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.

 

The third Intifada- What went wrong?

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by backinblack
 


Are you suggesting that settlements expansion is somehow halting Palestinian growth?

I'm against the settlements in general, but you and I both know there's absolutely no correlation between 500 houses built in one colony or another and the Palestinian economy growing, its city development, etc..

Your statement is purely sentimental..



Well if Israel supported a Palestine state it would show they want peace.. What's the chances of that ??


What has Palestine done for peace?

I think the real question burning in my mind is- How are Israel and Palestine *any* different? Both governments are doing exactly the opposite of what they should be doing, for the sake of getting reelected instead of the sake of their nations' futures..

We both know politics is bull#, why hang the blame solely on the Israeli side? Why do people so easily embrace this one sided, polar way of thinking?

With respect,
Eliad.




posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 11:59 AM
link   
reply to post by sk0rpi0n
 


I'd love to know why *you* think you know the "real deal" in the middle east. Do you live here? Are you reporting from here?

Or are you simply getting your information like everyone else who live halfway across the world and take part in this trendy picking of sides (instead of promoting sane and rational thinking)?

With respect,
Eliad.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Where was it announced that it was called off?

Clearly the people of Palestine, Syria and Lebanon haven't heard.

And wasn't the UN vote declared by Abbas long before the third Intifada was declared of Facebook?



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Realistically speaking the vote would probably be vetoed, and we'll all be back to the drawing board.

Basically it all depends on Israel and Palestine's next governments.

That doesn't mean there's no more hope, though.. Just that it doesn't lie in shortcuts..



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eliad
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Realistically speaking the vote would probably be vetoed, and we'll all be back to the drawing board.

Basically it all depends on Israel and Palestine's next governments.

That doesn't mean there's no more hope, though.. Just that it doesn't lie in shortcuts..


General Assembly votes where this will take place has no veto's as veto's can only occur in the Security Council for this is not a matter of the Council.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eliad
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 


Where was it announced that it was called off?

Clearly the people of Palestine, Syria and Lebanon haven't heard.

And wasn't the UN vote declared by Abbas long before the third Intifada was declared of Facebook?


That is why the uprisings have gone away over there. The vote occurs in September where it will pass.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Eliad
 


Well if Israel supported a Palestine state it would show they want peace..

What's the chances of that ??


Someone on the Palestinian side has to get Hamas to recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State peacefully with a Palestinian state next door. Until Hamas doesn't explicitly recognize Israel's right to exist peacefully and states they will honor past agreements, it will be impossible to negotiate a Peace settlement.

As I have stated before, it's ludicrous to negotiate a peace with someone who still wants to kill you, and goes so far to as to explicitly state that. Israel can work with Fatah as a peace partner, it can't with Hamas given their reluctance to allow Israel to peacefully coexist with a Palestinian State.

Does anyone think that Hamas would give up control of Gaza if a fair election were to be held there and they lost? The Arab Spring seems to have totally missed the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. I would have thought that they would have been the poster children of the Arab Spring. Both Hamas and Fatah are pretty autocratic when you really look at them, the Palestinian street has to do what they say. Go figure......



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil

Originally posted by backinblack
reply to post by Eliad
 


Well if Israel supported a Palestine state it would show they want peace..

What's the chances of that ??


Someone on the Palestinian side has to get Hamas to recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish State peacefully with a Palestinian state next door. Until Hamas doesn't explicitly recognize Israel's right to exist peacefully and states they will honor past agreements, it will be impossible to negotiate a Peace settlement.

As I have stated before, it's ludicrous to negotiate a peace with someone who still wants to kill you, and goes so far to as to explicitly state that. Israel can work with Fatah as a peace partner, it can't with Hamas given their reluctance to allow Israel to peacefully coexist with a Palestinian State.

Does anyone think that Hamas would give up control of Gaza if a fair election were to be held there and they lost? The Arab Spring seems to have totally missed the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. I would have thought that they would have been the poster children of the Arab Spring. Both Hamas and Fatah are pretty autocratic when you really look at them, the Palestinian street has to do what they say. Go figure......


Palestine has already cut Hamas off as they have done nothing positive nor constructive for anyone. Hamas like Hezbollah is not to be trusted.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 





General Assembly votes where this will take place has no veto's as veto's can only occur in the Security Council for this is not a matter of the Council.


I see.. I seem to have heard that the U.S has the power to prevent the vote, and is planning on using it.
At any rate it doesn't seem like anything would change until both sides agree on a solution.

Let's look at it this way- Had Israel gone to the General Assembly and got it to pass a vote allowing it to keep 15% of the West Bank, regardless of Palestinian demands or the damage it would cause Palestine, would you feel the Palestinians must abide by it?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the 67' borders, but that's hardly fair, now, is it? People have been living there for decades, have built communities and homes, should they all be thrown out the window simply because I want the Palestinians to have 2% more land? Or should the two states reach a middle ground?

The problem lies with the two governments, not the people, not the settlements themselves, not a lack of land in the West Bank.



That is why the uprisings have gone away over there. The vote occurs in September where it will pass.


Yes, but that's been planned for months now, long before the 3rd Intifada went up on Facebook.

Furthermore there has been no announcement that the protest was called off, so where do you get this info?

Is it a conclusion you came to?

With respect,
Eliad.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Eliad

Are you suggesting that settlements expansion is somehow halting Palestinian growth?

I'm against the settlements in general, but you and I both know there's absolutely no correlation between 500 houses built in one colony or another and the Palestinian economy growing, its city development, etc..



Continued building of settlements are a poke in the eye/ thorn in the side of the Palestinians. There is no reason that Israel needs to keep adding more units to settlements. If the places were reversed, Israel wouldn't like Palestinians building settlements on Israeli land. If you wouldn't like it, why would you to it others?

It would be a very nice gesture to freeze all settlements, all it is doing is Israel trying to create new defacto borders by settlements. I know there will be some adjustments of the 67 border, but it's just not right or conductive for peace for Israel to continue to build settlements in the West Bank. Both sides will have to give up things near and dear to them for there to be real peace between the two parties.

Or both sides can be idiots to each other and keep things the way they are. Sad thing is, neither side will budge enough for the other for the beginnings of peace to start. It's going to take small steps from both sides being decent to the other for things to get back on the right track.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 08:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1


Palestine has already cut Hamas off as they have done nothing positive nor constructive for anyone. Hamas like Hezbollah is not to be trusted.


Don't know where you have gotten that impression. Fatah and Hamas supposedly have patched up their differences. I would not trust Hamas, especially since the best offer they have given is a multi-year ceasefire and that they wouldn't be bound by past agreements. What happens after the ceasefire expires in Hamas's vision of the world? At least they are stupidly honest about their intentions.



posted on Jun, 22 2011 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Eliad
 



"I'd love to know why *you* think you know the "real deal" in the middle east. Do you live here? Are you reporting from here?


What I stated is my understanding of how the Palestine situation is handled by the mainstream media, pro-israel groups, christian groups, western governments etc. They pretty much drowns out alternative views.

Please review my post again and tell me where Im wrong. What do you think is happening?





Or are you simply getting your information like everyone else who live halfway across the world and take part in this trendy picking of sides (instead of promoting sane and rational thinking)?


"trendy picking of sides", huh?
Do people criticize the nazi regime and sympathize with the jews because they are just taking part in trendy picking of sides?
or are they rationalizing that what the nazis were doing was bad.

Same thing here, when I defend the palestinians (at least on a forum, if nothing more) and criticize the Israeli treatment of the Palestinians, its based on an assessment of certain events and actions. Nothing more, nothing less.




edit on 22-6-2011 by sk0rpi0n because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Eliad
reply to post by backinblack
 

Are you suggesting that settlements expansion is somehow halting Palestinian growth?
I'm against the settlements in general, but you and I both know there's absolutely no correlation between 500 houses built in one colony or another and the Palestinian economy growing, its city development, etc..
Your statement is purely sentimental..


Well if Israel supported a Palestine state it would show they want peace.. What's the chances of that ??

What has Palestine done for peace?
I think the real question burning in my mind is- How are Israel and Palestine *any* different? Both governments are doing exactly the opposite of what they should be doing, for the sake of getting reelected instead of the sake of their nations' futures..
We both know politics is bull#, why hang the blame solely on the Israeli side? Why do people so easily embrace this one sided, polar way of thinking?
With respect,
Eliad.


Mate, stealing land for civilian settlements is an "act of war", it's an invasion by any reasonable standard..
Therefore, the Palestinians have every "right" to retaliate..
Heck, Israel would shoot any Palestinian trying to do the same thing..

And how can Palestine grow with Israel's settlements and the blockade on needed items to build?

Also in Israel's own words, they are worried about "defensive borders'.
That means they will take MORE land around the settlements as a buffer zone..



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 02:06 AM
link   
There is no such thing as "Palestine", there are no such people as "Palestinians", there is only Arab occupiers and terrorists, occupying a piece of Israel. Bulldoze Gaza to the sea.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thwax
There is no such thing as "Palestine", there are no such people as "Palestinians", there is only Arab occupiers and terrorists, occupying a piece of Israel. Bulldoze Gaza to the sea.


More BS from a book of fiction..
It's actually people like you that give Israel a bad name, nice work.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Thwax
 




There is no such thing as "Palestine", there are no such people as "Palestinians", there is only Arab occupiers and terrorists, occupying a piece of Israel. Bulldoze Gaza to the sea.



If it looks like Arabs are "occupying a piece of Israel", its because they were living there first... alongside a smaller jewish population.

Its more like jews occupying a land they have never lived in for millenia.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by Thwax
 




There is no such thing as "Palestine", there are no such people as "Palestinians", there is only Arab occupiers and terrorists, occupying a piece of Israel. Bulldoze Gaza to the sea.



If it looks like Arabs are "occupying a piece of Israel", its because they were living there first... alongside a smaller jewish population.

Its more like jews occupying a land they have never lived in for millenia.


Times change. Arabs may have been there before Israel was refounded, but the Jews are there now, and there is absolutely nothing the terrorists, or terror sympathisers can do about it. Every time the stone age Islamic countries surrounding it have tried to remove it, they have been defeated. It's time to accept that the Palestine project has failed. The more you fire rockets, the more you will suffer devastating retaliations.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 03:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Thwax
 


IMO it's Israel that is at a crossroad..

They will enter the real world or perish..



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:05 AM
link   
reply to post by Thwax
 



Times change. Arabs may have been there before Israel was refounded, but the Jews are there now, and there is absolutely nothing the terrorists, or terror sympathisers can do about it.


Your view of muslims seems to be that they are either "terrorists" or "terrorist sympathizers"

Anyway, you are right... times change... and hopefully we will see a time when the Israeli regime is vanquished, just like the Nazi regime... or any other regime.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Eliad
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 





General Assembly votes where this will take place has no veto's as veto's can only occur in the Security Council for this is not a matter of the Council.


I see.. I seem to have heard that the U.S has the power to prevent the vote, and is planning on using it.
At any rate it doesn't seem like anything would change until both sides agree on a solution.

Let's look at it this way- Had Israel gone to the General Assembly and got it to pass a vote allowing it to keep 15% of the West Bank, regardless of Palestinian demands or the damage it would cause Palestine, would you feel the Palestinians must abide by it?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the 67' borders, but that's hardly fair, now, is it? People have been living there for decades, have built communities and homes, should they all be thrown out the window simply because I want the Palestinians to have 2% more land? Or should the two states reach a middle ground?

The problem lies with the two governments, not the people, not the settlements themselves, not a lack of land in the West Bank.



That is why the uprisings have gone away over there. The vote occurs in September where it will pass.


Yes, but that's been planned for months now, long before the 3rd Intifada went up on Facebook.

Furthermore there has been no announcement that the protest was called off, so where do you get this info?

Is it a conclusion you came to?

With respect,
Eliad.


The White House has already paved the way for the vote to occur.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join