Palestinian Sovereignty?

[nonamerasian]

Should there be a creation of an independent Palestinian nation?

If so, should it include East Jerusalem?

Do you think an internationally recognized Palestinian will help pacify tensions in the Middle East?

[SunWuKong]

my immediate answer would be "yes". but honestly i don't know all that much about the situation so maybe i'm just talking out of my ass.

[mr. x]

my thoughts are that its all so not black and white as activists on both sides would like to see it. i mean if u made a palestinian state then the terrorism becomes state sponsored doesnt it?

[SunWuKong]

my thoughts are that its all so not black and white as activists on both sides would like to see it. i mean if u made a palestinian state then the terrorism becomes state sponsored doesnt it?

i think the point is that Palestinian backed "terrorism" is carried out because Palestinians want an independent state. meaning that if there is an independent Palestinian state, theoretically Palestinian backed "terrorism" would stop.

[ChinaLama]

Of course the other issue is, how BIG of a Palestinian state is wanted or needed? It's very possible terrorism will continue even after a Palestinian state is created, because some terrorists want a bigger Palestinian state.

[nonamerasian]

Even if it didn't pacify things, should they receive a homeland?

[kitty]

I think the Israeli and the Palestinians should share the homeland they are fighting over.

[AliBabaIncorporated]

creating a homeland out of territory that belongs to a densely packed other population is a bad idea. unfortunately, it's already done and the rest of us have no choice but to pick up the pieces. thanks evangelicals protestants who just had to stick them there to fulfill a fundamentalist reading of the book of revelations, and thanks to jews who went along with them for the sake of nostalgia over the 2000 years ago homeland when they already knew the region didn't particularly like jews in the first place and supported the Nazis in WWII.

Weirdly enough, the Soviet Union was gonna try to create a Jewish homeland somewhere towards the East, but the idea never took hold ...

[Tao]

umm...i might get flamed for this but sometimes I get so sick and tired about hearing about this shit on the news, and the different politicians trying to win the favor of the jewish vote and saying how israelis are for "freedom and justice" and all that nonsense. I mean this whole "god promised us and only us this particular piece of land" principle is just asking for trouble. Not to mention the discrimination and prejudices that both religion's followers believe to be true. I hate the idea that God chose this particular group of people and only them to be favorites.....I mean what kind of shit is that? Can't we be judged as individuals? That omipotence has to be good for something right?

oops...i digress. I believe the only way to solve this whole problem (and I beilieve I said this before) is to irradiate the place. Have it so that no one wants it....or in this case, those that still do, will die of radiation poisoning. Cause no matter who promised what to whom, shits gone on too long now for either side to just give up. the only solution is to dissapoint both sides.

[ism]

oops...i digress. I believe the only way to solve this whole problem (and I beilieve I said this before) is to irradiate the place. Have it so that no one wants it....or in this case, those that still do, will die of radiation poisoning. Cause no matter who promised what to whom, shits gone on too long now for either side to just give up. the only solution is to dissapoint both sides.

Haha like a Wisdom of Solomon type deal. Threaten to nuke the place, and whichever side says, "don't, let the other side have it," gets it all.

[Blue dice]

The answer is easy, Palestinians should have their own homeland. The fact is that Jews have a tenuous historical right to be in Israel. Both Palestinians and Jews have common heritage in Israel but neither one has the right to take it over completely. In the U.S. media you constantly see Palestinians demonized but I think anyone would be pissed if you had people suddenly come into your country and take over everything.

Let's face it if today it wasn't european-Jews in control of Israel the U.S. could care less. Matter of fact if it was ANY other ethnic group then the U.S. would have left them out to dry a long time ago. Instead the U.S. feels it's necessary to fund Israel's own military exploits.

[John0101]

This is really a tough question, I have a lot of Jewish friends back home that support Isreal in any of their causes without any doubt.

Yet I do have a few Arabian friends who also think that they are being mistreated and are recieving an unfair treatment.

They both make really good points. But I get the feeling that the creation of a Palestinian state is a symbol for greater all over conflit in the middle-east.

[kitty]

Bad idea since both Israelis (I) and Palestinians (P) are not much willing to compromise. (P) -- in wanting a seperate state -- want the much coveted Mosque, which for reasons historical, is built upon the most sacred site of the Jewish religion: The Old Jerusalem Temple.

I think it's very naiive to think that (P) and (I) should just stop fighting and be old friends and make up.



I know it's the most difficult solution but think about it -- why should the Palestinians be made to move? They have a religious claim over the land, but then so do the Jews. I don't think they just make up and be old friends, but I think they should examine the possibility of developing a government that gives both communities equal representation and thus equal claim over the land.

Why should the Palestinians move?

Why is the Jewish claim over the land more valid than the Palestinian claim?

And where would you set them up? Could you set them up anywhere where you wouldnt' be recreating the same problem all over again?

(I know it's probably a little naiive but I can't see any other way that would be fair to both parties)


This kind of reminds me of the way you stated Black people could'nt be capable of victimising Asians because they were a minority themselves, even though victimising can taken to mean harassment in t's literal sense.

how so? I don't see them as related.

and if you don't understand what i'm trying to say here about social power, i suggest you read a textbook on race relations, or bring it back up in the other thread.

[nonamerasian]

I honestly don't know what to believe on the topic for I rarely, rarely hear the Palestinian side.

Unless a Palestinian blows himself/herself up or has had relations with someone who has blown himself/herself up, I don't really see them on TV, with the exception of Politically Incorrect segments before the show was kicked off ABC.

I've known Israelis or people who have at least been to Israel, but they all happen to be Jewish.

I've read messageboard discussions on the topic, but also usually with the Jewish perspective.

In my point-of-view, the Palestinian perspective rarely gets out in mainstream media and that is eerie.

What little does come out paints an apartheid type of picture. If that situation is true, I think in a few years I'm going to feel guilty for not definitively sticking up for an independent Palestinian state.

After all, the two groups should have the same right to exist with basic civil rights protection and a sense of equality. If it can't exist as is, why not create an independent state?

[VV o n g B a]

whats funny about the situation is that the israelis had the chance to take care of this situation back in biblical times. god had instructed them to wipe out the ancestors of the palestinians or face significant problems down the line. genocide. but they didn't b/c they felt sorry for the palestinian ancestors. and now...

[nonamerasian]

I think the Israeli and the Palestinians should share the homeland they are fighting over.

As is?

Perhaps that could be possible. . .But not unless there is some type of international pressure that could force about change because with the way things are, I doubt proper resolutions can be passed from within.

One group will hold too much power, one group will be gypped, and the fighting will go on, and on, and on.

It could be possible, but I don't see it happening.

[kitty]

Did I ever say that the (P) should move? Or did I ever say that the have a less of a claim on that land because they happen to be Muslims? Sometimes, I think you make too much of a statement and turn it into something quite unrelated.

All I said was that people quarreling over a piece of land is not going to end just for the sake of peace. If some of the best political minds can't manage to do so then how could people like us explain how peace should come about?


duude... chill out... why're you accusing me of being "too into semantics" again? I didn't say you said they should move... I was clarifying my earlier statement because I think most people don't think the Palestinians have as valid a claim on the land, and I think they do. Most people *do* think they should move... I was never targetting you.

I never accused you of saying that they have less of a claim because they're muslim. like where are the hell are you getting this from?

You seriously need to chill the fuck out, man. You turn every response to what I have to say into some sort of random attack on me.


Why does everything boil down to reading books by PhD/Doctorate authors? Sometimes, one has to think for himself/herself and not be lead by people who hold two or three Doctorates in Sociology and History.

BTW - I think that "victimisation" should be given its literal meaning.

It doesn't. I never said anything about PhD/Doctorates or anything. I'm only telling you to read a damn book because I've explained my stance *very explicitly* in the other thread. I'm tired of repeating myself.

If you actually looked at the definition of "victim" you'll see that there's an aspect of the word that implies a *power* from the aggressor. that's where ethnic group dynamics and the power of the dominant group comes into play.

[kitty]

As is?

Perhaps that could be possible. . .But not unless there is some type of international pressure that could force about change because with the way things are, I doubt proper resolutions can be passed from within.

One group will hold too much power, one group will be gypped, and the fighting will go on, and on, and on.

It could be possible, but I don't see it happening.

*sigh*... I know... it's not a realistic solution, but I think it's the most fair.

[Tao]

As is?

Perhaps that could be possible. . .But not unless there is some type of international pressure that could force about change because with the way things are, I doubt proper resolutions can be passed from within.

One group will hold too much power, one group will be gypped, and the fighting will go on, and on, and on.

It could be possible, but I don't see it happening.
it's possible if the US stops supporting israeli troops with tanks and advanced weapons. Right now the palestinians feel that they are fighting "the man" that is holding them down and agianst their religion. That's why we have terrorist attacks against us citizens.

ok ok....maybe my first solution of irradiating the place wasn't such a practical idea.....hmm....something more do-able......hmmm, I know!

how about this. We give every israeli and palestinian a machete, take away any other forms of weaponry, and just let them be. They'll be on equal grounding, w/o all that technology to favor one side or the other, and leave fate in their own hands. If these religious fanatics on either side feel that risking loosing their lives is worth it in order to get the holy land then those people will fight. People who are smarter than that...meaning all the moderates and seculars will live due to process of elimination. then those people will be able to live in a happy go lucky world of milk and honey.....i'm a genius.

[kitty]

well thanks morientes... i don't think i'm all that but i appreciate your kind words :)

[Danny]

i think the point is that Palestinian backed "terrorism" is carried out because Palestinians want an independent state. meaning that if there is an independent Palestinian state, theoretically Palestinian backed "terrorism" would stop.

But, by giving them an independent state would that not state that the terrorism to this point has played a hand into getting them that state, setting up a precedent?

I think more people would be apt for it if the terrorism stopped cold. It is just like a minority of the group making it bad for the majority of the group. These little pockets of hate and terror are making it more difficult for the majority, which is not terrorist loving and the like.

[kitty]

But, by giving them an independent state would that not state that the terrorism to this point has played a hand into getting them that state, setting up a precedent?



well, one could argue that terrorism does work though. it had a hand in the establishment of a lot of our status quo... in america for example, our history is full of examples of terrorist actions having a hand in many of our historical events.

The Boston Tea Party for example was a terrorist action against the British... and it resulted in a massive loss of property. And it was all for the fight for independence against the British.

Nat Turner was another 'terrorist leader' who, after breaking from the plantation where he was a slave, ransacked and killed plantation owners to try and free the black slaves, 25 years before the Civil War. Again, another example of terrorism in a fight for something which is, arguably, a just cause.

I guess that the Palestinian use of terrorism is, for me, just an example of how powerfully they feel about their cause. I don't know if it makes it right, or wrong, but I definitely don't feel that they deserve a homeland any less than the Israeli -- I think they are simply using any means they have to try and make their voice heard (and given the brutality of the Israeli police, they have much fewer avenues than the Israeli to get their point across).

[Danny]

The Boston Tea Party for example was a terrorist action against the British... and it resulted in a massive loss of property. And it was all for the fight for independence against the British.

Nat Turner was another 'terrorist leader' who, after breaking from the plantation where he was a slave, ransacked and killed plantation owners to try and free the black slaves, 25 years before the Civil War. Again, another example of terrorism in a fight for something which is, arguably, a just cause.

But in both of these examples a war started for the freedom. Palestine is not going to become a state becuase of war, the Israeli's would kick the living shit out of them again.

The only way that Palestine would get their own 'state' is if the Israeli's allow it. By their continued use of terrorist tactics, that will never occur, because think of it like this. If Palestine does get their own state and terrorism did play a hand in it. Then you would get people like in the Philippines, or in NE Spain who are already looking to gain independence from their host countries, to increase their terrorist methods, pointing to Palestine as a state that gained its independence using the same tactic.

[SunWuKong]

The Boston Tea Party for example was a terrorist action against the British... and it resulted in a massive loss of property. And it was all for the fight for independence against the British.

Nat Turner was another 'terrorist leader' who, after breaking from the plantation where he was a slave, ransacked and killed plantation owners to try and free the black slaves, 25 years before the Civil War. Again, another example of terrorism in a fight for something which is, arguably, a just cause.

But in both of these examples a war started for the freedom. Palestine is not going to become a state becuase of war, the Israeli's would kick the living shit out of them again.

The only way that Palestine would get their own 'state' is if the Israeli's allow it. By their continued use of terrorist tactics, that will never occur, because think of it like this. If Palestine does get their own state and terrorism did play a hand in it. Then you would get people like in the Philippines, or in NE Spain who are already looking to gain independence from their host countries, to increase their terrorist methods, pointing to Palestine as a state that gained its independence using the same tactic.

maybe it's just me, but it seems like you didn't understand kitty's point. she was saying that these "terrorist acts" may be morally justified, therefore they being a precedent is not necessarily a bad thing, as you seemed to have implied.

what does the fact that there were wars for both of the examples that kitty mentioned have to do with anything? were you trying to make an argument for popular support? if that is the case... the Independence War only had the support from 1/3rd of the population of the colonists. and the Civil War divided the nation. these wars didn't justify those "terrorist acts". the fact that those "terrorist acts" were actions against injustice did. the same may (or may not) be said for what the Palestinians are doing.

[kitty]

I'm not attempting to justify terrorist acts -- (i think) -- I'm just trying to say that terrorist actions don't necessarily preclude a 'just' cause...

[nonamerasian]

But, by giving them an independent state would that not state that the terrorism to this point has played a hand into getting them that state, setting up a precedent?

I think more people would be apt for it if the terrorism stopped cold. It is just like a minority of the group making it bad for the majority of the group. These little pockets of hate and terror are making it more difficult for the majority, which is not terrorist loving and the like.

What is a better alternative?

Continue putting up walls and fences, setting up curfews making it difficult to make a living, ignoring historic boundaries in the name of "safety," and basically doing all the things that give the terrorists fuel to recruit?

If it is truly only a minority, why punish the majority?

[syc]

[/QUOTE]The only way that Palestine would get their own 'state' is if the Israeli's allow it. By their continued use of terrorist tactics, that will never occur, because think of it like this. If Palestine does get their own state and terrorism did play a hand in it. Then you would get people like in the Philippines, or in NE Spain who are already looking to gain independence from their host countries, to increase their terrorist methods, pointing to Palestine as a state that gained its independence using the same tactic. [QUOTE]


Its kind of funny because before WW2 Israel was Palestine and belonged to the Palestinians under the Ottoman Empire. The first groups to do suicide bombing style attacks on civilians were zionist extremists fighting for the creation of a Jewish state. Ironic isnt it?

[sdcheung]

<----------- hey these people are on the ball., they are actually thinking, in stead of falling into neo-Con Propaganda and Jewish Propaganda. Finally a board where the gerbils in their heads are using their wheels.

[nonamerasian]

"Neo-con propaganda"/ "Jewish propaganda"?

[nonamerasian]

I'm not completely understanding the entire "right of return" and citizenship issues of Israel.