the ruling elite. Just how many people were living in the area at the time? And how many converted? If you are going to point to something you might want to be able to give some credible numbers.

 

[angrybellsprout]

And how many was that? Everything I've ever read about it is they can't say how many. So if a bunch of experts can't say how many how can you say it was large scale? Some scholars say it was only the ruling elite. Just how many people were living in the area at the time? And how many converted? If you are going to point to something you might want to be able to give some credible numbers.

Just like the ruling elite of Rome converted to the Christian faith...

 

[skadistic]

Just like the ruling elite of Rome converted to the Christian faith...

Is it? Are you sure? Do you have supporting documentation? If you do then you can give some numbers right?

 

[hossam]

Israel gave back war winnings already: the Golan Heights and the Sinai Peninsula. Remember that? Israel "won" those in war, and gave them back for peace. Also, Israel has removed their own people from settlements - representing the voluntary internal displacement of Israelis.

Now if Israel is willing to give back two VERY important (strategically) pieces of land won in war AND voluntarily displace their own citizens for the benefit of Palestinians, how can you say that Israel has not been "willing to give"?

Now, what did Israel get in return for these concessions? More suicide bombers...

If the Palistinian people had used the very expensive greenhouses that Isael left behind when they internally displaced (instead of destroying them in mindless riots) then they might have some semblance of agriculture and self-reliance. It's not Israel's fault that Palestinians destroyed those greenhouses. It is just another example of Israel giving and Arabs not giving a damn. Arabs want Israel "wiped off the map" no matter how many concessions or gifts the Israelis present.

I voted other (2 states, different reason); as much as I would like to see one state - I just do not think it is possible. The reason I vote other is that it is not the differences between the people that makes unity impossible - it is the lack of a sectarian government. My idea is the installment of a sectarian government.

israel never gave the golan heights back and egypt got sinai in the unted nations.

 

[JohnRM]

Wow, this is getting very off-topic.

 

[Elponitnatsnoc]

israel never gave the golan heights back and egypt got sinai in the unted nations.

Actually, the government of Israel voted to return to Sinai to Egypt and the Golan Heights to Syria. Egypt accepted Resolution 242, which called for Israel to give back all the land they had won in the war (a defensive war, mind you). Thus, Egypt got the Sinai back. Syria, however, rejected the Resolution because they did not want Israel to exist in any capacity. Thus, they didn't get the Golan Heights back because they didn't accept the Resolution.

So it's basically Syria's fault that they did not get the Golan Heights back because of their unrelentless mandate that Israel must not exist. They are not willing to compromise; Israel clearly is, and this is proven from their voting to return their conquered land to Egypt and Syria.

Of Khazars: They were a pretty small population, but their descendents moved to Hungary. Hungary had a large Jewish population, but obviously all were not of Khazar heritage. Anyway, we can surely agree that most present-day Jews descended from the Hebrews, no?

 

[warpus]

Anyway, we can surely agree that most present-day Jews descended from the Hebrews, no?

I don't think even the experts would agree with this.

Conversion to Judaism isn't common, but it isn't unheard of either. It happens from time to time.. How pure can the Jewish "ethnicity" be?

 

[hossam]

Actually, the government of Israel voted to return to Sinai to Egypt and the Golan Heights to Syria. Egypt accepted Resolution 242, which called for Israel to give back all the land they had won in the war (a defensive war, mind you). Thus, Egypt got the Sinai back. Syria, however, rejected the Resolution because they did not want Israel to exist in any capacity. Thus, they didn't get the Golan Heights back because they didn't accept the Resolution.

So it's basically Syria's fault that they did not get the Golan Heights back because of their unrelentless mandate that Israel must not exist. They are not willing to compromise; Israel clearly is, and this is proven from their voting to return their conquered land to Egypt and Syria.

Of Khazars: They were a pretty small population, but their descendents moved to Hungary. Hungary had a large Jewish population, but obviously all were not of Khazar heritage. Anyway, we can surely agree that most present-day Jews descended from the Hebrews, no?

oh well then thx for clearing the misunderstandin in egypt people are very nationilistic include to some degree myself.