Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View The "One State Solution" From The Other Side of The Looney Spectrum
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 4:11PM #1
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 15,972
Just to keep everyone up to date on the idea which is a favorite of at least one person here. This article presents this unworkable "solution" from the opposite side of the person who supports it here on B'net.


Myth of a two-state solution
Palestinians fighting Israel and each other put peace out of reach

. . .

The only viable solution for the Middle East is a one-state solution: one contiguous Israeli state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. There will not and cannot be lasting peace in the Middle East until then.

Ever since the Palestinians and Arab countries refused to accept the Mandate for Palestine in the 1920s, the original two-state solution, the international community has been catering to Palestinian and Arab demands for a divided Israel. The Palestinians and Arabs, however, repeatedly have rejected those proposals, including the 1947 U.N. Partition Plan, which they are using to justify their demands for a divided Israel. Enough is enough. Why is the international community continuing to kowtow to these demands when, for 64 years, the Palestinians and Arabs have worked against peace? Israel is the only country in the region that has shown that it wants and will work toward peace.
. . .

The Palestinians have broken their word again and again. They continue to fire rockets directly at innocent Israeli families and children, and they have betrayed the fundamental tenet of the two-state solution they tout by cutting Israel out of negotiations and going directly to the United Nations. Moreover, the Palestinian Authority (PA) continues to incite violence against Israelis.
. . .
The two-state solution can never work when one of the domains, the Palestinian state, does not even acknowledge the other state’s (Israel‘s) right to exist and has as its entire purpose in life wiping Israel off the face of the earth. Never will peace come when one side possesses such hate and routinely expresses that hate through violence and blood. It is time to let go of the two-state-solution insanity and adopt the only solution that will bring true peace to the Middle East: a single Israeli state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Israel is the only country in the region dedicated to peace and the only power capable of stable, just and democratic government in the region.
. . .
Those Palestinians who wish to may leave their Fatah- and Hamas-created slums and move to the original Palestinian state: Jordan. The British Mandate for Palestine created Jordan as the country for the Palestinians. That is the only justification for its creation. Even now, 75 percent of its population is of Palestinian descent. Those Palestinians who remain behind in Israel will maintain limited voting power but will be awarded all the economic and civil rights of Israeli citizens
. . .
 full article:
www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/3/...

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 07, 2012 - 5:06PM #2
Miraj
Posts: 5,021

Looneyism abounds, and pushes back from the "Other Side".


Is All Criticism of Israel Antisemitic? Put Simply: Yes


“But surely you believe,” they always ask you, “that you can criticize Israel without being antisemitic?” It is an obnoxious and patronizing question in and of itself, of course, in that it is obviously an admonition that all civilized, thinking people must answer “yes” or “of course” or “naturally.” It is important, however, because of its true answer, which is unequivocally, unquestionably, and objectively “no.”


Before the remonstrations on the “silencing of dissenting voices” and “attack on free speech” begin, it seems necessary to point out the reason for this: All criticism of Israel is antisemitic because of the specific historical moment in which we live. The circumstances in regard to Israel and the Jews in the world today render any non-antisemitic criticism of Israel impossible. And most ironically of all, it is entirely the fault of the antisemites.


Whether one wants to admit it or not, we are living in an age in which a global campaign exists for the sole and specific reason of legitimizing the destruction of Israel and the expulsion or annihilation of its Jewish population. Iran’s own president is straightforward about wiping Israel off the map. Islamists call for it every five minutes somewhere in the world. Western academics and activists regularly hint at it with such euphemisms as the “one-state solution” (an Arab state, in case you were wondering), and their constant apologetics on behalf of anti-Jewish terrorism.  And as the recent atrocities in Toulouse have shown us, the Jews of the Diaspora are not and will not be spared the bloody consequences.


Continued at the link.

Disclaimer: The opinions of this member are not primarily informed by western ethnocentric paradigms, stereotypes rooted in anti-Muslim/Islam hysteria, "Israel can do no wrong" intransigence, or the perceived need to protect the Judeo-Christian world from invading foreign religions and legal concepts.  By expressing such views, no inherent attempt is being made to derail or hijack threads, but that may be the result.  The result is not the responsibility of this member.


PhotobucketPhotobucket
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 10, 2012 - 10:38AM #3
NahumS
Posts: 1,759

I must confess, I get loonier by the day.


The two-state-solution is an obvious chimera. There is no way that it can work.


The Palestinians seem unable to establish a civil society on thier own, and if they accept the millions of "refugees" (which they are disinclined to do), they will simply not be able to absorb them. Neither can Israel. So a 2 state solution will not solve the problem of the refugees - nor will a 1 state solution. The solution is in humanitarian absorbtion of the "refugees" and their myriad decendants in the countries where they have been living.


Such a small country would not be economically viable. It's hardly Monaco or Andorra....


We hear a great deal about how the Palestinians "deserve" their own state - but very little about how such a state will bring peace and stability.


A Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria is likely to become another Gaza - exporting terror and living in misery. Who wants thst? Not us - and not the majority of Arabs either.


Israel cannot remove its citizens from the area that the Palestinians are demanding as a state. No democracy could possibly forcibly remove nearly half a million citizens. The demand that the future Palestinian state be Judenrein simply removes any moral justification for its existence.


The solution lies in a federated autonomy - or in one state. The state of Israel - the nation state of the entire Jewish people - with equal civil rights for all of its citizens. Its symbols would still be Jewish and Israel would still have a responsibility for the entire Jewish people.


Arab citizens would have a significant degree of minority rights that would guarantee their  right to their own religion, language and culture, while having equal civil rights as Israeli citizens. Israel will remain Israel.


There would be a larger Arab minority - about 35% vs the present 25%. Still, if they agree to live as an ethnic minority (as Jews are everywhere else in the world) in a Jewish state with a guarantee of their rights, problems can be worked out in the Knesset - without violence. They would enjoy the highest standard of living in the middle east, as well as be free to be part of the only democracy in the region.


The advantages: an end to the conflict, an end to violence and force, citizenship for all residents of Israel and a share in its economic, social and technological wellbeing. There would also be, in time, a good relationship between Arab and Jewish citizens. Israelis want this - even those on the political right (like myself) but the conflict gets in the way.


In effect, all the current non-citizens of Judea and Samaria would become like Israeli Arabs - but if the conflict is ended, the situation of Israeli Arabs will greatly improve. They would have equal civil rights, full citizenship and a share in the country and its wellbeing.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 10, 2012 - 10:58AM #4
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 15,972

Nahum


So what you are suggesting is basically a modification of the Canada/Quebec deal. (It was a much better deal for the Quebecois than for other Canadians but they seem happy with it so who am I to complain?)  Could you flesh out the idea more fully?

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 10, 2012 - 12:19PM #5
habesor
Posts: 5,663

To all:


The problem is not how many states there will be in a solution to the conflict. The problem is that not all parties can contemplate a solution that allows for the continued existence of both sides. When that happens the actual arrangements on the ground should be reasonably easy to work out.  


To Miraj:


Generally speaking I don't bother with the question of whether or not a critic of Israel is anti-Semitic. I prefer to examine the arguments and leave the motivations for making them out of the discussion. However, since you mentioned the issue of Antisemitism and criticism of Israel, I was just wondering how you can tell if a criticism of Israel is motivated by the Antisemitism of the critic or by some other reason. In fact, how can you tell if criticism of the Arabs or the Palestinians is motivated by hatred of Arabs or Muslims on the part of the critic.


Though sometimes I have strong suspicions about these critics, unless the statement is made that they hate all Arabs, Muslims, Jews, Zionists or whatever, I find it very difficult to make any kind of determination and hence my focus on the arguments themselves.


Habesor   

Habesor
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  May 14, 2012 - 3:55AM #6
NahumS
Posts: 1,759

May 10, 2012 -- 10:58AM, rocketjsquirell wrote:


Nahum


So what you are suggesting is basically a modification of the Canada/Quebec deal. (It was a much better deal for the Quebecois than for other Canadians but they seem happy with it so who am I to complain?)  Could you flesh out the idea more fully?





I am not a politician or a diplomat. I want israel to continue to control defensible borders - from the Mediterranean to the Jordan -  and I want Jews to have the right to live anywhere in our homeland while respecting the property and human rights of others.


I do not want to see anyone removed from his home against his will. Not Jews, and not Arabs.


I also am not happy about ruling over Palestinian Arabs against their will, nor do I want them to remain without any citizenship (Jordan took that away in 1988).


I want to see an end to the conflict.


This all leads me to the one-state solution. We will have to investigate precedent and see what worked and what doesn't, and negotiate a status for the Arabs.


I don't see ethnicity as the major issue - but hostility. If the Arabs of Judea and Samaria can give up their hostility, we can find a way to accomodate their ethnicity as a national minority and still preserve Israel as the state of the Jewish people as well as of all its citizens.

Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook