haresfur wrote:
Ooh, anecdotal evidence.

 westslope wrote:

You still haven't answered my question. But you bring up another, what does "Greater Israel" mean?

 R_P wrote:
And the quote I heard many years ago from a Palestinian was something like, "The war will be won in the bedrooms of Gaza"

 black321 wrote:
No deal will be accepted with limited sovereignty/self-determination and without a right of return for Palestinians in Lebanon/Jordan, etc.

 R_P wrote:

Yeah its complex, but Arafat didnt want to concede...give up the right to ask for more.
He walked away.
Since then, neither side has shown any real willingness to compromise.

 Steely_D wrote:
🤡

If only some people read them then they wouldn't be talking out of their ass.

 R_P wrote:

If only we knew someone who was constantly posting articles on the topic.

 black321 wrote:
You might want to read up on that a bit, and not blindly accept the anti-Palestinian US/Israeli version of those events. I.e. BS.

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
just wondering if you really meant to deemphasize the atrocities of Hamas?!

I mean, this whole situation is beyond any rational thinking...and the concept, if only palestine had their own state everything would be fine...just doesnt hold water.
Recent history shows that...Arafat rejected a solid deal back in 2000 and again in 2008...which led to Hamas and Netanyanhu being in power. 
Neither side seems interested in peace, so why fund either of these maniacs? 

 westslope wrote:

crikey, you are actually starting to make sense. Not saying I agree with you but I can follow your argument. Yes, I agree that all citizens should have full rights and yes, I agree that the Israelis are never going to put themselves in a position where they lose control, because history, which is no doubt is offensive from a Palestinian point of view.
But because of those points, which we seem to agree on, my conclusion is the same as Haresfur.. there will have to be a two-state solution. The idea that the Israelis will give up control is illusory. On the other hand, the idea that Palestinians don't have full rights of self-determination is just as obnoxious as apartheid .. ergo they will have to learn to live side by side and critically, acknowledge each other's right to exist. 

Second point, we quickly talk about "the Israelis" and "the Palestinians" as though they were both monolithic structures. But they are not. Both are very full and rich cultures with a plethora of different viewpoints. Moreover, there is a lot of common ground between them, even if radicals don't want to accept this. 

Which gets me to the third point: On both sides we have rulers using the conflict to control their own grip on power. I think we can all agree that Netanyahu is undisputedly a war criminal. But Hamas is not much better, using the conflict to retain an iron grip on power. Factor in Iran and other regional factors and you get the current situation where everyone is manoeuvring to  maximise their own power at the cost of the little people. 

All feels like a lot of toxic masculinity to me. One more step to overcome on the way to a better future.

 haresfur wrote:
You are assuming that the welfare of Israelis of Jewish descent is always more important than the welfare of Arabs and others.   That is not a proposition I support.  Actually forcing Israel to completely dismantle the settlements and evict the settlers would send a very positive message to the world that violently taking resources is no longer tolerated.

The alternative to a delusional 2-state solution would be to grant all citizens in Greater Israel full rights.  Naturally, the USA and Israel would oppose that because granting full democratic rights to all citizens would put people of Jewish descent in a minority position.

 westslope wrote:
Israelis prefer(red) the status quo. I guess that's perpetual war/occupation/annexation/ethnic cleansing. De facto, a one state solution.

 westslope wrote:
So what does anti-zionism mean to you in the modern context?

And realistically, the alternatives to a two-state solution at this point is either perpetual war or complete removal of Arab control from the west bank and Gaza. Neither are acceptable to me.

 haresfur wrote:
No. Are you sniffing glue?  Is that correct? 

A 2-state solution at this point is a pipe dream unless the USA forces Israel to disbandon all the illegal settlements in the West Bank and evacuate the area of illegal settlers.

 westslope wrote:

Your anti-zionism posts imply to me that Israel shouldn't exist and the Arab world should attack and remove the country. Is that correct? What does the word zionism mean to you in the modern context. Do you favour a 2 state solution?

Democratic party pro abortion platform.

No fetus can beat us.

More war for democracy?

 westslope wrote:
I'll have to read this later but: 

Trump apparently was going to ask Musk that he loan Trump money to pay off the E.  Jean Carroll fine or underwrite the bond that Chubb posted for Trump. We'll see. 

Trump's lawyers have already said that they cannot secure a vond to cover the $454 fine. That mess is going to be very interesting to watch.