3 edits
Originally posted by no1maraudermarauder: "Abbas has pointed out that an attempt to disarm and disband Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other groups would lead to a civil war, something he is unwilling to do."
The Palestinian Authority is dealing from a position of weakness; they have accepted the "Road Map" as the best they can hope for without agreeing to all its conditions. Abbas has pointed out that an attempt to disarm and disband Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other groups would lead to a civil war, something he is unwilling to do. Political reform is someth ...[text shortened]... raeli occupation are composed of and run by Palestinians. Pretending otherwise gets you nowhere.
Suppose a peace agreement is signed without the participation of these terrorist groups and thus without disarming them, because Abbas doesn't want this. The following situation will emerge: There will be peace between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. What does this mean ? The terrorist organisations will not be disarmed, because the PA cannot risk a Palestinian civil war. The attacks on Israel will continue because Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and the others cannot and will not be controlled by the PA.
What is being reached by that so called peace agreement ? Israel of course has done concessions, among which the establishment of a Palestinian state, to get the PA to sign such a peace agreement. There will be no peace however, no recognition, no secure borders for Israel, nothing, because these terrorist organisations backed by Syria, Iran and other countries still want to wipe Israel from the map and will continue their suicide- and other attacks. As a result of all this Israel has gained exactly nothing in return for its concessions. No peace at all, nothing, nada.
Question: Why would Israel sign a peace agreement with the PA under the conditions described above and which you advocate ?
1 edit
Originally posted by ivanhoeYour preconceived ideas make it impossible for you to actually understand what I am saying. Abbas' position is not that anybody be able to use Palestinian territory to attack Israel after a peace agreement; I have pointed this out to you many times. Israel will get the PA's cooperation to end attacks from Palestinian territory. What more do you expect the independent state of Palestine to do? A demand that Palestine repress political groups with wide popular support is both violative of the Palestinian's people's rights and an illegal intrusion by foreigners into Palestinian self-rule.
marauder: "Abbas has pointed out that an attempt to disarm and disband Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other groups would lead to a civil war, something he is unwilling to do."
Suppose a peace agreement is signed without the participation of these terrorist groups and thus without disarming them, because Abbas doesn't want this. The following situation will e ...[text shortened]... sign a peace agreement with the PA under the conditions described above and which you advocate ?
Your ridiculous conclusion that Israel would gain "nada" from a peace agreement shows your incredibly one-sided position, but little else. Are you seriously suggesting that the creation of a Palestinian state which has a legal obligation to stop its territory from being used to attack Israel will not enhance Israeli security? Are you seriously suggesting that the creation of a free and independent Palestinian state will not reduce the appeal of Hamas and other groups? Are you seriously suggesting that attacks on Israel won't decline? If you are, you are dealing in paranoid fantasies.
The day after a truly free, independent Palestinian state is formed, Israel will still be the predominant military power in the Middle East and be backed by the world's greatest superpower. Israel's borders will be as defensible as they were in 1967 when they were able to crush the Arab militaries in six days. Your continued insistence to hold the Palestinian people hostage until the impossible task of destroying everyone who opposes Israel's existence shows that you have no real interest in an acheivable peace. And finally, Israel is not being begged for "concessions"; they are being informed that it is high time they started following international law and ended their illegal occupation and brutal oppression of the Palestinian people. You ignore that little fact over and over again; Israel has no legitimate business in the West Bank, so they're not entitled to dictate the conditions of their withdrawal to the people they are oppressing. It is enough that the leaders of Palestine agree to conduct their nation within the rules of international law, something the rulers of Israel have steadfastly and persistently refused to do.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1maraudermarauder: "Abbas' position is not that anybody be able to use Palestinian territory to attack Israel after a peace agreement; ... "
Your preconceived ideas make it impossible for you to actually understand what I am saying. Abbas' position is not that anybody be able to use Palestinian territory to attack Israel after a peace agreement; I have pointed this out to you many times. Israel will get the PA's cooperation to end attacks from Palestinian territory. What more do you expect ...[text shortened]... ternational law, something the rulers of Israel have steadfastly and persistently refused to do.
marauder: " Israel will get the PA's cooperation to end attacks from Palestinian territory. ... "
Does this mean the Israeli forces will get permission to operate on Palestinian territory ? Otherwise this promise of a "cooperation" will be mute. The PA could't control these terrorist groups before signing the peace treaty and they will not be able after. Remember Abbas does not want to risk civil war. So why do you think the PA can control them after signing the peace agreement ? I would think Abbas will also be unwilling to risk a civil war after signing the agreement, don't you think ? ..... or do you think Hamas and Hezbollah will watch how the PA arrests the men behind the suicide and other attacks and will do nothing about it ?
Originally posted by ivanhoeOf course, Israeli military forces won't have permission to use another countries' territory; what countries have permission to use Israeli territory? Your argument is comparing apples and oranges; your insistence is that Abbas "disarm and disband" Hamas and the others right now before a Palestinian state even exists; why should he? What does he gain but a civil war and nebulous promises from a state that is in violation of over 50 UN Security Council resolutions?
marauder: "Abbas' position is not that anybody be able to use Palestinian territory to attack Israel after a peace agreement; ... "
marauder: " Israel will get the PA's cooperation to end attacks from Palestinian territory. ... "
Does this mean the Israeli forces will get permission to operate on Palestinian territory ? Otherwise this promise of ...[text shortened]... h how the PA arrests the men behind the suicide and other attacks and will do nothing about it ?
Why don't you just admit that you don't want a Palestinian state? That's what you're really saying by imposing impossible preconditions on its existence. The Palestinian people are militarily resisting their occupation at this time; they have every legal right to do so. Abbas aiding Israel by destroying those resisting Israeli occupation would be treason now to the Palestinian people. After a Palestinian state exists, then he will have the obligation to prevent his territory being used to attack anybody PLUS he'll have gained an actual free country. That will be a strong incentive to stop those attacks he can + it will reduce the power of extremists. Your continued insistence that Hamas will be able to mount any serious terrorist campaign after Palestinian independence is just paranoid speculation on your part; my guess is that Hamas and others will be seriously weakened. In any case, Israel would certainly be no worse off then it is now even under your most paranoid scenario and at least they would be complying with international law for a change.
6 edits
Originally posted by no1maraudermarauder: "After a Palestinian state exists, then he will have the obligation to prevent his territory being used to attack anybody PLUS he'll have gained an actual free country. That will be a strong incentive to stop those attacks he can + it will reduce the power of extremists."
Of course, Israeli military forces won't have permission to use another countries' territory; what countries have permission to use Israeli territory? Your argument is comparing apples and oranges; your insistence is that Abbas "disarm and disband" Hamas and the others right now before a Palestinian state even exists; why should he? What does he gain ...[text shortened]... most paranoid scenario and at least they would be complying with international law for a change.
Read Ahmadinejad's speech, which he pronounced in the presence of terrorist Palestinian leaders.
marauder: "Your continued insistence that Hamas will be able to mount any serious terrorist campaign after Palestinian independence is just paranoid speculation on your part; .... "
marauder: "my guess is that Hamas and others will be seriously weakened. .... "
Your "guess" ....... Oh boy .... talking about speculations ...
A countries security cannot be built on "guesses", marauder. Therefore Israel cannot afford itself to build a peace agreement on the quicksand of your "guesses".
If Israel would sign such a peace agreement, they would give away all their trump cards, they will desperately need in true peace negotiations, in exchange for some vague hollow promises by the PA to "cooperate" and of course your "guesses".
Again, how stupid do you think the Israelis are ?
Your proposals lack inner coherence and inner logic. They are built on "guesses", speculations, hollow promises and the assumption the Israelis are stupid, dumb and blind.
Originally posted by ivanhoeAre you sure this is your stance? Will it change when I explain to you that very few security decisions are based on absolutes. At some point someone has to stand up and make an educated guess regarding some issues of security. When Bush saw a memo that said "Al Queda determined to strike in the US" he took a guess that it was just the usual "chatter". Now that is an example where guessing caused a catastrophe but it is proof that guesses are made in regard to national security. Guesses are made ALL the time. But you make guesses based on the information that you have. An informed guess is still a guess.
[b]marauder: "After a Palestinian state exists, then he will have the obligation to prevent his territory being used to attack anybody PLUS he'll have gained an actual free country. That will be a strong incentive to stop those attacks he can + it will reduce the power of extremists."
Read Ahmadinejad's speech, which he pronounced in the presence ...[text shortened]... built on "guesses", speculations, and the assumption the Israelis are stupid, dumb and blind.[/b]
5 edits
Originally posted by CliffLandinThe Israelis will never accept a "peace" agreement with the PA wherein the terrorist groups will be able to continue their attacks on Israel from Palestinian territory. A vague promise by the PA to cooperate in finding the terrorists , and mind you they do not want to risk a civil war (meaning they will do nothing nada against the terrorists before ànd after the signing), and some vague unsubstantiated guesses, speculations, that these terrorist groups will dissolve after a Palestinian state has been created, will be everything the Israelis would get. Maybe we should ask Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah if they intend to vanish into thin air once a Palestinian state has been created. I bet their answer will be negative ..... and that's not an unsubtantiated guess. They want to destroy the state of Israel. That's quite another cup of soup.
Are you sure this is your stance? Will it change when I explain to you that very few security decisions are based on absolutes. At some point someone has to stand up and make an educated guess regarding some issues of security. When Bush saw a memo that said "Al Queda determined to strike in the US" he took a guess that it was just the usual "chatter But you make guesses based on the information that you have. An informed guess is still a guess.
[i]Any Palestinian who signs a peace agreement with Israel will be looked upon as a traitor of the nationalist Arabic cause, disguised of course as an Islamic cause. He will be murdered by these "democrats" just like the Egyptian president Anwar Sadat was murdered. Abbas knows he will be signing his own death penalty when he signs a peace agreement ...... Arafat had the chance of a lifetime to sign a peace agreement. He did not do it. Why ? Because he would be murdered. He has admitted to that in a documentary. His confession is on tape.
Originally posted by ivanhoeAre you positive of this or is it your opinion?
The Israelis will never accept a "peace" agreement with the PA wherein the terrorist groups will be able to continue their attacks on Israel from Palestinian territory. A vague promise by the PA to cooperate in finding the terrorists , and mind you they do not want to risk a civil war (meaning they will do nothing nada against the terrorists before ...[text shortened]... cause he would be murdered. He has admitted to that in a documentary. His confession is on tape.
Your "guess" ....... Oh boy .... talking about speculations ...
A countries security cannot be built on "guesses", marauder. Therefore Israel cannot afford itself to build a peace agreement on the quicksand of your "guesses".
This was your statement that I was responding to. You clearly state, crystalclear if you prefer, is A countries security cannot be built on "guesses", I responded that they are all the time. You didn't deny it or admit that you were wrong. You simply went on to state your "guess" regarding Israel and Palestine.
2 edits
Originally posted by ivanhoeThe lies never stop. Arafat DID sign a peace agreement; the Oslo accords which gave Israel something it didn't deserve - control of 76% of the territory of Palestine. But to fanatics like you that just isn't enough; you went Israel to de facto control the Muslim portion of Palestine as well. Israel's "trump cards" are held in violation of international law; their physical ability to occupy Palestinian territory and brutalize and oppress the Palestinian people. Even after a reasonable peace agreement along the lines I've outlined, the Palestinian people will be under far more threat from Israel than Israel will be from them. That is a simple fact.
The Israelis will never accept a "peace" agreement with the PA wherein the terrorist groups will be able to continue their attacks on Israel from Palestinian territory. A vague promise by the PA to cooperate in finding the terrorists , and mind you they do not want to risk a civil war (meaning they will do nothing nada against the terrorists before ...[text shortened]... cause he would be murdered. He has admitted to that in a documentary. His confession is on tape.
Until Israel's leaders accept that the purpose of negotiations is to end Israel's illegal occupation and create a Palestinian state that has the same powers as any other state, then the war will continue. Your paranoid suppositions about what will happen after the creation of a Palestinian state are just excuses to make sure one is never created. Sooner or later, however, Israel will get leaders who realize that their present course is one built for never ending war and will negotiate a just peace which creates a truly independent Palestinian state, not the puppet pro-Israel one you desire. You'll scream and cry when that happens, but it is inevitable.
EDIT: And what leader got killed for signing the Oslo Accords, Ivanhoe?
Originally posted by ivanhoeDo you think the Palestinians should accept a peace deal whereby Israeli terrorist groups will be able to continue their attacks on Palestine from Israeli territory?
The Israelis will never accept a "peace" agreement with the PA wherein the terrorist groups will be able to continue their attacks on Israel from Palestinian territory.
Originally posted by shavixmirOf course not ! .... The question is that the marauder wants Israel to accept a proposal wherein Israel does not recieve the two things it needs most. Recognition as a state and secure borders.
Do you think the Palestinians should accept a peace deal whereby Israeli terrorist groups will be able to continue their attacks on Palestine from Israeli territory?
Originally posted by ivanhoeWhy do you keep lying, Ivanhoe? The Palestinians already agreed at Oslo to recognize Israel. And the 1967 borders were secure enough for Israel to militarily defeat all its Arab neighbors in 6 days.
Of course not ! .... The question is that the marauder wants Israel to accept a proposal wherein Israel does not recieve the two things it needs most. Recognition as a state and secure borders.