Hamlet
Manic Depressive
"Only a peace between equals can last" - Woodrow Wilson.
He was right when he said it then, and it still rings true today.
He was right when he said it then, and it still rings true today.
Should There Be A Palestinian State?
- Thread starter amadeus
- Start date
G-Man
A One Man's War
Israel won't allow the PA to become even stronger unless they'll start acting for peace. We have enough problems with them as an authority. If they'll become a country they can return the entire middle east to the days it was one big battle field.
Sparrowhawk
The Builder
Well, even if a Palestinian state was a corrupt dictatorship, it would at least be an entity you could deal with. I mean, the PA as it is is such a disorganized mess that Arafat couldn't stop things now if he wanted to. At least a proper state would have a governmental infrastructure to work from.
Isn't it already a big battlefield? If there was a Palestinian state, and they continued with the terrorism, at least they'd have an army you could satisfactorily grind into a pulp. Having to essentially police a large foreign population has got to be a drag.
Well, although I consider myself as member of the left-wing in israel, one should learn from history, luckily, Israel has the perfect source to learn from, its borering country, Lebanon.
Lebanon has its own army, yet the hizbulla co-exist with it perfectly well. Destorying Lebanon's army is not an option (well, at least not an option that will be accepted around the world), since it is not the force that attacks northern israel. Moreover, even if such an action would be carried, that will not help, since the hizbulla will continue to exist, as guerilla/terror groups tend to do.
Israel pulled out of lebanon almost two years ago. Israel returned to a border that was not considered to be the "true" israeli-lebanese border by its government, or the one that offers israeli citizens the most protection, but rather, the border line that was decided by the UN. Needless to say, the hizbulla did not accept that line. It seemed that at first the lebanese government did accept it, but due to syrian pressure, it rejected it too, and did not deploy its army in southern lebanon. Two years have passed, and the hizbulla continues to attack israel.
The question to be asked is will a indepedent state satisfy all of the palestinian demands. The answer is very unlikely. There will be always a place for further demands. Jerusalem, the right of return to the palestinian state, the right to return to israel, authority over religious places in israel, one can even imagine the demand to return Jaffa and the old city of Haifa, after all, there is a palestinian majority over there.
If not all of the palestinian demands will be satisfied, will it act against terrorist that will try to achieve those goals? Did it do that in the past? Does lebanon do it today?
Sure, the palestinians deserve of a state, but as long as their leaders (and the common people) believe in terror as a tool to achieve goals, they are not worthy of one.
VoodooAce
Emperor
Good question.
Should this oppressed people without a homeleand (they used to have one, but itwas ripped from under them) have a country of their own.
If there were any such thing as a stupid, mean hearted question, this would be it. The only saving grace here is there is no such thing as a stupid question.
Saved on a technicality, RM!
Should their be a U.S. state?
Should their be an Israeli state?
Should there be a Palestinian state?
None of those questions don't belong with the others.
Should this oppressed people without a homeleand (they used to have one, but itwas ripped from under them) have a country of their own.
If there were any such thing as a stupid, mean hearted question, this would be it. The only saving grace here is there is no such thing as a stupid question.
Saved on a technicality, RM!
Should their be a U.S. state?
Should their be an Israeli state?
Should there be a Palestinian state?
None of those questions don't belong with the others.
Looking out for my own particular interests, I see no need for a Palestinian state. Just in my opinion, I'd hardly call the Palestinians "oppressed." From Morocco to Pakistan, there's sympathetic governments to the Palestinians.
Quick Test, VoodooAce
------------------------------------
1. When did a palestinien country exist?
2. What leads to the continuing opression of the palestinien terror
a) Their decleration of war against Israel in 1947
b) Their refusal of the 2000 camp david peace offer
c) Their refusal to the American/European cease fire offer?
d) All answers are correct
FearlessLeader2
Fundamentalist Loon
Oh yeah, something I forget, and apparently everyone else did too:
The Palestinians HAD a state. They gave it to their 'brother' Arabs, to use as a staging area to drive the Israelis into the sea, so the Pals could have the whole area.
It's exactly the same thing as a venture capital imvestment. They invested their land with the 'real estate firm' of Nasser, Hussein, and Partners, in hopes of getting much more land in return.
However, again in stark parallel to a venture capital investment, there is often a risk of failure, and in such cases, one often does not receive even one's original investment back.
The Jews won that first battle, and every engagement since, in decisive manner, and it was they who became the benefactors of that venture capital investment.
If I go out tomorrow and lose my life savings on the stock market on an IPO stock that nose-dives, am I entitled to have my money refunded? Of course not. Should I be allowed to sue the people who did make money on the trading? Of course not.
So why should the Palestinians get special treatment? All they are is whiny crybaby losers, who didn't get their way. Only instead of crying in their beer, or jumping out of a high-rise like a respectable businessman, they're killing people.
The Palestinians HAD a state. They gave it to their 'brother' Arabs, to use as a staging area to drive the Israelis into the sea, so the Pals could have the whole area.
It's exactly the same thing as a venture capital imvestment. They invested their land with the 'real estate firm' of Nasser, Hussein, and Partners, in hopes of getting much more land in return.
However, again in stark parallel to a venture capital investment, there is often a risk of failure, and in such cases, one often does not receive even one's original investment back.
The Jews won that first battle, and every engagement since, in decisive manner, and it was they who became the benefactors of that venture capital investment.
If I go out tomorrow and lose my life savings on the stock market on an IPO stock that nose-dives, am I entitled to have my money refunded? Of course not. Should I be allowed to sue the people who did make money on the trading? Of course not.
So why should the Palestinians get special treatment? All they are is whiny crybaby losers, who didn't get their way. Only instead of crying in their beer, or jumping out of a high-rise like a respectable businessman, they're killing people.
ComradeDavo
Formerly God
Of course there should be a Palestinian state.
I suppose that means.....using your own argument......that the Iraqui people are not oppressed?
I suppose that means.....using your own argument......that the Iraqui people are not oppressed?
Simon Darkshade
Mysterious City of Gold
Very good analogy, and amusingly put. Not mention of impaling Yasser Arafat, but the rest is fine. 
I always thought Nasser Hussain was a very dodgy character.
cegman
Scott Walker Supporter
No the Palistines gave there land away and now they are just a group of people who exist to annoy or destroy Isreal.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,452
I think that whole region is already in quite a state, thank you!
PS
Yes they should get a state. It will stop them from moaning.
But until the peoples of that whole region are made into athiests,
and the combatants get over themselves and grow up, there will never be peace.
Religion, root of all trouble.
cegman
Scott Walker Supporter
God the root of all evil and good
No I think it is not religon. Religon is a smoke screen for the leaders to be able to do evil for greed and tell the people under them that their god told them to go send a person to blow up those blasphemers so we can get the land.
No I think it is not religon. Religon is a smoke screen for the leaders to be able to do evil for greed and tell the people under them that their god told them to go send a person to blow up those blasphemers so we can get the land.
CurtSibling
ENEMY ACE™
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 29,452
You've got a point...
Religion, root of all trouble.
Human nature, root of all corruption.
Religion, root of all trouble.
Human nature, root of all corruption.
G-Man
A One Man's War
I don't think it's surprising that the holy land is in a religious straggle. It's been so for centuries. But religion goes with what the people wanna hear so you'll first need people to want peace and when you have suicide bombers exploding in your city or tanks fighting terrorists in your back yard peace is not something you think about.
"There is one. It's called Jordan."
Jordan has a Palestinian majority but is ruled by a Saudian monarchy.
"There is one. It's called Jordan."
Jordan has a Palestinian majority but is ruled by a Saudian monarchy.
I know, but I think a lot of people are under the impression that the Palestinian people are without a land of their own and think that "Palestine" is only the land taken up by Israel, the WB and Gaza right now. That's just not true. A good portion of historical "Palestine" actually lies within the borders of Jordan...
G-Man
A One Man's War
Historical Palestine is on lands owned today by Israel, the PA, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and Egypt.
Yes, but isn't Jordan the only M.E. country with a large Pal minority/majority? The point is that people always like to talk about the poor Palestinians being a stateless people, similar to the Jews before the creation of Israel. What's lost in the discussion is the fact that the disputed land is relatively small when compared to historical Palestine. Why aren't people demanding that Jordan give up the land on the East bank of the Jordan to the Palestinians? If the Pals are in the majority in Jordan, why don't people talk about the injustice of them being ruled by a Saudi monarchy?
Didn't Shamir propose a Palestinian state in Jordan back in the 80s?
Similar threads
