Saudi King Salman tells Trump no Israeli normalisation without Palestinian statehood

[Eric Loh]

1 hour ago, Mavideol said:

the king  father has bigger balls then the son MBS, time for Trump to put the tale between his legs and stop the back door /under the table dealings with Netanyahu

King Salman was honouring his deceased brother King Abdullah who pressed Israel to accept a comprehensive peace agreement which include progressing talks on Palestine statehood. Israel rejected the peace initiatives and found a convenient ally in Trump to push forward their own plan without the inclusion of Palestine. It will never happen as long as King Salman is around. Thank god for that. Netanyahu and Trump are grabbing land based on military might with no intention of any comprehensive peace plan. It failed miserably and Trump has one less faux achievement to gloat. 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, ballpoint said:

Boy, trump will be smoking some Salman on Twitter when he hears about this.

 

Ummm....the OP is about a phone conversation between the two. Unless Trump was pretending to listen while tweeting some nonsense, I think he got it. Also, I doubt he was surprised or much disappointed.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Mavideol said:

the king  father has bigger balls then the son MBS, time for Trump to put the tale between his legs and stop the back door /under the table dealings with Netanyahu

 

How so? The king pretty much adheres to traditional, careful policy which been in place for about 20 years now. Don't think he's into rocking boats or taking undue risks for his rule at this point. Probably less trust in MBS's political instincts as well, by now.

 

 

 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, Orton Rd said:

Palestinians could have had a huge state called Palestine before WW2, and after offered by the UN, they did not want to accept as they could not bring themselves to recognize Israel. Their hatred will continue to turn down any offers, they must love playing the victim.

 

There was no "huge" state on offer, unless by "huge" you meant more-than-what-they-may-get-nowadays. That the Palestinians (or rather, leaders and sponsor Arab countries) made bad decisions, and continue to make them, doesn't really help the Israelis much, as the issue remains.

[Thorgal]

4 hours ago, polpott said:

The Saudi royal family swear allegiance to the Wahhabi. Always have, still do. Progenitors of 9/11. They swear to the destruction of Israel not subservience to it.

 

Wahhabism was created in 17th century by Mohammad Ben Abdelwahhab in nowadays KSA.

The creator of wahhabism was actually a son of Jewish merchant coming from Basrah, nowadays Iraq.

 

Wahhabism can be compared with what Calvinism has been traditional Catholicism. An internal religious reformation.

 

There's a huge difference between religious Islam and political Islam.

 

Religious Islam created a negative byproduct called wahhabism.

Political Islam promoted anti semitism after the creation of the Jewish state of Israel dominating the Palestinians.

This anti semitism was adopted under the pan Arabism (a larger than national political movement).

 

 

 

 

[Morch]

12 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

King Salman was honouring his deceased brother King Abdullah who pressed Israel to accept a comprehensive peace agreement which include progressing talks on Palestine statehood. Israel rejected the peace initiatives and found a convenient ally in Trump to push forward their own plan without the inclusion of Palestine. It will never happen as long as King Salman is around. Thank god for that. Netanyahu and Trump are grabbing land based on military might with no intention of any comprehensive peace plan. It failed miserably and Trump has one less faux achievement to gloat. 

 

With all due respect to posters' analysis, it is very doubtful that the Trump administration was surprised by the king's position and answer. As far as I recall, in assessments and commentary regarding Kushner's plan, KSA did not feature as leading-from-the-front, a role which was intended for Gulf countries. Similarly, the position of the king on this matter is nothing new - he repeated it a few times in recent years, following, if not mistaken, some of MBS's statements and acting as counterbalance/cold shower.

 

IMO, this was more an intended public display, allowing KSA to maintain that it is stays the course, while also allowing the king to reassert authority. What's more significant is what wasn't said - there were no fiery objections, no denouncements of parties involved, no threats, and Saudi Arabia's airspace remains open for Israel commercial air traffic.

 

 

[olfu]

12 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

 

^^ The crown doesn't rule Saudi, the religious do, but they allow the crown to think they do, IMO.

 

I don't often support anything Saudi, but I hope they stay the course.

I dont support anything before looking at facts and fact is 19 Saudis blow Twin Towers in New York city.

[dexterm]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

 

As expected, a staggering show of hypocrisy for some posters. UAE rulers opt for normalizing of relations with Israel, and it's tantrum like rants filled with dictators,  oppressive, the people not being consulted or even going on about torture and such. KSA chooses otherwise, and not a word about how the country is run on even harsher lines than the UAE. Apparently, it's alright to be an oppressive dictatorship, so long as your support poster's agenda.

 

As for the usual nonsense points in the post above:

 

- The UAE did not sign the agreement for "nothing in return". That you do not accept countries may have interests and priorities differing from your creed of politics carries little weight, and does not make your comments factual.

 

- The Arab Peace Initiative was rejected by the Hamas, representing a significant number of Palestinians. The hypocrisy highlighted above is evident again, seeing as the Palestinian people were not actually asked for their views, nor voted on accepting/rejecting the plan. Quite obviously, such matters only interest you when they fit your narrative.

 

- Some of the future participants/signatories of the Arab Peace Initiative fail to address domestic affairs, or indeed, speak in one voice (Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and the Palestinians themselves being easy examples). And yet you would have people believe that nothing changed.

 

- It's not so much a what-so-bad question, but more to do with sides (yes, not just Israel) unable to agree on things. You want to continue pushing your fringe politics? That's fine, so long as you acknowledge that they do not represent Palestinian public opinion and wishes much. 

 

- The usual rosy fantasies of living happily ever after in harmony are cute. Now go visit the ME, and find a single country where full western democracy values are adhered to. Or one in which ethnic groups live without any ongoing or reoccurring strife. Kinda doubt that picking one of the most explosive conflicts, situated in an already problematic region, and applying copy-pasted ideological solutions could be taken seriously. Maybe better places for your kind of social experiments.

 

- The Trump/Kushner thing is what it is. I doubt anyone seriously expects it to bring about permanent a permanent peace, present acceptable, workable all-around solutions, or answer the wishes of all parties involved. That said, even a measure of normalcy, and less hostility in such a volatile region ought to be sought, rather than disparaged.

The OP two state solution that King Salman initiated is the basis of the peace agreement that Israel's largest trading partner the EU endorses and just about every other county in the world. It was also the solution that the Obama administration supported before Trump came along to make things worse. It appears you are the fantasist out of line with world opinion. 

 

You fail to answer the question: What's so bad about a two state confederation or a one state solution with a bi-cameral parliament as outlined above, with sufficient security checks and balances and in a gradual process. Apart from people like you who say it can't be done. You seem to be a man with a problem for every solution. You lack vision and optimism; it's all in the too hard basket. 

 

Hamas as well as fanatical Jewish terrorists would be sidelined in a peace agreement, if enough outside US and EU pressure were brought to bear. I dare say white supremacists before apartheid ended and Jim Crow southerners pre Civil Rights bewailed the fact that things just aint gonna be the same no more.

 

The Trump Kushner thing not only is not going to bring about permanent peace it would also increase violence as the PA collapses and along with it security collaboration with Israel. Negotiations along the lines of King Salman's Peace Initiative would bring hope and calm.

 

And of course the elephant in the room still remains: what to do with 4.5 million indigenous Palestinians, whose lives have been ruled over by Israel 100% for 53 years now in apartheid conditions but who have no civil rights.

Edited September 7, 2020 by dexterm

[polpott]

1 hour ago, Thorgal said:

 

Wahhabism was created in 17th century by Mohammad Ben Abdelwahhab in nowadays KSA.

The creator of wahhabism was actually a son of Jewish merchant coming from Basrah, nowadays Iraq.

 

Wahhabism can be compared with what Calvinism has been traditional Catholicism. An internal religious reformation.

 

There's a huge difference between religious Islam and political Islam.

 

Religious Islam created a negative byproduct called wahhabism.

Political Islam promoted anti semitism after the creation of the Jewish state of Israel dominating the Palestinians.

This anti semitism was adopted under the pan Arabism (a larger than national political movement).

 

 

 

 

Tell me something I don't know. Osama Bin Laden and virtually all of those involved in the 9/11 attacks were Saudi Wahhabists.

[polpott]

3 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

Palestinians could have had a huge state called Palestine before WW2, and after offered by the UN, they did not want to accept as they could not bring themselves to recognize Israel. Their hatred will continue to turn down any offers, they must love playing the victim.

There speaks a hardened Zionist. 555

[polpott]

1 hour ago, olfu said:

I dont support anything before looking at facts and fact is 19 Saudis blow Twin Towers in New York city.

More than 19. A number of others ran the cells in the US and gave the orders. Fled back to Saudi days after the attack and the Saudi government have refused permission to extradite them or even interview them. Then there are the big boys in Saudi who provided the money.

[Evobase]

The Goyum know.

[dexterm]

4 hours ago, Orton Rd said:

Palestinians could have had a huge state called Palestine before WW2, and after offered by the UN, they did not want to accept as they could not bring themselves to recognize Israel. Their hatred will continue to turn down any offers, they must love playing the victim.

You keep regurgitating garbage about the Peel Commission's partition plan of 1937 which was also rejected by Zionists at their 20th Congress because they wanted even more: the whole of Palestine which they now have.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peel_Commission#The_Jewish_reaction

Palestinians rejected it because it was unfair and involved a huge forced transfer of their population.

 

Ben Gurion noted it was a tragic mistake, because it left 6 million Jews to be murdered by Nazis in the Holocaust, who may otherwise have had a country to escape to.

 

Zionists learned from their tragic mistake second time around in 1948, because they knew they had the power to use it as a stepping stone to gain the whole of Palestine, which they have succeeded in doing.
Palestinians objected to foreign powers giving away 55% of their land to colonising European immigrants, when Jews formed only 31% of the population and owned a mere 6% of the land.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine#British_censuses_and_estimations

[Evobase]

1 hour ago, polpott said:

Tell me something I don't know. Osama Bin Laden and virtually all of those involved in the 9/11 attacks were Saudi Wahhabists.

Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11. Stop believing the government propaganda.

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

 

A lot of words to cover the hypocrisy of whining about UAE being a vile dictatorship, not consulting it's people on such matters, and then cheering KSA when it suits.

 

Where did you see me post something rejecting the Arab Peace Initiative? That you to twist my positions and imply things that weren't said is nothing new. What, exactly, in my comments was "out of line with world opinion", then?

 

I did not "fail" to answer your faux question. I've done so, extensively, on numerous past topics. That you routinely choose to pretend each instance is the first time things were discussed, is both tiresome and dishonest. Your fantasies are not solutions. Your slogans and catchphrases aren't solutions. Ignoring that people on either side are not interested in most of these constructs is not a solution. Ignoring each and every real problem that exits, and wishing it away - not a solution either. Your "solutions" seem to revolve around not addressing actual issues, but airing fantasies based on little that's real. Wishful thinking is not a solution as well.

 

You repeat the opinion that Hamas will be sidelined. You have yet to support this with anything, or even to address that Hamas (and other extremists) can certainly make achieving a peace agreement difficult. As often is the case, what you post is at a disconnect with reality on a local and regional level. Just another fantasy.

 

I never said anything about Kushner's plan being a recipe for permanent peace, quite the opposite. You're barking up the wrong tree, or trying (again) to imply positions I do not hold. As for the PA's collapse - on past topics, you were all for the PA's collapse, and dismissed comments that this wasn't really in the best interests of the people. Guess that consistency is not of much use when having to flip flop so often.

 

As for the nonsense about negotiations following the Arab Peace Initiative bringing calm - you ignore again that Hamas/Islamic Jihad did not sign up for this, and that they represent a significant portion of the Palestinian people (if not a majority). Again, rosy fantasies devoid of any factual value or connection to reality.

 

As usual, I do not expect you to actually address points made in this post or the previous one, but fully anticipate you further complaining that your own "questions" are not answered, even when they were.

[dexterm]

@Morch

You called my proposal for a two state solution "fringe politics" , which is the same solution that the EU, King Salman's Peace Initiative and the Obama administration called for. You appear to be the one on the fringes of reality. 

 

You called my proposal for a single state with a bicameral parliament "rosy fantasies". Single state democracies with equal rights for all is how most of the members on this forum live. If you have lived in Israel you would not have experienced that I suppose.

 

If Hamas are included in negotiations, Israel says "We can't negotiate with terrorists".

If Hamas are not included in negotiations, Israel says "We need to negotiate a permanent peace with all Palestinians."

You are using the same playbook.

 

If Hamas oppose Salman's Peace Initiative, then don't invite them to the conference. If the Peace Initiative achieves its aims (67 borders with land swaps, shared Jerusalem or International City, acknowledgement of Palestinian refugees), and the prosperity that comes with peace is seen to be attainable, Hamas would be sidelined.

 

Edited September 7, 2020 by dexterm

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, dexterm said:

@Morch

You called my proposal for a two state solution "fringe politics" , which is the same solution that the EU, King Salman's Peace Initiative and the Obama administration called for. You appear to be the one on the fringes of reality. 

 

You called my proposal for a single state with a bicameral parliament "rosy fantasies". Single state democracies with equal rights for all is how most of the members on this forum live. If you have lived in Israel you would not have experienced that I suppose.

 

If Hamas are included in negotiations, Israel says "We can't negotiate with terrorists".

If Hamas are not included in negotiations, Israel says "We need to negotiate a permanent peace with all Palestinians."

You are using the same playbook.

 

If Hamas oppose Salman's Peace Initiative, then don't invite them to the conference. If the Peace Initiative achieves its aims (67 borders with land swaps, shared Jerusalem or International City, acknowledgement of Palestinian refugees), and the prosperity that comes with peace is seen to be attainable, Hamas would be sidelined.

 

 

No, I did not. I was obviously referring mainly to your usual one-state nonsense, but also to the bogus confederation bit. My views on both the two-state solution and the Arab Peace Initiative were aired on these topic numerous times, there is no way you are not aware of them. Just another attempt to twist words and meaning, nothing new.

 

You can go on and on about your one-state nonsense. It would still be inapplicable with regard to either sides' positions and wishes. Other than rosy fantasies, you could not begin to realistically explain how it would work or come about even if sides were actually into it. This is the ME, not the EU. Why would you imagine it is possible to copy-paste this construct and apply it to these surroundings? Could you point to any regional precedent? Any regional country practicing democracy on the level required even without the conflict to get over first?

 

You can spin it all you like, but Hamas is not interested being part of negotiations on a peace initiative it did not embrace. Further, Hamas positions are such that the basis for the Arab Peace Initiative is rendered pointless. You simply do not wish to accept the reality of the Palestinian schism, or the implication of the Hamas's positions. What you seem to engage in our nonsense games about what if's which do not apply.

 

As for your "don't invite them" bit, I would suggest making yourself familiar with Palestinian positions and politics before posting. It's not only Israel which sees the problem of negotiation with only one of the Palestinian leaderships, the Palestinians themselves have rejected the notion of conducting separate negotiations. From the PA's point of view, this would give the Hamas ample political ammunition painting them as selling out or being soft, while also running the risk of not being able to deliver when the time comes - thus putting their position and authority under question. This too, was covered on many past topics. Your assertion that the Hamas will be simply or easily sidelined is not, that I'm aware of, supported by any significant assessment.

[polpott]

4 hours ago, Evobase said:

Bin Laden had nothing to do with 9/11. Stop believing the government propaganda.

Read my post again. It doesn't say that he did.

[MajarTheLion]

15 hours ago, polpott said:

Kushner and Trump are hailing the deal with the Emirates as "The greatest peace deal ever". Actually its a deal between Israel and a tiny gulf state who are insignificant in the Arab world. The biggest non deal ever. Come back when one of the big hitters such as Iran, Syria or Saudi have signed on to it.

The United Arab Emirates is the number two exporter of oil in the Middle East. That alone makes them not "insignificant".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_exports

[MajarTheLion]

15 hours ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

largely agree with what you say except for the last bit,

in my view nothing with a US hand on/in it will ever sell in the middle east, regardless of its quality

 

the US has since quite long used/spent all her chips in the middle east, (so has UK),

and they (the chips) will never come back

 

I agree. The US should <deleted> out of it. I'd start with getting out of Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan and go from there.

[polpott]

49 minutes ago, MajarTheLion said:

The United Arab Emirates is the number two exporter of oil in the Middle East. That alone makes them not "insignificant".

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_oil_exports

Really? To Trump you're probably right. its all about the oil. 555

 

Saudi Arabia the country responsible for 9/11 was the first country Trump cosied up to after his election - oil.

 

Syria - Trump promised to withdraw US troups from there. They're still there guarding the oil fields which Trump has laid claim to.

 

UAE Politically completely insignificant but as you say major oil exporter. 

 

Its all about the oil, always has been always will be.

 

 

Edited September 7, 2020 by polpott

[dexterm]

7 hours ago, Morch said:

 

No, I did not. I was obviously referring mainly to your usual one-state nonsense, but also to the bogus confederation bit. My views on both the two-state solution and the Arab Peace Initiative were aired on these topic numerous times, there is no way you are not aware of them. Just another attempt to twist words and meaning, nothing new.

 

You can go on and on about your one-state nonsense. It would still be inapplicable with regard to either sides' positions and wishes. Other than rosy fantasies, you could not begin to realistically explain how it would work or come about even if sides were actually into it. This is the ME, not the EU. Why would you imagine it is possible to copy-paste this construct and apply it to these surroundings? Could you point to any regional precedent? Any regional country practicing democracy on the level required even without the conflict to get over first?

 

You can spin it all you like, but Hamas is not interested being part of negotiations on a peace initiative it did not embrace. Further, Hamas positions are such that the basis for the Arab Peace Initiative is rendered pointless. You simply do not wish to accept the reality of the Palestinian schism, or the implication of the Hamas's positions. What you seem to engage in our nonsense games about what if's which do not apply.

 

As for your "don't invite them" bit, I would suggest making yourself familiar with Palestinian positions and politics before posting. It's not only Israel which sees the problem of negotiation with only one of the Palestinian leaderships, the Palestinians themselves have rejected the notion of conducting separate negotiations. From the PA's point of view, this would give the Hamas ample political ammunition painting them as selling out or being soft, while also running the risk of not being able to deliver when the time comes - thus putting their position and authority under question. This too, was covered on many past topics. Your assertion that the Hamas will be simply or easily sidelined is not, that I'm aware of, supported by any significant assessment.

You ignore the patently obvious. Israel is already a single state..has been for the last 53 years.

If you are an Israeli Jew, you can live, work and worship anywhere you like from the Mediterranean to the Jordan.
If you are a West Bank or Gazan Palestinian you get to work and worship in Israel but only after you have been herded through metal cages at checkpoints by trigger happy IDF.

 

My preference is for a single democratic state which it will be ultimately because Palestinians and Israelis are geographical neighbors for eternity.
I don't care if it gets there via King Salman's Peace Initiative for a two state solution, which later melds into a EU or US style Confederation.

 

I agree with you that won't come from within the current Israeli mentality, but it can be brought about with a concerted push from a new US administration and an EU that doesn't just pay lip service to the mantra/fig leaf "We support direct negotiations towards a two state solution." then turns a blind eye to illegal settlement expansion.

 

Obama said "The status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace. The dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation."CNN interview May 19, 2011

 

If a new US admin wants to be a real friend to Israel, give them some tough love, and do as Bernie Sanders proposed: attach strings to the $billions of taxpayer money USA gives Israel each year.

Edited September 8, 2020 by dexterm

[Eric Loh]

38 minutes ago, 4reaL said:

You really should see more of the world dexterm, you're blinded by your own hatred of the Jewish State and their right to exist.

 

Palestine is seeking a two-states solution in accordance to the Oslo Accords and the Camp David 2000 Summit talks and not Israel's right to exist. Your views are much distorted by your ignorance.  

[4reaL]

7 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Palestine is seeking a two-states solution in accordance to the Oslo Accords and the Camp David 2000 Summit talks and not Israel's right to exist. Your views are much distorted by your ignorance.  

 

Palestine is governed by terrorists, until this is resolved there is no future for them.

 

 

 

[Eric Loh]

7 minutes ago, 4reaL said:

 

Palestine is governed by terrorists, until this is resolved there is no future for them.

 

 

 

The state of Palestine under President Abbas is recognized by 137 UN members and have non-member status in the UN. They are seeking for full member and is on-going. This implies UN recognition of statehood. Get a grip. 

[Morch]

4 hours ago, dexterm said:

You ignore the patently obvious. Israel is already a single state..has been for the last 53 years.

If you are an Israeli Jew, you can live, work and worship anywhere you like from the Mediterranean to the Jordan.
If you are a West Bank or Gazan Palestinian you get to work and worship in Israel but only after you have been herded through metal cages at checkpoints by trigger happy IDF.

 

My preference is for a single democratic state which it will be ultimately because Palestinians and Israelis are geographical neighbors for eternity.
I don't care if it gets there via King Salman's Peace Initiative for a two state solution, which later melds into a EU or US style Confederation.

 

I agree with you that won't come from within the current Israeli mentality, but it can be brought about with a concerted push from a new US administration and an EU that doesn't just pay lip service to the mantra/fig leaf "We support direct negotiations towards a two state solution." then turns a blind eye to illegal settlement expansion.

 

Obama said "The status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace. The dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation."CNN interview May 19, 2011

 

If a new US admin wants to be a real friend to Israel, give them some tough love, and do as Bernie Sanders proposed: attach strings to the $billions of taxpayer money USA gives Israel each year.

 

I did not "ignore" anything, certainly not the fact that you do not acknowledge points made by others, except when twisting their meaning or using them as stepping stones for more regurgitated propaganda.

 

What you post is untrue. Israelis are not even allowed to enter some of the areas controlled by the PA, and, of course, they are not permitted to enter the Gaza Strip. While you wish to ignore uncomfortable facts out of sync with your narrative, there's good reason for the Palestinians not being allowed free access - it would take some creative denial to erase all them terrorist attacks, suicide bombings and the like.

 

What you prefer is irrelevant to the fact that the "solution" you push is neither realistic, nor wished for by either people. That you try to paint it as being

 

And for the dishonest "agree with you", you do not. Twisting words is not "agreeing". I do not confine my comments, critical or otherwise to only one of the sides. You can go on about "Israeli mentality", but that leaves out the "Palestinian mentality" which you're either uninformed about or unwilling to discuss. Other than in your tirades, the conflict is not maintained solely by Israeli positions and stance.

 

It's interesting that you have no issues with applying foreign pressure on one side, but readily denounce the same with regard to the other. Following you "reasoning" this "tough love" could be used on both. But then, you have issues merely with countries not fully supporting the Palestinians in accordance with your views, so no surprises.

 

Let's check again - your points, such as they - addressed. Questions and points raised in my previous posts ignored. Not much of a discussion, but then you're not here for that.

Edited September 8, 2020 by Morch

[Morch]

32 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Palestine is seeking a two-states solution in accordance to the Oslo Accords and the Camp David 2000 Summit talks and not Israel's right to exist. Your views are much distorted by your ignorance.  

 

You must have missed the part where the Palestinians are divided among themselves, and effectively have two competing leaderships. The Hamas does not seek what you claim, while having issues with Israel's existence. That you and @dexterm wish to ignore this doesn't change facts and reality.

[Morch]

17 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The state of Palestine under President Abbas is recognized by 137 UN members and have non-member status in the UN. They are seeking for full member and is on-going. This implies UN recognition of statehood. Get a grip. 

 

Getting a grip would be accepting that, currently, the Palestinians are a divided people/nation. And that they do not all support the PA or subscribe to the political positions you claim. The situation is made even more complicated by both leaderships being essentially unelected. The Hamas, by the way, is recognized as a terrorist organization by quite a few countries, especially those bearing more relevance to the conflict.

[Rimmer]

Multiple off topic posts and replies have been removed.

 

Topic is not about US aid

[dexterm]

32 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

I did not "ignore" anything, certainly not the fact that you do not acknowledge points made by others, except when twisting their meaning or using them as stepping stones for more regurgitated propaganda.

 

What you post is untrue. Israelis are not even allowed to enter some of the areas controlled by the PA, and, of course, they are not permitted to enter the Gaza Strip. While you wish to ignore uncomfortable facts out of sync with your narrative, there's good reason for the Palestinians not being allowed free access - it would take some creative denial to erase all them terrorist attacks, suicide bombings and the like.

 

What you prefer is irrelevant to the fact that the "solution" you push is neither realistic, nor wished for by either people. That you try to paint it as being

 

And for the dishonest "agree with you", you do not. Twisting words is not "agreeing". I do not confine my comments, critical or otherwise to only one of the sides. You can go on about "Israeli mentality", but that leaves out the "Palestinian mentality" which you're either uninformed about or unwilling to discuss. Other than in your tirades, the conflict is not maintained solely by Israeli positions and stance.

 

It's interesting that you have no issues with applying foreign pressure on one side, but readily denounce the same with regard to the other. Following you "reasoning" this "tough love" could be used on both. But then, you have issues merely with countries not fully supporting the Palestinians in accordance with your views, so no surprises.

 

Let's check again - your points, such as they - addressed. Questions and points raised in my previous posts ignored. Not much of a discussion, but then you're not here for that.

>>Let's check again - your points, such as they - addressed. Questions and points raised in my previous posts ignored.
..the usual arrogant nonsense. You ignore the fact that Israel is already a de facto single state. Has been for the last 53 years.

 

Might be a good idea to keep some of them terrorist fanatical Jewish settlers the other side of the green line too, the ones that firebomb Palestinian homes and mosques, throw rocks at honest Palestinian farmers, poison wells and livestock, cut down olive trees. Cowards because they have the guns, and that goes for the IDF too, who simply turn a blind eye to these thugs. 

 

I am all in favour of a peace conference on the basis of the OP King Salman Peace Initiative but with honest brokers mediating, cajoling and banging both heads together. Trump and Kushner have clearly shown they don't fit that bill. Their deal of the century is a just a Netanyahu wishlist.  Maybe after the November election in the hope there's a fresh team.

 

If not, mai ben rai, Trump will help Israel dig a deeper hole for itself.