It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Report: Hamas will recognize Israel

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 06:28 PM
link   

According to a Thursday report on Al-Jazeera, the Hamas government will recognize Israel if Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders.

Hamas officials close to Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh expect Haniyeh to announce the change in the organization's platform in the next few days, Army Radio reported.

The international community has pressured Hamas since the group assumed power to acknowledge Israel's right to exist. The United States and the European Community have even frozen aid to the PA, with the exception of humanitarian assistance.

More at Source


Recognizing Israel, ending suicide attacks and all attacks outside the occupied territories, and reaching out to the international community I think Hamas has now proven themselves to be a partner for peace. Its conditional upon Israels withdraw to pre-war borders, but why should they ask for less that what is theirs? I expect many people to reject this out of hand, but don't discount the effect it will have in the international community.

[edit on 14-4-2006 by Malichai]




posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 06:51 PM
link   
I believe they will reject Hamas and it was always their intent to reject them from day one of their being elected wether they did a 180 degree turnabout and offered the recognition of Israel or not. All smoke and mirrors. I hope I'm wrong but I just don't see it happening.



Pie



posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malichai
I think Hamas has now proven themselves to be a partner for peace.

?
When they are willing to negotiate a peac treaty, then they're a partner for peace.
Why should isreal leave the occupied territories, from which attacks are plotted and launched, without a treaty promising no more attacks???? The 1967 borders are the 'big victory' that the palestinians are going to get, ie, its the most that they can possibly hope for. ANd they think they can get that by saying 'we recognize israel'????
The yehudis aren't going to go back to those borders without some serious concessions. Recognizing Israel is a diplomatic formality and pre-requistite to entering into the discussions in which Hamas can ask for them to withdraw.


why should they ask for less that what is theirs?

Because they're not going to get it.


, but don't discount the effect it will have in the international community.

The international community is already rather anti-israel. Its not going to make any difference.



posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 11:59 PM
link   
They should change their position to will recognize Israel as a political entity if Israel ends her occupation of all W.Bank + E.Jerusalem.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 12:05 AM
link   
Actually jajabinks, Hamas should simply tell the truth and admit that they will never recognize Israel, regardless if they withdraw to the 1967 lines, and that Hamas is simply seeking more territory from which to continue attacking Israel...





seekerof



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Malichai
I think Hamas has now proven themselves to be a partner for peace


Their back is against the wall locally, internationally, financially and diplomatically and so on….

And just because Hammas said ‘they’ are going to recognize ‘them’ if they do...? What about the rest of the Middle East and ‘those’ that have historically supported, armed, and promoted Hammas and Palestine/Arafat, will they do the same and recognize Israel? No.


Originally posted by Malichai
Its conditional upon Israels withdraw to pre-war borders, but why should they ask for less that what is theirs?


Why should Israel hand over any territory and go back to the pre 1967 war borders? How did ‘they’ end-up with this territory in the first place? Israel already showed how strategically important these areas are to her defensively when she was attacked again in 1973.

As far as good will goes…how about recognize Israel first, stop the ‘martyr’ bombings and general attacks then sue for territory under the proven crown of peace.

Borders are not the issue...


mg



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 12:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by jajabinks
They should change their position to will recognize Israel as a political entity if Israel ends her occupation of all W.Bank + E.Jerusalem.


That is pretty much what they said. They want Israel to withdraw from all occupied areas.

As for the others here....your hate has consumed you, and you are not worth a reply. Try putting yourself in the Palestinians shoes and ask yourself if you would want freedom.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malichai
Try putting yourself in the Palestinians shoes and ask yourself if you would want freedom.

If I was a palestinian, I certainly wouldn't've left my home, started a war and then gave up on it. And I certianly wouldn't be killing yehudi children, thats called 'murder'.

If the palestinians want that land, they're going to have to fight for it. Only a small percentage of their population has actually taken up arms against the yehudi 'invaders', and those cretins that are fighting are less focused on hitting the IDF and more focused on killinhg civies.

If they won't fight for their homes, they don't get them. They've been occupied for something like three generations, and they can continue to be occupied for another 30 generations. They don't fight. They don't negotiate. They don't get the occupation off their backs.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 02:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malichai
As for the others here....your hate has consumed you, and you are not worth a reply.


Actually it may be the other way around.


Originally posted by Malichai
Try putting yourself in the Palestinians shoes and ask yourself if you would want freedom.


Freedom? They are self governed…with their hand out and fully dependent on everyone but themselves. The Palestinians receive as a ‘body’ the most international aid of any group in the world yet still choose to fight over ideals and dirt instead of self sufficiency….The World Bank has supported, opened and staffed their schools since 1950’s, opened and operated their clinics the, etc. etc. etc. while her own leaders, Arafat included, robbed the coffers of hundreds upon hundreds of millions of dollars….. The Arab states hung the Palestinians out to dry more than once, for the most part do still today as ‘Palestine’ is used as a pawn against Israel. She will not be "free" until she gains legitimacy and self sufficiency and this will not happen squabbling over the lost spoils of a war long past.

Again this is not about borders….


mg



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 02:11 PM
link   
Heres something to kick around.

In Judaism (as I suppose in Christianity, though not sure how familiar they are with the concept), there is the mix multitude that went out of Egypt with the Jews.

We today dont know who the true Jew is, and who is part of the mixed multitude.

Wouldnt it be a twist if Israels borders are drawn to encircle the west bank so that basically all the palestinians turn into virutal prisoners not able to get out of their country?
What if they are the true Jews and the others are the mixed multitude?

The point is not to say this as fact, but to try to say this...we need to start loving each other...
drop all this fighting, who does it help?

Think about this...the creator of the whole universe, if he wanted something to happen, he could do it without violence.

Gods peace

dalen

edited: this whole life is a duality game that started with the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
Yin/Yang, etc. etc. So far this is the energy cycle of this earth...so be it.


[edit on 15-4-2006 by dAlen]



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by missed_gear

Freedom? They are self governed…


They are not free. Israel collects their taxes,[and is now keeping the money] controls their borders, steals their land, and is attcking the people, and destroying infrastructure.

They are not free, and Israel is the one denying them freedom.


Again this is not about borders….


Thats exactly what this is about. Where is Israels border, and if its outside the 1967 borders what is supposed to happen to the people living in these occupied lands? If they are not allowed to become citizens of Israel, and they do not have sovereignty they are not free.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malichai
Thats exactly what this is about. Where is Israels border, and if its outside the 1967 borders what is supposed to happen to the people living in these occupied lands? If they are not allowed to become citizens of Israel, and they do not have sovereignty they are not free.


If God is so concerned with land, than let him come and take care of it. He created the cosmos, but left it to us humans to destroy each other? Something smells fishy.

So until God shows up, lets have peace and all live wherever we want.

Sounds good to me. I think God likes my idea to.


Gods Peace

dalen



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Malichai
Thats exactly what this is about. Where is Israels border, and if its outside the 1967 borders what is supposed to happen to the people living in these occupied lands? If they are not allowed to become citizens of Israel, and they do not have sovereignty they are not free.


As a caveat, I do not support Israel in many of her actions; however there are merits to some of her claims just as there are some merits to claims against her. This is an interesting topic to say the least.

Your assumption lies in a belief there was a ‘sovereign state’ belonging to 'Palestine' in these disputed territories which was overthrown and/or ousted and this ‘sovereign state’ belonging to 'Palestine' indeed existed before the Six Day War inside these disputed territories, that the ‘Palestinians' want to become citizens of Israel and more importantly that Israel gained these territories as the aggressor.

In all the above cases none are true.

Prior to the invasion in 1967, Jordan occupied the West Bank and Egypt the Gaza Strip as a result of an illegal ‘aggressive’ invasion in 1948. Jordan annexed the West Bank in 1950 only to be recognized by two states. In 1967 Israel gained the currently disputed territories in a defensive acquisition and defensive retention which is legal. There are a few arguments but there are few rulings as well.

I can not find a copy of a specific applicable ruling to this topic online (yet, the search function is down at the ICJ) but the following discusses the ICJ findings on the matter stemming from the 1970’s.




Applicable Highlights:
Findings of Stephen M. Schwebel ICJ Justice, discussed.


-[snip]-

(c) where the prior holder of territory had seized that territory unlawfully, the State which subsequently takes that territory in the lawful exercise of self-defense has, against that prior holder, better title.

The facts of the June 1967 "Six Day War" demonstrate that Israel reacted defensively against the threat and use of force against her by her Arab neighbors. This is indicated by the fact that Israel responded to Egypt's prior closure of the Straits of Tiran, its proclamation of a blockade of the Israeli port of Eilat, and the manifest threat of the UAR's use of force inherent in its massing of troops in Sinai, coupled with its ejection of UNEF. It is indicated by the fact that, upon Israeli responsive action against the UAR, Jordan initiated hostilities against Israel. It is suggested as well by the fact that, despite the most intense efforts by the Arab States and their supporters, led by the Premier of the Soviet Union, to gain condemnation of Israel as an aggressor by the hospitable organs of the United Nations, those efforts were decisively defeated. The conclusion to which these facts lead is that the Israeli conquest of Arab and Arab-held territory was defensive rather than aggressive conquest.

The facts of the 1948 hostilities between the Arab invaders of Palestine and the nascent State of Israel further demonstrate that Egypt's seizure of the Gaza Strip, and Jordan's seizure and subsequent annexation of the West Bank and the old city of Jerusalem, were unlawful. Israel was proclaimed to be an independent State within the boundaries allotted to her by the General Assembly's partition resolution.

-[snip]-

Full Text


‘Free’ is rather relative to as status.



mg



posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 03:01 AM
link   
It looks like Hamas decided to offer terms of peace that they knew wouldn't be acceptable to Israel in order to appear "reasonable". Hamas has every right as a soveign (kinda) political entity to not recognize Israel. However, it must also understand that their decision carries certain consequences. That's the way it goes. In that same vein, if it comes to war, or what appears to be war, Israel will not hesitate to swiftly and brutally protect itself (as it has been shown to do in history). The winner gets to write history. Sad but true.



posted on Apr, 17 2006 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by dAlen
Heres something to kick around.

In Judaism (as I suppose in Christianity, though not sure how familiar they are with the concept), there is the mix multitude that went out of Egypt with the Jews.

We today dont know who the true Jew is, and who is part of the mixed multitude.

Wouldnt it be a twist if Israels borders are drawn to encircle the west bank so that basically all the palestinians turn into virutal prisoners not able to get out of their country?
What if they are the true Jews and the others are the mixed multitude?

The point is not to say this as fact, but to try to say this...we need to start loving each other...
drop all this fighting, who does it help?

So you agree that the issue can't be resolved until both sides sign a permanent peace treaty?

I have never seen anything that suggests that the Israelis will not sign a permanent peace treaty with a palestinian leadership, especially if its just an unconditional peace treaty, with an expectation that there be talks about the yehudi settlements in the future.
On the other side, the palestinian 'state' is run by an organization that is required, by its own constitution, to destory the state of israel, and they seek this out by targetting civilians.


Malichai
They are not free, and Israel is the one denying them freedom.[/quot]
Agreed. They are an occupied people. Of course, the yehudis have every right in the world to occupy the territory and police the people.


and if its outside the 1967 borders what is supposed to happen to the people living in these occupied lands?

They'll have to live under occupation.

If they are not allowed to become citizens of Israel, and they do not have sovereignty they are not free.

Why would israeli make them citizens? They are an occupied people, they have rights, but not the right to citizenship. Heck, they don't even have a right to have what little 'sovereignty' that the yehudis have granted them thus far. The yehudis probably should've pulled the plug on the self representation experiment when they elected hamas.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join