Originally posted by dottewellRubbish, the Israelis want to make it happen, they can't make it happen while the Palestinians wan't the whole place and are actively seeking the destruction of Israel in conjunction with Hezbollah and Iran.
Israel could make that happen tomorrow.
Where do you get your information?
I get my information by applying common sense to current affairs.
Originally posted by princeoforangeYou really do need to read up on your political history. It looks like you slept through the 1990s.
Rubbish, the Israelis want to make it happen, they can't make it happen while the Palestinians wan't the whole place and are actively seeking the destruction of Israel in conjunction with Hezbollah and Iran.
I get my information by applying common sense to current affairs.
Originally posted by princeoforangeAh, you're just a kid. We could talk about the aftermath of the Oslo accords, and who was to blame for what; we could talk about Camp David, and what was exactly was on offer, and what Clinton really thought, and Barak's agenda and negotiating style; we could talk about Hamas, who they are, and the difference between their public and private pronouncements; we could talk about the letter to Kofi Annan; in short we could talk about blame that attaches to both sides in what is the perhaps the greatest political tragedy of the latter half of this century.
It looks like you have been asleep since at least 2002, your eyes are still obstinately shut.
But you'd just have to go and look it all up.
Do you know any Palestinians? Do you know any Israeli jews, for that matter? Do you want to know? Do you even care about getting all sides of a story, of learning about such an important topic in the round? Or are you scared of complexity?
Like I said, you're just a kid. Good luck to you in your studies.
Originally posted by dottewellCamp David and the Oslo Accords are good points in case. At Oslo, Barak offered the Palestinians 96% of their demands, a huge concession, but it was refused. This clearly shows that the Palestinians are not committed to the peaceful, 2-state solution, if they were, they would have jumped on such a concession. It seems to me that the Palestinians prefer not to have a state while Israel exists as they can then carry out terrorist activities more conveniently
Ah, you're just a kid. We could talk about the aftermath of the Oslo accords, and who was to blame for what; we could talk about Camp David, and what was exactly was on offer, and what Clinton really thought, and Barak's agenda and negotiating style; we could talk about Hamas, who they are, and the difference between their public and private pronouncements ...[text shortened]... u scared of complexity?
Like I said, you're just a kid. Good luck to you in your studies.
Originally posted by princeoforangei think most people want to get on with life and not be terrorists/freedom fighters (although a few no doubt enjoy it).
Camp David and the Oslo Accords are good points in case. At Oslo, Barak offered the Palestinians 96% of their demands, a huge concession, but it was refused. This clearly shows that the Palestinians are not committed to the peaceful, 2-state solution, if they were, they would have jumped on such a concession. It seems to me that the Palestinians pr ...[text shortened]... ve a state while Israel exists as they can then carry out terrorist activities more conveniently
it must surely be acknwledged that the palestinians have legitimate grievences to say the least. I don't think that the two state solution will resolve the years of hatred and death on both sides, but it seems to be the only way forward and i'm suprised that more pressure is being put on all parties to reach some sort of agreement whoever is representing them.
Originally posted by 7ate9Shall i start playing the Violin now or when you stop sniveling
My upbringing in New Zealand was peculiar, because my dad's blood was from the pacific island areas and my mums was from places around England. I always got treated like a Maori by people who didn't know me.... but I had none. I found white people very annoying in the way they treated me, because basically I was more like them. I ended up liking the Maori peop ...[text shortened]... laying catch-up. I think they do very well giving what was done to them.... Very under-rated.
2 edits
Originally posted by princeoforangeIt shows nothing of the sort. It shows only that what was on the table was not considered acceptable.
Camp David and the Oslo Accords are good points in case. At Oslo, Barak offered the Palestinians 96% of their demands, a huge concession, but it was refused. This clearly shows that the Palestinians are not committed to the peaceful, 2-state solution.
In what way was that a "huge concession"? Offering less than the 1967 borders (the obviously correct basis for a solution), with access between parts of the Palestinian terretory that could be closed by Israel at any time? Insisting on Israeli sovereignty over the whole of Jerusalem?
If you were awake during and after Camp David you would know that a settlement was possible at that time. Tragically it is now further away than ever.
I've been a long-standing advocate of a two-state solution as the only practicable one. I've also taken heat on here for suggesting that (despite enormous question marks over the legality of the establishment of the Israeli state), the Israeli people probably does have (morally at least) some de facto right of self-determination. But how an earth could it have been a "huge concession" on Barak's part, in the light of Israel's flagrant ignoring of UN SC resolution 242?
There are criticisms to be made of both sides. Your hopelessly one-sided view does you no credit whatsoever.
Originally posted by dottewellWhy are the 1967 borders the correct basis for a solution?
It shows nothing of the sort. It shows only that what was on the table was not considered acceptable.
In what way was that a "huge concession"? Offering less than the 1967 borders (the obviously correct basis for a solution), with access between parts of the Palestinian terretory that could be closed by Israel at any time? Insisting on Israeli sovereign ...[text shortened]... to be made of both sides. Your hopelessly one-sided view does you no credit whatsoever.
