« A beautiful old book | Main | Analysts: Syrian army in no danger of collapsing from rebel assaults - McClatchy »

07 September 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Matthew

Just wait until all the apartheid era formulations are re-issued: We will be told that "separate development" is necessary in the One State. It will be One Land, Two Systems. And even President Obama will praise this version of "democracy."

Since I live in the South, I know people will accept this argument so long as the Zionists avoid the phrase "separate but equal."

confusedponderer

"We have war when at least one of the parties to a conflict wants something more than it wants peace."

Israel wants land more than peace. They feel that, given enough time, they can have that because they are in a position of strength vis a vis the Palestinians. And indeed, for them, as the stronger party, why should they cede anything when they can, cheaply, keep everything?

IMO that is why they have deliberately killed the two state solution, as they have deliberately killed an accord with Syria over the Golan Heights.

Israel doesn't want peace or reconciliation with her neighbours but to dominate, internally (it is a *Jewish* state after all) as much as externally.

Harry

On another but related front, I was curious if Col. Lang had any opinion about the shooting of a "British" family of three in France. There some internet talk of it being an Israeli job. The story on the internet is that the family were of Iraqi origin and might have had spookish connections.

The beaver

Another one who has been "bought" by the Israeli :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-19522744

Canada under the Steven Harper Conservative party is surprised that it could not get a seat at the UNSC :(
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/harper-and-the-us-are-wrong-on-the-iran-threat/article545943/?from=1360261

Cloned_ poster

I think a one- state solution should be pursued vigorously by the Palestinians.

Cloned_ poster

I suspect Old Ba'ath rivalries here.

jdledell

Since 1967 many important Israelis have thought the Allon Plan was the appropriate approach to the Palestinians. Essentially, Israel would annex the entire Jordan Valley and large area around Hebron along with Gush Etzion area. Israel would control the area from Jerusalem all the way to the Jordanian border. Ma'ale Adumim municipal boundaries already include this entire area. This would mean two Palestines - the North including Jenin, Nablus and Ramallah and a smaller southern area east of Hebron. The Allon Plan assumed that the Palestinian areas would only have autonomy - not citizenship.

However, Sharon thought the Northern Palestinian area was too large and included an important aquifer. Thus he pushed for the establishment of Ariel corridor to Shiloh which cuts the northern area in two.

To this day, numerous Likud politicians as well as settlers speak reverently about the Allon Plan and how Israel is finally well on it's way to implementing it. This is what Netanyahu has in mind when he uses the euphemism of Palestinians having "economic peace". He means everything and everyone entering entering or exiting the various Palestinian areas would need Israeli permission. Israel is not pursuing peace or justice - it is seeking absolute control.

Babak Makkinejad

All:

Tragedy is understood to obtain when men (or women) are destroyed in spite of their best effort at righteousness and justice.

I cannot understand in what manner is the State of Israel is a tragic figure.

David Habakkuk

jdledell,

Are Israel's leaders aware that such strategies must destroy 'liberal Zionism'? If are, do they care? If they do not care, are they right?

For what it is worth, my impression is that in relation to the UK, Israelis tend to listen to British Jews who agree with them, and end up with a largely delusional view of the way opinion here, both among gentiles and among Jews, has been moving.

An article by Isi Leibler in the Jerusalem Post last March, entitled "Anglo Jewish leaders and ‘trembling Israelites’" is I think a case in point.

(See http://www.jpost.com/LandedPages/PrintArticle.aspx?id=260916 )

jdledell

David - It not only destroys liberal Zionism, it destroys western style democracy. Palestinian bantustans won't be acceptable to most western countries but Israel feels the world won't do much more than yell and scream - no boycotts South Africa style. That is what they are banking on.

Far too many Israelis are just plain tired of the Palestinian "problem" and no longer care what the "solution" is, just as long as it goes away. That is why you can have a long series of pieces in JPost by Martin Sherman advocating moving the Palestinians out of the west bank, semi- coercively.

You are correct many Israelis only listen to the voices that agree with their positions. However, that is a problem not only for Israelis, I see plenty of that in the U.S.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Blog powered by Typepad