Are we there yet? Palestinian State, page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
Topic started on 29-5-2003 @ 12:01 PM by Gazrok
www.cnn.com...

Further than we've ever gotten before (amazing with Arafat out of the picture, huh?). They're meeting today, should be interesting. Unlike the Camp David accords, this plan directly addresses stages, and a commitment by Isreal to work towards eventually unifying unconnected parts of the proposed state. Let's see if the Palestinians will # up this chance too!

Personally, I've already lost sympathy for them the first time they walked...if they walk this time, I wonder how many more will view them as a lost cause? Let's hope they get their act together this time....


reply posted on 29-5-2003 @ 01:38 PM by Leveller
I think the fact that Bush is actually going to the region says that this is the hardest that anyone has pushed for peace so far.
I don't see either the Israelis or the Palestinians as having much choice in the matter.

If the Palestinians walk away from the table they are fully aware of the US policy in the War On Terror.
If the Israelis walk away they are fully aware of the US ability to pull the cash plug.
With Iraq now neutral, at least one obstacle has been removed. The US now has a base from which to operate in the region and will probably in the future have an ally there.
Israel is not doing itself or the US any favours by dismissing a peace process. Any later return is going to be very hard if current policies aren't changed.

But as I stated elsewhere - I see this as a done deal. What we are seeing is the public face of the talks. I would suggest that most of what follows has already been hammered out in the last couple of months or maybe longer. We're getting the window dressing now. The two sides are making the outcome more palatable for their populations. Both sides have to be seen publicly making demands and refusing concessions so as to keep the hardliners at bay. They can't afford to make the process look easy. They both have to come away from the table looking like they've won. I doubt wther they would take that risk over a public table.

But don't expect to see quick results. I don't see the Israelis dismantling their settlements overnight and I believe it will take months for the Palestinians to bring their militants under control. It could take years before our interpretation of peace is reached.
In the meantime we are going to hear a lot of hard rhetoric and probably see a few bluffs, but I would expect that if the deal has already been done.

Maybe I'm an optimist. But truthfully I don't see this as a Palestinian/Israeli deal. I see it more as the US walking up to both sides and saying "We will have peace whether you like it or not" and both sides realising that they've got no choice but to do as they're told.


reply posted on 29-5-2003 @ 11:56 PM by Toltec
From Reuters....

www.reuters.com...;jsessionid=ERBPJDJOGWCZGCRBAELCFEY?type=topNews&storyID=2848648

Strange as it may seem there is not much in the way of preparation with respect how those Israeli people who are relocated will react, if and when we get to that point (at least not that is being openly discussed)

That this does not seem to be matter of concern from either side begs the question as to if either side is actually working to complete this in the near future.

While Israeli militants have allowed the military for the most part to speak for them, they are very capable of reacting in as violent a fashion as there Palestinian counterparts.

When faced with this reality how will the Israeli army
react?

Israel does stand to loose substantial territory as a result of changing those dashes on the map to actual lines, so a question is what is it gaining in return?

Certainly as a result of a general cessation of hostilities the military industrial complex which is an aspect of Israelis economy will also suffer. So from a certain standpoint it can be considered that the losses far outweigh any potential benefit.

That is unless one takes into consideration the Saudi initiative which was presented some time ago (as I understand it the offer is still out their).

As well as the fact that the world powers state they are fully supporting this action, there contribution to Israel will be much more than just a pat on the back (all sorts of things come to mind).

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not the fodder to the terrorist canon its the wick and every time one kills another, justification for what terrorist do is spawned.

As a result the basis for these initiatives are fundamental to the war on terror and to say that it is an almost impossible goal to achieve, is more of an opinion with respect to the state of human evolution than the intricacy of the problem itself.

The real problem with a general cease fire between Israel and the Palestinians. Is to react to those who continue hostilities after the fact as combatants opposed to the new way and to take that very seriously.

This is not something new and would site that almost every war fought in history had the same problem. Some people will not surrender for the myriad of reasons that exist during war. Clearly many of these reasons are rational and that is what makes taking action against them, by forces which up until the
cease fire protected them at best a real mess.

As it has always been throughout history.

What are your thoughts?


reply posted on 30-5-2003 @ 08:55 PM by Toltec
Djarums I agree with you the majority of the people are tired of the war and most of all will be very happy when it is over, this does not change the fact that some will have to be arrested and (God forbid) other will turn there weapons on there own kind and as a result will have to be injured and even killed.

A good reason why War is hell is because once it is almost over, governments are forced to deal with those who will not surrender.

The reality is history does not treat this issue responsibly despite the fact that every war fought in which a peace accord has been achieved does entail this response.

Despite the conclusions presented by some (Estragon) the reason that the US is not prepared to work with ARAFAT. Is that it is clear he has no intention to deal with the realities of a general surrender, while Sharon has a different point of view.

Rather than imply the excuse that has been used for a millennia (a witch hunt) might I suggest that we as a world have to deal with the realities of war.


As of today the US has made clear that travel to Israel is not a good idea for American citizens, they did not just generate this response as a result of what the Palestinians will do (Had that been that case they would have been more specific).

Facts are facts the Arab press as well as the UN underreported the events of physical and psychological abuse occurring with the Arab world. As well for the record, did international human rights organizations not respond to what as obvious (they simply did not report it).

We as a world community are addressing the failure of the very system which was designed to overcome obstacles and bring to light the truth.

So while some site minions of Sharon I would sugest those who treat these issues as such, as more than just irresponsible.

What are your thoughts?
Pages:     ^^TOP^^