German minister warns Israel it faces growing frustration in Europe

[dexterm]

18 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

As usual, you can't seem to make a post without going into your default propaganda mode.

 

Israel is not the only side to this conflict, and hardly the only side displaying intransigence when it comes to negotiations. It is not the case that the Palestinian side is ready and willing (not to mention able) to negotiate or to reach a compromise.

 

As for what Netanyahu says  - he says a whole lot of things, most dictated by the direction in which the winds assuring his political survival blow. And once more, you gloss over Palestinian leaders displaying similar behavior - saying one thing, then another, depending on circumstances and venues.

 

There is no requirement that the EU and the US will side with the Palestinians, as you do. There is little indication that either is anywhere near adopting your extreme views.

 

Asking, as Gabriel does, where Israel is heading and what are its intentions, is fair enough and a good question. But as pointed above, it is only half of the equation.

 

 

 >>Israel is not the only side to this conflict, and hardly the only side displaying intransigence when it comes to negotiations. It is not the case that the Palestinian side is ready and willing (not to mention able) to negotiate or to reach a compromise.

..Palestinians have been nagging Trump into starting direct talks for almost 12 months now, until Trump stabbed them in the back taking the main issue Jerusalem "off the table", thus torpedoing his  own supposed ultimate deal negotiations.

"Palestinans have from the first sit-down between the two presidents in May 2017 until December, the Palestinian leadership had been “nagging” Trump to begin direct talks with Israel, he said. 

The rupture in relations between the Trump administration and the Palestinian leadership started on December 6, 2017 when Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, “unilaterally,” Zomlot pointed."

http://mondoweiss.net/2018/01/palestinian-ambassador-backstabbing/

 

It will be interesting to see if willing-to-talk-peace-anywhere-anytime Netanyahu will agree to sit down with anyone other than biased USA as facilitator. As Gabriel pointed out, maybe the USA is not really acting in Israel's ultimate best interests. 

 

>>As for what Netanyahu says  - he says a whole lot of things, most dictated by the direction in which the winds assuring his political survival blow

... I think this what the German FM is sort of hinting at :
"These – at best mixed – signals do not go unnoticed in Europe, where there is clearly growing frustration with Israel's actions," (OP)

 

Maybe about time Israel got itself some more reliable serious leadership that the Palestinains could talk to.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

 

... Gabriel is being generous using the term mixed signals. Netanyahu's entire cabinet, himself included, are all on record saying never in my lifetime a Palestinian state.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/05/state-palestine-israel-zionist-150527070943455.html

 

 

 

In a fuller version of The German Foreign Minister's OP speech quoted in Haaretz, he points out the 4 options that Israel faces:

1. Continue to manage the conflict head in the sand while the problems grow.
2. A viable two state solution based on 67 borders with Jerusalem as the shared capital.
3. Israel annexing the West Bank, while continuing to deny the indigenous population equal rights = apartheid.
4. A single democratic binational state.

 

"How do you want Israel's future to look like? Are you prepared to pay the price of perpetual occupation and conflict - a price that will continue to grow if there is no hope for self-determination on the Palestinian side? Are you willing to bear the consequences of fully fledged annexation - a one-state reality of unequal rights? Or are you ready to accept a single democratic state between the sea and the river?"
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/german-fm-is-israel-prepared-to-pay-price-of-perpetual-occupation-1.5783841

 

now that the US admin have disqualified themselves as honest brokers.

 

Shortened for brevity.

 

IMO, they are DOING #1 while working towards #3, and hoping a slowly slowly method will allow them to institute de facto apartheid without alarming the world's leaders to the point that they feel forced to "do something". 

 

The shame of the rest of the world is that they have allowed it to happen, veto or not in the UN. Worth remembering that the US administration resisted supporting the anti apartheid movement till overwhelming world opinion forced them to do so.

 

IMO, the Americans have not been "honest brokers" since they voted to create a new state on other people's land. The brilliance of those leading the project has been to convince the rest of the world that they were unbiased, when they so obviously were, IMO.

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

More of your  usual nonsense and spins.

 

That you quote a Palestinian official alleging something recent is not an overwhelming indication or support for the notion that the Palestinian side is ready and willing. There is no reason to take Zomlot's word as gospel. As pointed out, leaders of both sides say the right things when the situation calls for it. There's rarely much substance behind such statements nor a true intention of following them through. Abbas is an chronically unpopular leader, who does not actually control about half of the Palestinian population and doubtful as to how many he represents. Glossing over uncomfortable facts is not going to change that.

 

I do not think Netanyahu committed himself to accepting any alternative mediator the Palestinian side fancies. While making faux points is right up your alley, there is no imperative for Israel to accept such dictates. And as much as you try painting it otherwise, the US will play a key role in whatever negotiation process which will emerge. 

 

Maybe stop pretending that the Palestinians have a "reliable serious leadership" that can be talked to.

 

[Morch]

 

@thaibeachlovers

 

Which "they" are you referring to? Israel, as a whole? There is no such wide agreement, never mind long term planning. The above may apply to some sections of Israel's right wing (in and out of the government) but probably not all. And even then, the notion of a well thought-out plan is rather alien to how things usually work over there.

 

There were over 30 countries (about 70% of the total votes) in favor of said UN resolution. Would you suggest disqualifying all of them on these bogus grounds? Perhaps accepting only those countries who voted against? And just to remind, the same resolution also called for the creation of a Palestinian State - not sure how that sits with the convulsed reasoning offered.

[Baerboxer]

On 2/1/2018 at 3:25 PM, Jingthing said:

I agree that the vast majority of people in the Middle East did not want the state of Israel to ever exist and now want it to stop existing. But that doesn't mean that some kind of messy peaceful compromise where Israel still does exist isn't possible. But it will be very, very difficult, so arguably pretty darn close to impossible. 

 

I really believe Israel pursued a solution, not a perfect one for anyone perhaps, but nevertheless a peaceful solution that could have led to co-existence and would have actually seen a Palestinian state that could have prospered. But other Arab and regional powers never wanted that. It suits those extremists to demand the destruction of Israel knowing full well that Israel, her allies and many neutrals will never allow that to happen. So it keeps the "sore" open and allows them to exploit it.

 

After so many years of trying, the rise of extremism happens in Israel, which is hardly surprising.

 

 

[Harveyg]

On 2/1/2018 at 3:11 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

 

I hope this time the EU actually does something, instead of just blah, blah, blah.

Time for an anti Sth Africa apartheid style world wide campaign, till Israel withdraws from the illegally occupied territories, East Jerusalem, removes the blockade of Gaza by land and sea, and recognises the Palestinian right to be a nation.

Well said.  But I must say I am repeatedly amazed by one sided eloquence. It reduces the eloquence to blindness, amazing blindness     Can someone offer an explanation for this?  Anti semitism is the only thing I can think of but there must be another reason, right??   I mean besides Israel being 100% at fault, historically and presently!

[Harveyg]

On 2/1/2018 at 3:28 PM, Ulic said:

Isreal has no intention of negotiating a two-state solution. End of story.

 

On 2/1/2018 at 3:28 PM, Ulic said:

Isreal has no intention of negotiating a two-state solution. End of story.

Oops. There’s goes that 1 sided eloquence again and much more simple.   Adds a real beauty to the argument.  

But wait.  Couldn’t there be an equally simple eloquent opposite?? —

Palestinians and Muslims have no intention of abiding a two-state solution. End of story.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Harveyg said:

Well said.  But I must say I am repeatedly amazed by one sided eloquence. It reduces the eloquence to blindness, amazing blindness     Can someone offer an explanation for this?  Anti semitism is the only thing I can think of but there must be another reason, right??   I mean besides Israel being 100% at fault, historically and presently!

Much simpler than that. Most of us don't like bullies.

I supported Israel when it was being attacked by a larger force, but now it is the larger force attacking innocent people, unless you want to say all Palestinians are guilty, of something.

Occupation, blockade, collective punishment, and land confiscation are illegal both by law and morality.

Stop the occupation and the blockade of Gaza and most will support Israel's right to exist.

 

I'm amazed that one side seems to think it's OK to occupy and oppress innocent people for decades, while stealing their land. Can there be an explanation for this?

[Morch]

10 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Much simpler than that. Most of us don't like bullies.

I supported Israel when it was being attacked by a larger force, but now it is the larger force attacking innocent people, unless you want to say all Palestinians are guilty, of something.

Occupation, blockade, collective punishment, and land confiscation are illegal both by law and morality.

Stop the occupation and the blockade of Gaza and most will support Israel's right to exist.

 

I'm amazed that one side seems to think it's OK to occupy and oppress innocent people for decades, while stealing their land. Can there be an explanation for this?

 

Not all the Palestinians are "guilty", and in the same way, not all are "innocent". Same as everywhere. I don't know that most people do not support Israel's right to exist anyway, even if some posters think otherwise. And, of course, then there are other posters who would not accept Israel even under such "conditions". 

 

To quote from a previous post of yours - "Two state solution with millions of PO Palestinians wanting revenge for the occupation".  Not much of a motivational statement there. As for the blockade of Gaza - two standing points often ignored: the blockade is maintained by Egypt as well, and it is not disconnected from Hamas (and other Islamic terrorist organizations) actions and policies. 

 

You can be "amazed" at whatever wide brush straw man position you choose to falsely claim, doesn't make much of argument. Things are a wee bit more complex than this contrived presentation.

 

 

[dexterm]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Not all the Palestinians are "guilty", and in the same way, not all are "innocent". Same as everywhere. I don't know that most people do not support Israel's right to exist anyway, even if some posters think otherwise. And, of course, then there are other posters who would not accept Israel even under such "conditions". 

 

To quote from a previous post of yours - "Two state solution with millions of PO Palestinians wanting revenge for the occupation".  Not much of a motivational statement there. As for the blockade of Gaza - two standing points often ignored: the blockade is maintained by Egypt as well, and it is not disconnected from Hamas (and other Islamic terrorist organizations) actions and policies. 

 

You can be "amazed" at whatever wide brush straw man position you choose to falsely claim, doesn't make much of argument. Things are a wee bit more complex than this contrived presentation.

 

 

Zionist Israel is the (mainly European) colonizer, invader, occupier, ethnic cleanser, land grabbing expansionist, and bully. 

Pray do tell when the Palestinians have done any of the above.

 

Israel is the only one in the area with the nuclear backed powerful standing army. The Palestinians have nothing to fight back with other than refusing to legitimize Israel...which must drive Israelis mad.

 

The German FM Gabriel is advising Israel as a friend that the EU is on Israel's case until that Palestinian legitimizing comes. And legitimacy will only come when Israel offers a just solution, agreed to by the Palestinians and accepted internationally.

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

Yeah, I'm quite aware of your extreme views and inflammatory rhetoric, thanks. That doesn't make the bile you spew any more to the point, any more constructive or any more accurate. The same tired old spins, aimed at posting as much regurgitated propaganda as possible.

 

The point made, and which you will not address, is that the labels of "guilty" and "innocent" are largely meaningless with regard to people as a whole. That you see this otherwise (but only when it suits, of course) matters naught. Just another affirmation of your extreme black and white positions.

 

The rest of your BS does not relate to my post as well - it had nothing to do with nuclear arms, supposed Palestinian "legitimization" (whatever you imagine this to stand for) of Israel. Not expecting anything on topic from you on the points which were raised. Been there done that.

 

And twist it as much as you like, Gabriel views do not align with yours, nor is the version touted above correct. There is no requirement that Israel be the sole side presenting solutions, while the Palestinian merely accept or reject offers. There is no "Palestinian legitimizing" other than in your fantasies. The same fantasies which include the EU being "on Israel's case" until such time as your imaginary conditions are met.

[Harveyg]

On 2/2/2018 at 6:28 AM, Kiwiken said:

There is a 4th solution a single state , Democratic and equal. But that is a big ask to two bitter opponents. I would more see sadly a single state divided by gerrymander and social apartheid

As long as there is religion it won’t happen.   But who knows.  We are evolving, aren’t we?

[Harveyg]

On 2/2/2018 at 3:55 AM, Thorgal said:

 

OP is about a GERMAN politician who expresses his opinion agains ISRAEL.

 

He didn't specify his opinion to JEWS only.

 

Israel has a minority of +20% of Arabs, read Muslims...

 

Perhaps you gonna lecture in a future thread about those same Arabs/Muslims to prove the Israeli social integrity...to the region...

Splitting hairs.  In the name of political correctness I’ll agree with you.   But for anything that has to do with reality, past and present, your statement is not necessary secul, not helpful, ....

[Harveyg]

On 2/2/2018 at 2:25 PM, Morch said:

 

Well, it's not like your comment is all that informed or even objective, is it?

 

Whether Israel should or shouldn't have "expected" this or that result when unilaterally withdrawing form the Gaza Strip is not the point. Rather, the Palestinians had, for the first time, an opportunity to run a part of their future state as they saw fit. Instead of making the best of it, they squandered the opportunity. Spin it however you like, there was a choice there, and the wrong turn was taken once more.

 

The blockade of the Gaza Strip is not disconnected from the reality of Palestinian actions (which you fail mention) nor is it upheld by Israel alone. If Egypt wished it, the blockade would have been effectively over long ago. Spin that one as well, if you like.

I’d like to alter some wording with what I generally am thankful for in your message.  

“the wrong turn was taken once more.”   Wrong for whom.  We could surmise that the turn was correct and completely consistent with the present view.  I wonder...  do any Arabs even regret that turn?  Surely it is consistent with multiple Arab statements as to the annihilation if the state of Israel.  In that light nothing was squandered. 

[Harveyg]

On 2/2/2018 at 4:52 PM, manarak said:

 a very racist point of view.

Labels don’t help anything.  They stop discussion.   

[Harveyg]

15 hours ago, dexterm said:

OP...
"In a thinly veiled threat about cutting off aid, he said some members of Israel's cabinet were "explicitly against the two-state solution" but that such a solution "has always been the foundation of our engagement for Israeli-Palestinian peace and for the large amount of funding" from Germany and Europe.
These – at best mixed – signals do not go unnoticed in Europe, where there is clearly growing frustration with Israel's actions," he told an Israeli security conference. Gabriel cited disagreements even within his own Social Democratic Party about what some see as "unfair" treatment of the Palestinians."

... Gabriel is being generous using the term mixed signals. Netanyahu's entire cabinet, himself included, are all on record saying never in my lifetime a Palestinian state.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2015/05/state-palestine-israel-zionist-150527070943455.html

 

Paying lip service to negotiating a two state solution is a charade Israel plays to distract the world while they continue the occupation and expansion of their illegal colonies. It is a game that so far has suited US and EU politicians too, so that they can pretend to be supporting peace negotiations, while remaining Israel's largest trading partner. (a weapon they could use if they really want change).

Gabriel pointed out that there is a growing frustration with Israel especially amongst younger voters regarding this smoke and mirrors routine.

 

In a fuller version of The German Foreign Minister's OP speech quoted in Haaretz, he points out the 4 options that Israel faces:

1. Continue to manage the conflict head in the sand while the problems grow.
2. A viable two state solution based on 67 borders with Jerusalem as the shared capital.
3. Israel annexing the West Bank, while continuing to deny the indigenous population equal rights = apartheid.
4. A single democratic binational state.

 

"How do you want Israel's future to look like? Are you prepared to pay the price of perpetual occupation and conflict - a price that will continue to grow if there is no hope for self-determination on the Palestinian side? Are you willing to bear the consequences of fully fledged annexation - a one-state reality of unequal rights? Or are you ready to accept a single democratic state between the sea and the river?"
https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/german-fm-is-israel-prepared-to-pay-price-of-perpetual-occupation-1.5783841

 

With legislation to annex more of the West Bank, with the mad men in the White House cheerleading, it looks like Israel is currently heading towards option #3 overt apartheid, which will be a game changer as far as world reaction is concerned.

 

The German minister's speech may be a last gasp attempt to get Israel to see sense. He may also be laying the groundwork for some sort of  P5+1 internatonal peace conference, now that the US admin have disqualified themselves as honest brokers.
 

Now,  how about a similar lucid detailed analysis of the other side - to give credit to your 1sided lucid remarks

[Harveyg]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Much simpler than that. Most of us don't like bullies.

I supported Israel when it was being attacked by a larger force, but now it is the larger force attacking innocent people, unless you want to say all Palestinians are guilty, of something.

Occupation, blockade, collective punishment, and land confiscation are illegal both by law and morality.

Stop the occupation and the blockade of Gaza and most will support Israel's right to exist.

 

I'm amazed that one side seems to think it's OK to occupy and oppress innocent people for decades, while stealing their land. Can there be an explanation for this?

“but now it is the larger force attacking innocent people,”

True - if you don’t include Iran’s unapologetic amazing proclamation to wipe Israel off the map.  I have repeatedly wondered if there are Arab states that want to perpetuate Palestinian suffering.  

Your kind of statement makes one cry for the underdog.  Yes let’s all cry,  it’s horrible, but let’s be more clear where the oppression springs from. It’s just not that open and shut.  And u can add the USA and whomever you’d like. My position is calling one side a bully is, well, enough said. 

 

“Stop the occupation and the blockade of Gaza and most will support Israel's right to exist.”

AYE. There’s the rub.  MOST!!

[Air Smiles]

33 minutes ago, Harveyg said:

True - if you don’t include Iran’s unapologetic amazing proclamation to wipe Israel off the map. 

 

lol. the source of that statement is from the 1980s, and has been mistranslated and used over and over by Israel as fake proof that Iran is out to get them.

 

The literal translation is: “This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the arena of time.”  Which is quite different to " “Wipe Israel ‘off the map’ "

 

 

[dexterm]

6 hours ago, Morch said:

 

@dexterm

 

Yeah, I'm quite aware of your extreme views and inflammatory rhetoric, thanks. That doesn't make the bile you spew any more to the point, any more constructive or any more accurate. The same tired old spins, aimed at posting as much regurgitated propaganda as possible.

 

The point made, and which you will not address, is that the labels of "guilty" and "innocent" are largely meaningless with regard to people as a whole. That you see this otherwise (but only when it suits, of course) matters naught. Just another affirmation of your extreme black and white positions.

 

The rest of your BS does not relate to my post as well - it had nothing to do with nuclear arms, supposed Palestinian "legitimization" (whatever you imagine this to stand for) of Israel. Not expecting anything on topic from you on the points which were raised. Been there done that.

 

And twist it as much as you like, Gabriel views do not align with yours, nor is the version touted above correct. There is no requirement that Israel be the sole side presenting solutions, while the Palestinian merely accept or reject offers. There is no "Palestinian legitimizing" other than in your fantasies. The same fantasies which include the EU being "on Israel's case" until such time as your imaginary conditions are met.

I wrote ..
"Zionist Israel is the (mainly European) colonizer, invader, occupier, ethnic cleanser, land grabbing expansionist, and bully. 
Pray do tell when the Palestinians have done any of the above."

 

I note you did not answer the simple question despite apparently accusing Palestinians of equal blame in the resolution of this conflict. Not that I expected anything else from a charlatan Zionist apologist.

 

You also ignore the fact that a just peace agreement with the Palestinians is the only key to Israel's legitimacy. As German FM Gabriel said there are no shorcuts. It doesnt matter what the current US admin and Netanyahu's government wishfully think, there will be no permanent peace (the only kind worth having) until the Palestinians say so. So its up to Israel to deliver that solution. They are in the box seat with all the power.  And the solution is so simple! Israel could agree to the two state solution that Gabriel envisages tomorrow if they really wanted peace... Jerusalem as shared capital, roughly 67 borders with land swaps, compensation for or recognition of refugees, as outlined by the German FM.

 

Pray do tell what are the problems to agreeing to those basic principles that have been known for the last 15 years at least. Other than Zionist greed in wanting to hold onto all the illegal facts on the ground they have created over the last 50 years and continue to do so.

 

[nausea]

I really do wonder where Israel thinks it 's going long term. Reminds me of Carthage v. Rome; you can win lots of battles but the demographics are against you. They can lose lots of times, you can only lose once.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, Harveyg said:

“but now it is the larger force attacking innocent people,”

True - if you don’t include Iran’s unapologetic amazing proclamation to wipe Israel off the map.  I have repeatedly wondered if there are Arab states that want to perpetuate Palestinian suffering.  

Your kind of statement makes one cry for the underdog.  Yes let’s all cry,  it’s horrible, but let’s be more clear where the oppression springs from. It’s just not that open and shut.  And u can add the USA and whomever you’d like. My position is calling one side a bully is, well, enough said. 

 

“Stop the occupation and the blockade of Gaza and most will support Israel's right to exist.”

AYE. There’s the rub.  MOST!!

Couple of points.

Iran isn't the subject and that's a different thread, and they are not Arabs.

 

IMO Israel isn't going to stop the occupation, or blockade, and it's all going to end badly for everyone.

[MrMuddle]

It's way past time that the civilised world completely ostracised Israel, the "state" that was founded on terrorism.

[Jingthing]

4 hours ago, MrMuddle said:

It's way past time that the civilised world completely ostracised Israel, the "state" that was founded on terrorism.

It was founded by the United Nations. The lands there were previously the colonial British Mandate of Palestine. Before that part of the colonial Turkish Ottoman empire. The land was divided into two different parts, Jewish and Arab. Immediately after, multiple countries in the Arab world launched an attack on Israel. The odds were on their side. They lost. 

Edited February 4, 2018 by Jingthing

[Morch]

13 hours ago, Harveyg said:

I’d like to alter some wording with what I generally am thankful for in your message.  

“the wrong turn was taken once more.”   Wrong for whom.  We could surmise that the turn was correct and completely consistent with the present view.  I wonder...  do any Arabs even regret that turn?  Surely it is consistent with multiple Arab statements as to the annihilation if the state of Israel.  In that light nothing was squandered. 

 

Reading your posts it seems that your hold a position which regards the Arab-Palestinian stance toward Israel and the conflict as unified and unchanging. Factually this is not the case. That there is relatively little public expression of such views is not to say that they do not exist. More an issue of political realities and risks. There's also, in many parts of the Arab world and the ME in general, a difference between popular sentiment and leadership's views.

[Morch]

11 hours ago, Air Smiles said:

 

lol. the source of that statement is from the 1980s, and has been mistranslated and used over and over by Israel as fake proof that Iran is out to get them.

 

The literal translation is: “This occupation regime over Jerusalem must vanish from the arena of time.”  Which is quite different to " “Wipe Israel ‘off the map’ "

 

 

 

There were many such statements over the years. Spin it as much as you like, the differences are superficial.

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

You go for this dishonest tactic on almost every topic. Hijack a post as if replying, while actually ignoring the post's content and going on one of the routine propaganda tirades. Then complain when your faux "points" aren't addressed. Your straw man question and argument are hereby dully acknowledged and tossed aside where they belong.

 

I did not "accuse" the Palestinians, but rather opined that the concept of "guilt" and "innocence" when applied to a people in general, are not useful nor usually correct. If anything, it is you who's obsessed with laying blame and assigning guilt in a one-sided manner. That you try to spin this in order to push a contrived "question" addressing one of your propaganda talking points is a routine tactic by now.

 

Your own view is that Israel's existence is illegitimate. That is not a universally accepted view. That is not Gabriel's view. Just another bit of nonsense you made up. The rest of your fables are the same old contradictory and ridiculous bunch of slogans.

 

A peace agreement is a two-sided affair, whether you like to acknowledge it or not - so just in the same way that the Palestinian side can accept or reject it, so could Israel. There is no conclusion or imperative which prescribes that Israel should be the sole side to offer solutions, while the Palestinian side plays a passive role. If your misconception rests on the imaginary "legitimization" claim, it should be pointed out that not achieving an agreement takes its toll on the Palestinian side as well. And if to apply your bogus terminology, also denies them their own "legitimization". It's a two way street. Guess that's another avenue leading to the contradictory "time is on the Palestinian's side" slogan.

 

On this post the only kind of peace worth having is a permanent one, on other posts you advocated all sorts of temporary truces. And, of course, nothing which relates how this relates or effects the Palestinians. No worries, a coherent explanation is not expected.

 

You can make up whatever "simple" solutions waiting just around the corner. But you know very well that even if Israel's government was up for that (and I am not claiming that it is, despite your many attempts to misrepresent my views), it is not the case that the Palestinian side would readily accept, or even accept at all. And that's referring to the supposedly moderate factions, disregarding Hamas and Islamic Jihad positions which you habitually ignore. Trying to paint the Palestinian side as ready and willing is patently false.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, nausea said:

I really do wonder where Israel thinks it 's going long term. Reminds me of Carthage v. Rome; you can win lots of battles but the demographics are against you. They can lose lots of times, you can only lose once.

 

The opening question is very much to the point, and it's the crux of the German FM's address. Israel's right wing government, which due to short term political conditions and considerations often veers further to the right, and further embraces religious trends does not seem to have a realistically well thought out long term plan on this front. There are interchanging instances of wishful thinking, faith, and burying of heads in the sand - depending on which politicians are referenced and on which venues. Israel's Center-Left opposition, generally speaking, is either for some form of two-state peace agreement or failing that, another instance of a unilateral pull out (while, bearing in mind lesson learned from the Gaza Strip, retaining more of a security hold on things).

 

The historical example is, I think, off mark - if the comparison is Israelis vs. Palestinians. The demographics (while presenting a serious issue) are not as dire or extreme to be applicable in the sense offered. If the reference was to the Arab world in its entirety, the demographics hold, but the lack of unity or purpose makes the it less relevant.

 

A mirror image query would be where the Palestinians think they are going long term. The bit about time being on their side seems to be contradicted by historical evidence, and that's without factoring the price paid as a society so long as the conflict drags on. Two sides of the coin.

[Morch]

5 hours ago, MrMuddle said:

It's way past time that the civilised world completely ostracised Israel, the "state" that was founded on terrorism.

 

It's way past time some posters would drop the pointless baiting. Or at the very least, get in touch with reality.

 

[thaibeachlovers]

2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

It was founded by the United Nations. The lands there were previously the colonial British Mandate of Palestine. Before that part of the colonial Turkish Ottoman empire. The land was divided into two different parts, Jewish and Arab. Immediately after, multiple countries in the Arab world launched an attack on Israel. The odds were on their side. They lost. 

Jewish terrorists killed a lot of British officers and government officials in a bombing of the King David hotel which probably contributed to the British abandoning their responsibility to the original inhabitants and handing Palestine over to the UN. Begin, a Jewish terrorist even became a PM.

[Morch]

7 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Jewish terrorists killed a lot of British officers and government officials in a bombing of the King David hotel which probably contributed to the British abandoning their responsibility to the original inhabitants and handing Palestine over to the UN. Begin, a Jewish terrorist even became a PM.

 

Not that this is really on topic, but there were wide spread terrorist campaigns by Arabs as well. Claiming that Israel was "founded on terrorism" is bogus, at best. And, of course, your biased and contrived interpretation as to the "British abandoning their responsibility" is not only more of the usual rubbish, but also ignores the time line of events.