Kerry's Israeli/Palestinian peace talks

[Tsuga C]

Peace without victory is an impossibility and victory will only be achieved when one side exterminates the other. Arabs and Jews have hated each other and fought for the same resource base for the last 5,000 years. It'll only end when one or the other is no more.

[Zoraptor]

Arabs and Jews haven't even existed as distinct groups for 5000 years, and had a far better relationship than Arabs (Muslim Arabs) and Christians or Jews and Christians up until around a century ago. It's no coincidence that when Izzy and Ferdy went full pogrom post Granada most of the Jewish refugees went to the Ottomans, for example.

 

And 'victory' is achieved the same way it always has, make the other side unwilling or unable to continue, or come to an agreement prior to that point.

[Rostere]

Breaking: Netanyahu to undergo emergency surgery: http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/08/2013810232627213491.html

 

Peace without victory is an impossibility and victory will only be achieved when one side exterminates the other. Arabs and Jews have hated each other and fought for the same resource base for the last 5,000 years. It'll only end when one or the other is no more.

 

Look at all the wars which has been fought throughout history. Let's take WW2 as an example. Germany and France were on opposing sides, they fought, made peace, none of the countries was exterminated and borders did not change significantly in the end, yet they are allies today and none of the issues they had between themselves exist now.

 

I'd say, peace is achieved when two sides find the tolerance and intellectual maturity required to coöperate instead of creating conflict.

 

If Hamas takes over the West Bank, there will certainly be another Intifada and a huge amount of violence, almost certainly followed by full Israeli re-occupation with all that entails. As far as Netanyahu, he can always pull a Sharon and form a new centrist party if his coalition collapses over the peace treaty. Most Israelis do want real peace, and if they get a reasonable agreement some way would be found to implement it.

 

I would not be so certain. Keep in mind the differences between Gaza and the West Bank. Gaza is under crazy tight control from an international perspective, the West Bank even more so. Can you imagine a country criss-crossed by walls, barbed wire and checkpoints, sniper towers with searchlights, overflown by drones 24/7. Even going a few kilometres can entail several strip searches if you have said the wrong words on the phone. Most stuff you could even remotely create a weapon with is forbidden (although Israel is often more strict with construction materials).

 

It should be telling that Israel, despite it's size, is the world's next largest exporter of UAVs, and they look poised to snatch the first place from their arch-rivals in the UAV market, the US. This success has party been attributed to the frequency Israel gets to test it's UAVs live in Gaza. Indeed, other equipment related to the occupation makes up a large part of Israel's military exports which sadly possibly has helped several repressive regimes in their own efforts, for example the riot control equipment sold to Zimbabwe.

 

Hamas is having a hard time killing even one Israeli from the Gaza Strip. They could achieve even less from the West Bank. Israel has created the perfect military occupation in the West Bank and I don't think Hamas will be able to make as much as a scratch on Israel from there.

[Wrath of Dagon]

Look at all the wars which has been fought throughout history. Let's take WW2 as an example. Germany and France were on opposing sides, they fought, made peace, none of the countries was exterminated and borders did not change significantly in the end, yet they are allies today and none of the issues they had between themselves exist now.

 

I'd say, peace is achieved when two sides find the tolerance and intellectual maturity required to coöperate instead of creating conflict.

You're leaving out the small detail that it was Germany that lost, else the world would now be one big concentration camp.

 

 

Hamas is having a hard time killing even one Israeli from the Gaza Strip. They could achieve even less from the West Bank. Israel has created the perfect military occupation in the West Bank and I don't think Hamas will be able to make as much as a scratch on Israel from there.

There are no Israelis in Gaza, there are many in the West Bank, so not exactly the same situation.

[Gorgon]

As already pointed out, the status quo favors Israel. With the current leadership they are going to concede exactly nothing. We don't have a strong Palestinean moderate on the other side of the equation either. Yep, entirely hopleless.

 

They may agree on principle and set deadlines for further talks, like they have done for decades before with nothing materializing on the other end.

[Walsingham]

Arabs and Jews haven't even existed as distinct groups for 5000 years, and had a far better relationship than Arabs (Muslim Arabs) and Christians or Jews and Christians up until around a century ago. It's no coincidence that when Izzy and Ferdy went full pogrom post Granada most of the Jewish refugees went to the Ottomans, for example.

 

And 'victory' is achieved the same way it always has, make the other side unwilling or unable to continue, or come to an agreement prior to that point.

 

If you haven't already read "The Utility of Force" I'd recommend it.

[Gorgon]

If we are going to go digging for blame put it on bad Brittish administration prior to independence and Zionism.  Maybe it could have been possible to create a Jewish state without automatically antagonizing all of its neighbours, but not with such a massive influx of immigrants over so short a time. 

[Walsingham]

If we are going to go digging for blame put it on bad Brittish administration prior to independence and Zionism.  Maybe it could have been possible to create a Jewish state without automatically antagonizing all of its neighbours, but not with such a massive influx of immigrants over so short a time. 

 

I don't want this to sound like a knee-jerk excuse, BUT...

 

You have to remember that Britain was divesting itself of every colony/dependency it could, as fast as possible. It was an economic imperative, post-war. But if you read the correspondence flashing around the Colonial Office and in Hansard you can see this general tide of opinion that most of the troubles in these countries were caused by us. And that as soon as we left it would all be pretty much fine, because the locals would have to fix things, not just blame us.

 

This view, I have to say, strikes me as being tantamount to the popular view these days that Britain shouldn't have been there in the first place.

 

My own view is that a lot of the problem comes down to local cultures which emphasise partisan tribalism over national interest, and 'face' over pragmatism. You get fractured negotiation which is temperamentally incapable of behaving sensibly to resolve conflict. I don't think that perspective leads to healthy states. Period.

[Gorgon]

I wached a documentary recently about Indian independence and I never knew that the lack of local forces and the knowledge among the local hamlets that the border with Pakistan was in the process of being decided actually incited a series of bloody pogroms. The lack of centralized power is a very dangerous thing, even for a short time.

[Walsingham]

I wached a documentary recently about Indian independence and I never knew that the lack of local forces and the knowledge among the local hamlets that the border with Pakistan was in the process of being decided actually incited a series of bloody pogroms. The lack of centralized power is a very dangerous thing, even for a short time.

 

Yeah. I only discovered about two years ago the scale of the deaths involved. Can you imagine if there had been a rising, rather than a transfer of power?

[Rostere]

 

Look at all the wars which has been fought throughout history. Let's take WW2 as an example. Germany and France were on opposing sides, they fought, made peace, none of the countries was exterminated and borders did not change significantly in the end, yet they are allies today and none of the issues they had between themselves exist now.

 

I'd say, peace is achieved when two sides find the tolerance and intellectual maturity required to coöperate instead of creating conflict.

You're leaving out the small detail that it was Germany that lost, else the world would now be one big concentration camp.

 

What? That changes nothing.

 

They fought, no side was "exterminated", and now they are allies.

 

Hamas is having a hard time killing even one Israeli from the Gaza Strip. They could achieve even less from the West Bank. Israel has created the perfect military occupation in the West Bank and I don't think Hamas will be able to make as much as a scratch on Israel from there.

There are no Israelis in Gaza, there are many in the West Bank, so not exactly the same situation.

 

Indeed, not all the same. But my point still stands. The Israeli settler groups are far better armed than any Palestinians. Besides, it's not as if you can just waltz into a settlement as a Palestinian. At most they could infiltrate a few guys, which would all be for nothing if they meet with prepared settlers on the other side.

 

But yes, that would probably Hamas' most powerful initial attack...

[Wrath of Dagon]

What? That changes nothing.

 

They fought, no side was "exterminated", and now they are allies.

I'm sorry, I don't follow your logic, if the Germans had won lots more people would've been exterminated, it's only because the Allies won there's peace and prosperity.

 

Since the British mandate has been brought up, here's an interesting article I came across a few years ago : http://www.historynet.com/lashing-back-israel-1947-1948-civil-war.htm

Edited August 11, 2013 by Wrath of Dagon

[Walsingham]

If I may make a harsh point gently... tactical 'what ifs' just make the whole debate sound ludicrous.

[Wrath of Dagon]

I guess this is that 50% of the time when I don't know what the hell you're talking about.

[Oerwinde]

http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/news/story/2013/08/11/israel-settlements.html

 

So the israelis announced the approval of like 1100 more apartment units in the west bank today. that's gotta be good for peace. Lebensraum for God's chosen people and all.

Edited August 11, 2013 by Oerwinde

[Wrath of Dagon]

They have the right under the Oslo accords to provide for natural growth of the settlements they've already annexed. Also it's meant to be an offset for all the terrorists they're releasing.

Edited August 12, 2013 by Wrath of Dagon

[Oerwinde]

And that's where the problem lies. Israel shouldn't be expanding anything into Palestinian land, and the Palestinians shouldn't be asking for the release of terrorists. Everyones outlook is messed.

[Elerond]

They have the right under the Oslo accords to provide for natural growth of the settlements they've already annexed. Also it's meant to be an offset for all the terrorists they're releasing.

 

In my undestanding Oslo accords failed to mention expansion/growth of the settlements, which is one reason for it's failure to solve the conflict.

http://muftah.org/original-sin-how-the-oslo-accords-enabled-continued-settlement-growth-by-khaled-elgindy/

[Wrath of Dagon]

There are some settlements Israel doesn't intend to give up; this may not be the obstacle it seems, one solution proposed would be to trade Israeli land adjacent to the West Bank for the land those settlements occupy.

[Rostere]

 

What? That changes nothing.

 

They fought, no side was "exterminated", and now they are allies.

I'm sorry, I don't follow your logic, if the Germans had won lots more people would've been exterminated, it's only because the Allies won there's peace and prosperity.

 

Oh, now I see. I originally replied in response to Tsuga C. So now I don't even understand what we are arguing about in the first place. What was your original point really?

 

There are some settlements Israel doesn't intend to give up; this may not be the obstacle it seems, one solution proposed would be to trade Israeli land adjacent to the West Bank for the land those settlements occupy.

 

All the better if they all could live in the same country - suddenly the issue of evacuating settlements becomes not as loaded.

[Malcador]

Yes, two sets of people that have nothing but hate for each other in the same country.

[Rostere]

Essentially, the important part of the Oslo accords was that the Palestinians would not turn to the international community for help on forming a state, and in exchange for that, Israel would release these prisoners they are releasing now and do their best to help the Palestinians to form their own state.

 

Most stupid diplomatic deal of the century, if you ask me.

[Walsingham]

Essentially, the important part of the Oslo accords was that the Palestinians would not turn to the international community for help on forming a state, and in exchange for that, Israel would release these prisoners they are releasing now and do their best to help the Palestinians to form their own state.

 

Most stupid diplomatic deal of the century, if you ask me.

 

Not necessarily. Releasing non-strategic prisoners hardly adds measurably to the total number of militants. Plus they will cause all kinds of panic on the assumption that some may have been 'turned' or are being tracked by the intelligence services.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

What? That changes nothing.

 

They fought, no side was "exterminated", and now they are allies.

I'm sorry, I don't follow your logic, if the Germans had won lots more people would've been exterminated, it's only because the Allies won there's peace and prosperity.

 

 

Oh, now I see. I originally replied in response to Tsuga C. So now I don't even understand what we are arguing about in the first place. What was your original point really?

 

My point was that your example of no one being exterminated wasn't valid because it didn't consider both possible outcomes (Allies winning vs Axis winning).

[Walsingham]

Bit of context:
 

 

Israeli forces intercepted and destroyed a rocket fired from Egypt toward the Red Sea town of Eilat overnight Aug. 12, AFP reported Aug. 13, citing Israeli public radio. Jihadist militants had earlier said they fired a Grad rocket at Eilat in response to an alleged Israeli air raid. Egypt's military is trying to bring Sinai militancy back to tolerable levels. - Stratfor.com

 

 

Grad missiles are quite commonly being launched at Israel. They are military hardware, not home made.