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.

 

Whats your Middle East Peace Plan?

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Thanks for the input guys. Fair enough.

Surprising though how Peace is not too popular a subject here, isnt it?




posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:16 PM
link   
Due to history of the conflict, there is a great deal of mutual mistrust and hatred. So any plan should take this background into account.
Also: - ideal position for Israel is keeping all the land and no more attacks.
: - ideal position for Palestinians is simply no Israel.
Finding gold middle point in between is only possibility for any plan that will work.
I think that eventual peace agreement will be something as follows (i do not agree to all the issues personally, but it is my feeling)
Borders will be based on 1967 plus territorial exchange - land from Israel proper in exchange for land large settlement group occupy.
Problems - Israel will have big problems in evacuating almost hundred thousands (or even more - depends on borders) its protesting settlers ,plus inner unrest. Plus some settlements that will remain (exchanged) will be connected to Israel proper by thin routes that will be attacked by extremist Palestinian groups who would like to bring the deal down.
- Palestinian side will be opposed by fundamentalist organizations that will declare agreement and borders unacceptable and will continue to attack Israel. Also extremist groups from Israel will surely try to undermine rule of Palestinians or even attack "soft" targets - like an attempt to bomb mosque on temple mount.

Jerusalem will be declared international city under mutual rule with sectors of control - Israeli, Palestinian,UN in friction zones.
Problems - a lot of Israelis (me included) would not accept it, and it might get ugly.
- how Palestinians would accept it i really do not know. I guess that majority would support it.

Refugees - i really do not know how it would be solved. Any Arab/Palestinian leader giving up on right of return for refugees could very easily be lynched. Israel on the other side will not accept right of return. Maybe territorial exchange and compensations could somehow hide the real result from one/both sides...

All in all, i do not see how any peace agreement will ensure peace. Due to above mentioned problems. Israel will loose a lot, tactically, politically, strategically and economically.
Palestine will be an independent country ,but an underdog compared to all its neighbors. With economy dependent on those neighbors with workforce as main export. At least in the beginning.
So - the mess will not be over even after an agreement will be reached, whenever it will happen.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:28 PM
link   
There can be no peace unless both sides of a conflict actually WANT peace. The actions of each side have shown without a doubt, that neither side REALLY wants peace. Both sides have built their entire existence around war, conflict, violence, and terror. Hamas continues to be able to embed itself within the Palestinian enclave, and Israel is poised to elect Bibi Netanyahu, who is about as hawkish as one can be, so I see no chance of true peace in the near future. In addition, world competing powers, such as the US and Russian have a vested interest in keeping the conflict going, despite what their leaders say. Both countries depend upon war to keep their flailing economies afloat, and will use their proxies to continue controlled, confined wars.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:39 PM
link   
In the 7th Century, The Muslim Conquest of the Levant was simple, effective and complete. Quick military victories over a decaying Byzantine Empire awarded the Arabs with a massive geographical area. Yet their population was small when you consider that the societies that they now controlled. (Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Palestine). They did not kill off everyone and repopulate with Arabs, because they were too small of a people group.

So how was it that in less than 100 years the predominant religion of Christianity and the common language of Greek were traded for Islam and Arabic?

The Muslims established their governments with a minority of leading members of Mecca and they allowed Christians and Jews the freedom to exist and practice their religion. The new Muslim governments required that all commercial business to be done in Arabic and anyone who wasn’t Muslim to pay taxes. Muslim’s were exempt. Of course revolts were crushed.

The Romans did it a little different. They didn’t establish themselves because of superior engineering or law. They killed everybody who opposed them and established the Pax Romana with Language and Taxes. But forget about crucifying everybody who opposes you in this modern world we live in.

Why not just impose similar requirements, Hebrew language only and a tax, within Israel and all of the occupied territories? I would submit that it could be a simple economic solution.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


skyfloating, it's not that peace is not too popular here on ATS, but it's because there is really no such thing.

There are only brief respites between the violence and war.

War and conflict are the normal states of affair. Even when there's no actual shooting, there is preparation for the shooting.

And the faster you shoot, the less shot you get.

Fact.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by BeowulfNorCal
 


What ,like a tax for not being a Jew???? Ammm, it is not a)moral b)just c)(less important) possible.
If all the people who will have to, after this "plan", use only Hebrew and pay more just because their mom was not "correct", will revolt and kick my ass, i would not resent them for it, actually i would think that they are correct.
I am thankful that accepted social behavior of 8th century AD and 21st century are different.
However i think that half-measures Israeli community applied in 1967 are definitely result for this problem. Territories captured had to be either released or annexed.Having guts to control territory without having the guts to make its population equal citizens , even due to known issues, was recipe for current disaster.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 02:13 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 


I don't think it would be correct either.

Isn't taxation one of the major reasons the Amercan colonies revolted. Having to pay the back English for the cost of The Seven Years War, that the Amercan colonists basically started.

Just make it easier for everyone to comply with, extend a peaceful hand, effect a fair judicial system.

In terms of language. The US corrected itself during World War 1 with basically the elimination of german anywhere other then in the home.
This country is making mistakes by making room for spanish. In my home state of California, my mother's family is Hispanic, they came here in 1780 and we all speak spanish, at home.

Is this allowance of spanish providing for a fracture of this country's cohesiveness? I believe so.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Step one the US needs to gets it nose out of what is purely a regional problem . The region is capable of solving what ever problems are at hands with the support and not the interference of the International Community . Return to the Golan Heights to Syria in exchange for recognition of the State of Israel . Cut off all aid to Israel until they invest in the Palestine people . If the sitting government could also invite country other then the US and Britain to send PRT teams or medical teams e.t.c .

After certain amount of time if the Palestine people still get behind extremists rather then vote on independence or integration then let Israel take what ever measures they deem necessary.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


there is really no such thing.

There are only brief respites between the violence and war.

War and conflict are the normal states of affair. Even when there's no actual shooting, there is preparation for the shooting.

And the faster you shoot, the less shot you get.

Fact.


Ive been comfortably resting in a tranquil and violentless life for more than 30 years now.

So have Billions of other people.

Your statement makes it sound as if thats not normal.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Let the UN take over Jeruselum (Ala Tom Clancy) make it a neutral city. Its holy to all 3 major religions, lets honor that. For gods sakes dont let Netanyahoo make a scene at the Temple Mount

STOP the settlements

Create a DMZ that acts as a buffer between the state of Israel and the Palistinians. man it with UN troops.

Give the Palestinians hope, rebuild thier infrastructure, schools etc. Make HAMAS unappealing.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 05:04 PM
link   
Most of us seem to agree that making Jerusalem a neutral city should go a long way in softening things up.

[edit on 7-2-2009 by Skyfloating]



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroKnowledge
 


Has it ever been considered, in your country, to purchase land for $$$$?

[edit on 7-2-2009 by Skyfloating]



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 05:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
Let the UN take over Jeruselum (Ala Tom Clancy) make it a neutral city.


First off I agree whole hearty with the idea of making Jerusalem a Neutral or International City . My issue would be that the UN doesnt have any creditability little alone enough to be a watchdog on such a matter .


Create a DMZ that acts as a buffer between the state of Israel and the Palistinians. man it with UN troops.


Now I admit that I am no expert on the geography of the area .
Given the population density of the area where could you put a DMZ ?


Give the Palestinians hope, rebuild thier infrastructure, schools etc. Make HAMAS unappealing.


You have hit the nail on the head there pretty well .



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 


There are enough boundaries and checkpoints in Palestine. The second best solution is return the whole of Palestine to a state of protectorate, disarm all parties including Israel and administer the area from the UN. This way the Israelis can pursue their religious imperatives and the Palestinians can be free from oppression.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 

You are most fortunate. I wish you continued good fortune and peace.

It's not that way elsewhere.

In 1948, 1956, 1967,1973 Israel was threatened with extinction and was compelled to engage in war.

1964, Colombian Civil War with 52,000 dead, 1969 the Phillipine Communist/Islamic Insurgence resulted in 160,000 dead, in 1975 the Secret War in Laos killed 3,000, in 1983 the Sri Lankan Civil War cost over 80,000 deaths, in 1984 the Turkey PPK conflict cost 37,000 lives, the Somali Civil War cost 400,000 lives, in 1989 the insurgency in Jammu and Kasmir killed 60,000, in 2000, the Second Chechnan War killed 90,000, in Darfur in 2003, 500,000 were killed, and the Kivu conflict in the Congo killed 4,000,000.

And this is just a drop in the bucket.

Middle East peace plan?

Apparently, it will require a blood bath.



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 08:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


skyfloating, it's not that peace is not too popular here on ATS, but it's because there is really no such thing.

There are only brief respites between the violence and war.

War and conflict are the normal states of affair. Even when there's no actual shooting, there is preparation for the shooting.

And the faster you shoot, the less shot you get.

Fact.


Well said, peace is what happens between wars.

Even most of our sports are violence oriented.

The most popular video games are violence oriented.

Until we can reprogram ourselves we are violent beings.

I wish it was otherwise, but here we are.

I agree that making the sites holy to multiple religions international
protectorates is a good starting point, but getting ppl that hate
each other to agree to it will be a tall order.





[edit on 7-2-2009 by Ex_MislTech]



posted on Feb, 7 2009 @ 08:39 PM
link   
My Mideast peace plan. Allow Israel to defend itself from those that attack it. Let them use overwhelming force. Let them destroy those that seek to destroy it. Just as any nation should have the right to do. When an enemy attacks and they ae defeated and their land captured, let them keep it as just compensation for war. Then when the dust clears and the enemy is no more, there will be peace in the middle east.



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 07:44 AM
link   
My peace plan?

Break down those walls, share the land, and drastic change in governments for both sides .. and of course an international mediator; along with observational forces (perhaps provided by the U.S).

Christians, Jews, and Muslims once all lived in peace at one time, long ago.



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


Well - this is a very good point. Government however is not doing it - not only for being cheap - but also because ownership of the land is shaky subject. What exactly it would buy if final borders are not known? Imagine how many threads speaking of new government-led "ethnic cleansing" would appear on ATS alone.
And what if Palestinian authority would not accept those deals? This is not very clear.
There are non-governmental (and usually right wing organizations) who are paying for land - only beyond 1967 borders though - but it often backfires.Like in Hebron house lately - for example.
I think that in final peace agreement Israel would have to pay.
By the way - JNF was organized in 1901 to do just that.



posted on Feb, 8 2009 @ 02:00 PM
link   
The best plan for Middle East Peace is no plan at all.

Western involvement in the Middle East over a great many decades and in many ways, has in part caused much of these current problems while aggravating older conflicts. Continued involvement will only mean more conflict and wars, broader and more destructive wars and conflicts than would have been without western involvement. It is and was none of our business absent oil demands.

But that is it isn't it?

As long as there is western demand for oil from the Middle East it will be our business. As long as the Middle East produces so much of the West's oil and the west supports and arms Israel peace will be unattainable.

The US and west's support and aid to Israel has also made things worse. But there is also no way for the USA in particular to back out of that support so that too is and will be a continued cause of conflict tensions and the reason for Middle Eastern Nations such as Iran to continue on the path of nuclear proliferation and future wars/conflicts.

I hate to say it in such blunt terms but there is NO viable plan for peace in the Middle East.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join