Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Have you even seen the international reaction? Even the US is starting to turn against them.


    How does this support your​ position?
    You are blind to reality if you believe the USA is turning against Israel.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    Something Something Mahatma Gandhi.
    An I to take this to mean you can't?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    Something Something Mahatma Gandhi.
    Let's see what Mahatma Ghandi actually said about Palestine (An except):

    "Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred."
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    I'm thinking one state solution with a right to return for all Palestinian refugees and elections 3 months within the implementation of this proposal.

    How does that sound to you?
    Provided all political parties are strictly secular, i dont believe this to be a bad idea.

    However i still dont think its a plausible solution, It would ultimately mean the disarmament and disbanding of Hamas, which i doubt they would agree with.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    Let's see what Mahatma Ghandi actually said about Palestine (An except):

    "Palestine belongs to the Arabs in the same sense that England belongs to the English or France to the French. It is wrong and inhuman to impose the Jews on the Arabs. What is going on in Palestine today cannot be justified by any moral code of conduct. The mandates have no sanction but that of the last war. Surely it would be a crime against humanity to reduce the proud Arabs so that Palestine can be restored to the Jews partly or wholly as their national home. The nobler course would be to insist on a just treatment of the Jews wherever they are born and bred."
    I was referring more to his methods, rather than his opinions..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    You are blind to reality if you believe the USA is turning against Israel.
    Like a great big warship, they are. It may take them a bit of time to turn around, but they are fed up with their "Israeli problem".

    First there was the debacle over John Kerry and the hoohah of leaked transcripts and whatnot.

    And now the Israeli shelling of a UN school which they have unequivocally condemned...

    The tide is turning, slowly but surely...
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    An I to take this to mean you can't?
    Having trouble understanding what you mean here.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    Like a great big warship, they are. It may take them a bit of time to turn around, but they are fed up with their "Israeli problem".

    First there was the debacle over John Kerry and the hoohah of leaked transcripts and whatnot.

    And now the Israeli shelling of a UN school which they have unequivocally condemned...

    The tide is turning, slowly but surely...
    The relationship between the USA and Israel goes far far deeper than what is shown in public.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    Provided all political parties are strictly secular, i dont believe this to be a bad idea.
    There is no need for any party to run on a secular ticket.

    However i still dont think its a plausible solution, It would ultimately mean the disarmament and disbanding of Hamas, which i doubt they would agree with.
    Oh, I assure you, they will agree to it...
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    You are blind to reality if you believe the USA is turning against Israel.
    You can hardly say that their support isn't waining somewhat, especially given what Israel is doing. They're kind enough to condemn the actions of Israel along with the rest of the world and the public support is particularly high.


    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    Having trouble understanding what you mean here.
    You're asked to explain something and fail to do so, surely if you were capable of explaining you would have done so.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    There is no need for any party to run on a secular ticket.



    Oh, I assure you, they will agree to it...
    Its still not plausible, its essentially Israel giving up masses of power to a small area that has little to none. Like I said, the only plausible solution is for the Palestinians to conform.

    Why do you disagree with only secular parties? Pro-Muslim, or Pro-Jewish parties will only cause tension and unrest.

    I feel youre 'solution' is just an idea of making Israel into a Muslim state in the long run, not gonna happen.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    The relationship between the USA and Israel goes far far deeper than what is shown in public.
    The dirty laundry is being aired in public. It's a start.

    Congress is falling over itself to condemn HAMAS but the President goes and condemns Israel. I wouldn't be surprised if before the end of his term, BO has completely cut ties with Israel if they keep acting like this.

    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    I was referring more to his methods, rather than his opinions..
    You can't pick and choose.

    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    Its still not plausible, its essentially Israel giving up masses of power to a small area that has little to none. Like I said, the only plausible solution is for the Palestinians to conform.
    It's a one state solution. How would it involve "Israel giving up masses of power to a small area"?

    Why do you disagree with only secular parties? Pro-Muslim, or Pro-Jewish parties will only cause tension and unrest.
    It would be undemocratic...

    I feel youre 'solution' is just an idea of making Israel into a Muslim state in the long run, not gonna happen.
    That's the purpose of democracy, no? Majority rule and all that?

    As I said, you can't pick and choose only when it suits you. That's just hypocrisy...
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    You can hardly say that their support isn't waining somewhat, especially given what Israel is doing. They're kind enough to condemn the actions of Israel along with the rest of the world and the public support is particularly high.



    You're asked to explain something and fail to do so, surely if you were capable of explaining you would have done so.
    The USA will always condemn actions as a means to improve their public image, i responded to that in a previous post.

    I mentioned Gandhi in response to you saying there are no other means other than violence to achieve negotiation, Gandhi proves that point wrong, i didnt need to explain it.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    The dirty laundry is being aired in public. It's a start.

    Congress is falling over itself to condemn HAMAS but the President goes and condemns Israel. I wouldn't be surprised if before the end of his term, BO has completely cut ties with Israel if they keep acting like this.



    You can't pick and choose.
    I feel to stop responding to you, i feel you have a dream scenario where the USA turns against Israel, cannot stress how false this statement is.

    You also seem like someone who ultimately just wants an Islamic Caliphate in Israel by your means of solution and your response to my response to them.

    There is no point responding anymore.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    The dirty laundry is being aired in public. It's a start.

    Congress is falling over itself to condemn HAMAS but the President goes and condemns Israel. I wouldn't be surprised if before the end of his term, BO has completely cut ties with Israel if they keep acting like this.



    You can't pick and choose.



    It's a one state solution. How would it involve "Israel giving up masses of power to a small area"?



    It would be undemocratic...



    That's the purpose of democracy, no? Majority rule and all that?

    As I said, you can't pick and choose only when it suits you. That's just hypocrisy...
    As a final response, its not undemocratic to have secular parties only, its undemocratic to have parties that favour one religion over another. (See the definition of Democracy, and youll find parties have to be secular for a country to be deemed democratic legitimately)

    Israel will never give up its land to share with the Palestinians unless they conform to Israel, and even then its unlikely given the history.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    I feel to stop responding to you, i feel you have a dream scenario where the USA turns against Israel, cannot stress how false this statement is.
    I suppose you either have an inside line to the CIC at the WH or you are just deluding yourself like Netanyahu and his cabinet, shutting your eyes and eats in order to believe that no matter what Israel does, America will always support it to the hilt...

    You also seem like someone who ultimately just wants an Islamic Caliphate in Israel by your means of solution and your response to my response to them.
    I'm just saying that we should let democracy takes it's natural course.

    I cannot apologize for you being a hypocrite by picking and choosing as well as being selective when applying democratic principles whenever it suits you to.

    There is no point responding anymore.
    Why? Because you have defeated your own point about why the Palestinians should lay down their arms and be led like sheep to slaughter by the Israeli's?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    As a final response, its not undemocratic to have secular parties only, its undemocratic to have parties that favour one religion over another. (See the definition of Democracy, and youll find parties have to be secular for a country to be deemed democratic legitimately)
    I think you are conflating democracy and secularism. Don't worry, it's an easy mistake to make...

    One can be entirely democratic and religious as well as being democratic and secular. Arguable, one can also be neither...

    Israel will never give up its land to share with the Palestinians unless they conform to Israel, and even then its unlikely given the history.
    So the Israeli's just don't want to share? Well, I could have told you that at the start instead of having to play out this long winded discussion...
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Apocrypha)
    The USA will always condemn actions as a means to improve their public image, i responded to that in a previous post.

    I mentioned Gandhi in response to you saying there are no other means other than violence to achieve negotiation, Gandhi proves that point wrong, i didnt need to explain it.
    But similarly I can point to the USA and say that's proof that violence works. I can point to assorted places and say that it's proof peace doesn't work. You can't just point to Ghandi and the independence of India because they're completely different circumstances. The Post-War UK government was one that was highly supportive of de-colonisation and given that India was rather a thorn in the side it made sense to deal with it.
    The 1952 Tory government was very much against it so it slowed down, they felt that the Empire was rather important, but the 1960 Macmillan government decided decolonisation was a good idea, especially given the problems the French were having with their African colonies.
    London held the cards, London called the blows largely at the behest of the populace.
    If Hamas were to drop their weapons would the Israeli population call for the recognition of the State of Palestine? If they did, would the government do so? In both cases, I think not.


    And the USA may condemn actions for its own image, but it can only supply a state it condemns the actions of for so long before their words become meaningless.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tsr1269)
    Like a great big warship, they are. It may take them a bit of time to turn around, but they are fed up with their "Israeli problem".

    First there was the debacle over John Kerry and the hoohah of leaked transcripts and whatnot.

    And now the Israeli shelling of a UN school which they have unequivocally condemned...

    The tide is turning, slowly but surely...
    Um, no.

    You seem to have no understanding of the way politics work in the real world.

    US can go on and condemn Israel all it wants, but the fact is, it needs Israel right where it is. Why do you think it's been pouring so much money into it?

    Because Israel is the one country in the Middle East which the US can have normal relations with. The rest of them just want to blow the US up. Divide and conquer.

    As long as there is the Israeli problem, the Arab countries will never be fully united, and will never be able to look outside their continent. The fact that there is a jewish state kicking their ass is driving them crazy. US is well aware of that.

    Not to mention, with Israel's powerful army/ Mossad which are fighting the war on terror for the US in the Middle East.

    So, the US government can say whatever it likes to keep the flock of sheep happy, but what it says and what it does are two different things. Fact is, Obama is raising financial aid to Israel.

    US condemns in words only. You're stupid to think they'll ever do anything to hurt Israel. They'll lose such an important weapon in their quest for affordable oil and general suppression of extremism in the Middle East.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    But similarly I can point to the USA and say that's proof that violence works. I can point to assorted places and say that it's proof peace doesn't work. You can't just point to Ghandi and the independence of India because they're completely different circumstances. The Post-War UK government was one that was highly supportive of de-colonisation and given that India was rather a thorn in the side it made sense to deal with it.
    The 1952 Tory government was very much against it so it slowed down, they felt that the Empire was rather important, but the 1960 Macmillan government decided decolonisation was a good idea, especially given the problems the French were having with their African colonies.
    London held the cards, London called the blows largely at the behest of the populace.
    If Hamas were to drop their weapons would the Israeli population call for the recognition of the State of Palestine? If they did, would the government do so? In both cases, I think not.


    And the USA may condemn actions for its own image, but it can only supply a state it condemns the actions of for so long before their words become meaningless.
    Their words are meaningless, like I said, whatever is said in public doesnt reflect the private relations between the two nations at all. All the USA has done is condemn the deaths of civilians, which they have to do.

    The USA has supplied Israel through decades of this already. Israel has as much influence on the USA as vice versa, the two countries go hand in hand.

    In reference to the first point, a short term compromise between the 2 parties involved is not plausible. I have mentioned before there needs to be years and years of peace if the Palestinians want to achieve anything, by then it is hoped that they embrace secularism and forget about their dream of an Islamic Caliphate in Israel.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 8, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.