I am almost certainly going to be given a history lesson here. Which is nice. But I'd rather the emphasis of this discussion was on the reality now.
If Israel made concerted attempts to negotiate with the Palestinians and always favoured diplomacy over violence, would the situation be resolved more quickly?
Furthermore, if Israel gave up the Muslim quarter of Jerusalem then peace would surely be found more quickly?
I say this because then the international community would be FORCED to come to Israel's defence. Israel having made such big efforts to find peace would find favour with some countries whose general stance is ambivalent or pro-Palestinian (France say). I suspect the amount of terrorist attacks would decrease. Muslims would have their part of the third holiest Muslim city. What could they possibly complain about?
As I understand it when Israel previously offered Mr Arafat 95% of their demands it was turned down because Jerusalem wasn't a part of the offer. Part of Jerusalem is obviously important to the Palestinians.
Also it would be nice for the Palestinians to have a block of land instead of pockets.
I dont see why either side would refuse this. Although I'm a naive Westerner with interest on neither side...
I think Israel is stuck in the situation that if it makes such gestures then they cannot be taken back and, chances are, there will be nothing to gain from them as attacks on its people by extremists will continue.
An unenviable position.
And incidently, isn't the Western Wall in the 'Muslim portion' of Jerusalem?
No, thats in the jewish quarter. The dome of the rock is in the muslim quarter.
And no. If they got that, they'd just push for more.
I will reply more fully tomorrow, but what the hell do the Palestinians want if they turned down the Muslim Quarter of Jerusalem?
What are they playing at? Anyone would think they wanted conflict...!
Hey Bismarck, very tiny point but I read 96% of the West Bank was offered. Am I wrong?
By the by, Phonics Dude, you said the Palestinians deserve a state of the own which is NOT in pockets. Well the Peel commission (1937?) offered Jews a state which in 2 parts, and they accepted, while the Palestinians rejected it. It's funny that the two sides are so unequal in their quests for statehood.
Right, I understand. Apparently Arafat thought Hamas would assassinate him if he accepted the offer. Unfortunately, but unsuprisingly, all that happened was that terrorism increased after Arafat's rejection.
Bismarck: I do not believe most countries that hold a pro-Palestinian stance do so because they like one or the other countries more. Rather it is the actions of the countries which cause them to fall on one side or the other. And anyway, Israel has the unflinching support of the US. And this support, unlike the support of the UK or France for the Palestinian cause, is of immense practical value.
Bohemian: First my name is Phonicsdude. All one word. Yes I will be pedantic about it. Secondly, I dont think it is right that Israel should have to settle for pockets of land either.
So come on then all you pro-Palestinians. Why have you refused such generous offers in the past? Is it true that you wanted, as Bismarck states, the right of return?
Israel was created specifically to give the jews a homeland. If it is going to be mostly muslim then that defeats the point of Israel's creation..!
If you believe that Israel should never have been created (a view I share: although it is worth mentioning I am a fierce defender of Israel's right to exist peacefully and free from the threat of terrorism) then surely your anger should be vented against the Western countries that created Israel..?! As far as I know attacks on the West by muslim terrorist organisations are a fairly recent phenomenon. Certainly the attacks against Israel over the past 60 years have been far fiercer than the attack against the West.
At the very least you understand the Jews. If you were offered a homeland, having suffered centuries of behaviour which is to be abhored, would you not snap up the opportunity to build yourself a homeland? Finally the Jews have a safe haven where they won't be bullied by the world! (Again, I don't think Israel should have been created but you can empathise a little..). Violence against Israel was surely misdirected. It is the West who should have felt the full force of your wrath?
In any event why use violence? Why not diplomacy?
The Palestinian cause has a lot to answer for.
How are we defining "ally" by the way? There isn't an official friend and foe list.
What has France done to show that it is anti-Israel?
Pro-palestinians: You are not off the hook. This little side street Bis and I are headed down doesn't mean you dont have questions to answer.
There is in the EU. Im not for the UN. You have to obtain a visa to go to many countries who are a part of the UN.
So Bismarck, is maintaining a good relationship with Israel AND many Arab countries impossible?
As far as I know France has always denounced (or at least never spoken in favour) of terrorist attacks against Israel...
Again we come back to the T word. So overused.
'thousands', 'these', 'trends' or 'the'?