Palestinians win Saudi support but no Arab condemnation of UAE-Israel deal

[dexterm]

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

You ignore that this no-permanent-peace situation is much easier to endure on the Israeli side, where it has less of an obvious effect on people's lives. On the Palestinian side(s) things are not necessarily quite as bearable.

 

Your "recommendation" to the Palestinians manages to both ignore and milk their plight while waiting for the outcome promised. And if it does not pan out this way? Too bad for the Palestinians, great for them wannabe "activists" pouring scorn from behind the comfort and safety of their keyboards.

 

The above also ignores Palestinians are not as invested in the sort of solutions and happy endings you go on about. As usual, not a word on Palestinian positions, wishes, politics and whatnot. As far as you are concerned, seems like these are immaterial, irrelevant.

As usual full of carping criticism of others' positive solutions, but none of your own offered and not a word about what to do with the 4.5 million Palestinians living under apartheid conditions, other than roll over and surrender to your Zionist colonialist masters because it's the easiest thing to do. And spare me the faux sympathy for Palestinian suffering.

 

It does not matter how many mercenary deals Israel makes with Gulf dictators, all Palestinians need do is stay where they are. Until Israel gets a peace deal with them, Israel's land grabs will remain illegitimate.  

Edited September 11, 2020 by dexterm

[Morch]

40 minutes ago, dexterm said:

The dictators who run the UAE reneged on the Peace Initiative they had signed putting $$$ of which they already have plenty above principles. That's backstabbing. If your principles are might is right and the mighty $ trumps human rights, up2u. That would not at all surprise me.

 

Harping on the "dictators" label is meaningless considering you do not have such issues with KSA or even the Palestinians themselves. As far as I'm aware, the Arab Peace Initiative was not a binding agreement that shackled the supporting to your version of the Palestinian cause for all eternity. I don't see you having any issues with the fact that the Hamas rejected the Arab Peace Initiative.

 

I don't know that the agreement between the UAE and Israel represent much of an economic reward for the UAE. Ties may increase, but how much more relative to what was already in place remains to be seen. What the UAE does get are better ties with the USA, possible strengthening of military capabilities, and gaining a better position as far as diplomatic leadership of the Arab world goes.

 

There is no imperative, even if you think so, to put Palestinian interests before national ones. There is also no imperative to ignore Abbas severing ties with the UAE a while back, but you seem to manage that too.

 

When it doubt, when you got nothing, bring out the personal attacks - I never stated that might makes right is a principle of mine. I acknowledge that on many levels, that's how things work. You want to deny either? The first denial would be a lie, the second merely living in a fantasy world.

[dexterm]

44 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Harping on the "dictators" label is meaningless considering you do not have such issues with KSA or even the Palestinians themselves. As far as I'm aware, the Arab Peace Initiative was not a binding agreement that shackled the supporting to your version of the Palestinian cause for all eternity. I don't see you having any issues with the fact that the Hamas rejected the Arab Peace Initiative.

 

I don't know that the agreement between the UAE and Israel represent much of an economic reward for the UAE. Ties may increase, but how much more relative to what was already in place remains to be seen. What the UAE does get are better ties with the USA, possible strengthening of military capabilities, and gaining a better position as far as diplomatic leadership of the Arab world goes.

 

There is no imperative, even if you think so, to put Palestinian interests before national ones. There is also no imperative to ignore Abbas severing ties with the UAE a while back, but you seem to manage that too.

 

When it doubt, when you got nothing, bring out the personal attacks - I never stated that might makes right is a principle of mine. I acknowledge that on many levels, that's how things work. You want to deny either? The first denial would be a lie, the second merely living in a fantasy world.

Disinformation. I called the leaders of KSA head chopping dictators. Your deflection does not make sense.; it is a non sequitur.

 

>>As far as I'm aware, the Arab Peace Initiative was not a binding agreement that shackled the supporting to your version of the Palestinian cause for all eternity.

Well, make yourself aware! When people sign agreements they usually stick to them. If they don't, it's called breaking your word. Although that seems to be the vogue amongst many politicians these days.

 

Sure there's no imperative to support human rights. Just that people who don't tend to be immoral selfish sociopaths.

Edited September 11, 2020 by dexterm

[Morch]

38 minutes ago, dexterm said:

No hypocrisy. I am no fan of the head chopping dictators in KSA either. But they have at least kept their word.

 

The man with a problem for every solution. When you have exhausted all other nitpicking play the Hamas wild card.

 

Just because the bully Israel seems to be temporarily winning does not make it right. Israel has a state but with an as yet undefined eastern boundary..they keep moving it. You place the material comforts of the average Israeli above the moral compass they have lost. 3 years of brutalization and possible death in the IDF, and forever looking over your shoulder is not a lifestyle most western teenagers and their parents would aspire to. Not exactly nirvana.

Spare me your faux sympathy for the Palestinians.

 

The bottom line is that a country being run by dictators, and its human rights record take the backseat, as far as you are concerned, relative to support of the Palestinians. You don't even express much issues with both Palestinian leaderships being repressive. Coming from someone proclaiming himself a "humanist", it is most blatantly hypocritical.

 

Apologies on behalf of reality for not twisting itself to the shape of your fantasies. No apologies for the pointing out of your constant inaccuracies, uninformed views, fantasies and lies. That you wish to ignore many of the issues present in reality is fine, that you try to pass such views as being solidly grounded in fact, is not.

 

Hamas is not a "wildcard", even if you really don't want to go there. Ignoring it won't make it go away. The same goes for the current political state of the Arab world. These are facts. Throwing a tantrum each and every time they are pointed out won't change them one bit.

 

I've never said Israel was fully in the right as far as its conflict with the Palestinian goes. There was no such claim in the post you responded to. Never claimed Israelis live in a Nirvana, or that the occupation does not take its toll on Israeli society. I merely pointed out that it's easier to bear on the Israeli side of the fence compared with the Palestinian's. This was in response for your view emphasizing prices Israel pay. Just another fact, just another piece of reality that you cannot, or will not, address.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

You appear to be a Nakba denier. No mention of the fact that Israel's ethnic cleansing of half the Palestinian population and their racist refusal to allow their right of return is the root cause of the entire conflict.

 

And you appear to be a desperate troll. I never denied what you claim. What I did comment about was the language and descriptions you use are less on the factual side, and rely on emotive content. As you cannot support your claims, you go on yet another bogus, baseless personal attack.

 

Same goes for making nonsense comments unrelated to either side's actual positions, or either people's views. That was what you originally posted about - and obviously missing from your "reply".  Highlighting uninformed or misleading parts of your commentary often results in such unrelated attacks such as above.

 

So by all means, do tell about sides' various positions regarding "arrangements" such you mentioned. And do provide fact based details about all them title deeds and keys. Alternatively, you could explore support on either side to the notions of confederacy or a one-state solution. 

 

Guess all that's too hard, or going places you don't wanna go, so probably another irrelevant personal attack will be forthcoming.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

As usual full of carping criticism of others' positive solutions, but none of your own offered and not a word about what to do with the 4.5 million Palestinians living under apartheid conditions, other than roll over and surrender to your Zionist colonialist masters because it's the easiest thing to do. And spare me the faux sympathy for Palestinian suffering.

 

It does not matter how many mercenary deals Israel makes with Gulf dictators, all Palestinians need do is stay where they are. Until Israel gets a peace deal with them, Israel's land grabs will remain illegitimate.  

 

Your fantasies are at a disconnect from fact, reality and positions of both sides involved. That you see these fantasies as "solutions", or your apparent disdain for facts not aligned with your views doesn't make them a real prospect and does not imbue them with much force. In short, they are not to be taken seriously.

 

As opposed to your routine lie, I have actually expressed my views numerous times. The Palestinian need to take stock, accept a measure of accountability and take charge of their own destiny. This  will no doubt involve further compromises, further departure from their long held narrative. 

 

There can be no solution without the Palestinians developing a proper leadership able to be commit, and actually put the Palestinians on a path focused on actually building a country. The emphasis given to the struggle, being wronged, revenge and violence is bound to go nowhere.

 

Some things are possible, some not. Focusing on what can be achieved now, even if it falls short of the long held dreams, is better than having little, and risking losing bits of that as time goes by.

 

Sort the leadership, heal the divide, focus on country building, negotiate.

 

Doesn't have anything to do with your over emotive language or the slogans deployed. It's a much better path than the one you advocate - which condemns the Palestinians for years upon years of continued suffering, without any assurances that all will be well.

[Morch]

28 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Disinformation. I called the leaders of KSA head chopping dictators. Your deflection does not make sense.; it is a non sequitur.

 

>>As far as I'm aware, the Arab Peace Initiative was not a binding agreement that shackled the supporting to your version of the Palestinian cause for all eternity.

Well, make yourself aware! When people sign agreements they usually stick to them. If they don't, it's called breaking your word. Although that seems to be the vogue amongst many politicians these days.

 

Sure there's no imperative to support human rights. Just that people who don't tend to be immoral selfish sociopaths.

 

There is no "disinformation", and you may want to brush up on what "non sequitur" means. Basically, you acknowledge the dictatorial nature of the KSA, but posit that support for the Palestinians trumps that. For a self proclaimed "humanist", that's a hypocritical position. And, of course, not a word about both of the Palestinian leadership being themselves examples of such.

 

As for the Arab Peace Initiative being "binding", I take it you cannot provide any concrete support for you claims, and instead rely on waffle? In your informed, learned opinion - was the initiative "binding" even after Abbas effectively severed ties with the UAE? No expiry date on this "binding" thing? And while you try to misrepresent the Arab Peace Initiative as being something Palestinians are supportive of, it remains a fact that Hamas did not.

 

Oh, so it's support for human rights, now? Would these be human rights in KSA? The UAE? Or is it that for you, Palestinian human rights take precedence to all others?

[dexterm]

4 hours ago, Morch said:

 

There is no "disinformation", and you may want to brush up on what "non sequitur" means. Basically, you acknowledge the dictatorial nature of the KSA, but posit that support for the Palestinians trumps that. For a self proclaimed "humanist", that's a hypocritical position. And, of course, not a word about both of the Palestinian leadership being themselves examples of such.

 

As for the Arab Peace Initiative being "binding", I take it you cannot provide any concrete support for you claims, and instead rely on waffle? In your informed, learned opinion - was the initiative "binding" even after Abbas effectively severed ties with the UAE? No expiry date on this "binding" thing? And while you try to misrepresent the Arab Peace Initiative as being something Palestinians are supportive of, it remains a fact that Hamas did not.

 

Oh, so it's support for human rights, now? Would these be human rights in KSA? The UAE? Or is it that for you, Palestinian human rights take precedence to all others?

>> you may want to brush up on what "non sequitur" means. Basically, you acknowledge the dictatorial nature of the KSA, but posit that support for the Palestinians trumps that. 
..yes, what's the problem? 

 

You don't seem to understand "non sequitur" One may dislike a political leader but "it does not follow that" one most automatically also object to every single thing the person does. eg. I intensely dislike Trump, but support a ban on offshore exploration in Florida. Just an example to aid your understanding, not meant as a deflection.

[dexterm]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

And you appear to be a desperate troll. I never denied what you claim. What I did comment about was the language and descriptions you use are less on the factual side, and rely on emotive content. As you cannot support your claims, you go on yet another bogus, baseless personal attack.

 

Same goes for making nonsense comments unrelated to either side's actual positions, or either people's views. That was what you originally posted about - and obviously missing from your "reply".  Highlighting uninformed or misleading parts of your commentary often results in such unrelated attacks such as above.

 

So by all means, do tell about sides' various positions regarding "arrangements" such you mentioned. And do provide fact based details about all them title deeds and keys. Alternatively, you could explore support on either side to the notions of confederacy or a one-state solution. 

 

Guess all that's too hard, or going places you don't wanna go, so probably another irrelevant personal attack will be forthcoming.

>>And do provide fact based details about all them title deeds and keys. 
If you don't deny that half the population of Palestinians were ethnically cleansed and are not allowed to return, then why on earth question the probability that many Palestinians who were ethnically cleansed still hold the title deeds and keys to their confiscated properties, and moreover you seek proof for such?

I suggest you Google Images: "Palestinian keys"...you'll get thousands of hits.

 

Or hear someone who has actually spoken to a Palestinian refugee. I wonder if you have. And before you nitpick...I have.

 

"I spoke to Palestinians who still hold the keys to homes they fled decades ago – many are still determined to return
Most of them were convinced – or thought they knew – that they would come back after a week or two and re-open those front doors, and walk back into the houses many had owned for generations"

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/palestine-keys-return-home-israel-palestinians-a8398341.html

 

>>Alternatively, you could explore support on either side to the notions of confederacy or a one-state solution. 

And since you asked...

"The two-state solution can be achieved through a confederation
The Israeli-Palestinian “A Land For ALL” movement, which is hoisting the flag of a confederation, proves by its coexistence how vital is such a structure for both sides."
https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/the-two-state-solution-can-be-achieved-through-a-confederation-601058

 

"An Israeli-Palestinian Confederation Can Work
The two-state solution is dead. Most one-state solutions are unacceptable to the other side. There is, however, a viable peace plan that appeals to both."
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/06/29/an-israeli-palestinian-confederation-can-work/

 

My preference is for a one state solution
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-state_solution

 

....which will inevitably happen. Since Palestinians and Israeli Jews are geographic neighbors for eternity. 

 The route they will get there will probably be via King Salman's two state Peace Initiative, in that it is also the solution that Israel's largest trading partner the EU endorses. Pressure from a new US admin would help too.
 

Edited September 11, 2020 by dexterm

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

>> you may want to brush up on what "non sequitur" means. Basically, you acknowledge the dictatorial nature of the KSA, but posit that support for the Palestinians trumps that. 
..yes, what's the problem? 

 

You don't seem to understand "non sequitur" One may dislike a political leader but "it does not follow that" one most automatically also object to every single thing the person does. eg. I intensely dislike Trump, but support a ban on offshore exploration in Florida. Just an example to aid your understanding, not meant as a deflection.

 

That's alright if one posits himself as, say, a political activist. When someone proclaims to be a "humanist" then it usually implies a more general, wider scope. A "humanist" would not ignore issues of human rights violations based on his political leanings and agenda. You seem to have no problem overlooking such when it comes to countries expressing support for the Palestinians, or even when it comes to the Palestinians themselves. My comment stands.

[Morch]

 

@dexterm

 

 

Yawn. This was addressed on many past topics. That you should feign ignorance or require rehashing stuff over and over again is pathetic. In order for your claims to be true, you'd have to establish that a large number of Palestinian refugees were officially recognized landowners, or even that the homes lived in belonged to them. This does not necessarily conform with how things were back then. That you want to paint another picture is understandable.

 

The optics and testimonies you link do not fully support your claim. I'm not saying that there are not Palestinians holding on to old keys, or old title deeds, just that your "accounts" seem inflated and out of sync with reality.

 

I do not need to hear someone who spoke to Palestinian refugees, some first hand experience with that, thanks. Not surprised you picked a Fisk column to "support" your argument. More emotive content than fact, right up your alley. I hope you are aware "old" keys are sold at many tourist "markets" in the region. Or for that matter, that a key doesn't signify ownership.

 

And another yawn at the deflection attempt regarding confederation and one-state solutions. Twist it to your heart's content, but neither is popular with either side, the opinion columns provided (one behind a pay wall) notwithstanding. That you push this doesn't change the fact that these options are essentially fringe politics. You haven't demonstrated otherwise, and you cannot do so.

 

The Arab Peace Initiative is not about clearly not a one-state solution. That you try to co-opt it as some sort of overture, and sneak in some ambiguous comment implying EU support for your views is misleading.

 

Notably, the nonsense issue aired in your original post doesn't not reappear.

[onebir]

18 hours ago, Morch said:

The above also ignores Palestinians are not as invested in the sort of solutions and happy endings you go on about.

This must be the TV thread with the lowest chance of happy endings...

[Yellowtail]

22 hours ago, dexterm said:

An arrangement could be made to allow illegal Jewish settlers to remain in Palestine if they wanted to, provided that they take out Palestinian citizenship renouncing Israel, and reciprocally that 4.5 million indigenous Palestinians, many of whom still hold title documents and keys to their homes within Israel, are also allowed the right of return back to their confiscated properties within Israel whence they were ethnically cleansed.

 

A more sensible solution of course would be to have a confederation of Israel and Palestine where everyone is allowed to live, work and worship wherever they like. Or better still a single democratic state.

I'm sure they'd all be allowed to stay, as lone as they agree to be killed first....

[dexterm]

7 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

I'm sure they'd all be allowed to stay, as lone as they agree to be killed first....

I was not being flippant. There are many fanatically religious Jews who would want to stay in a Palestinian state. Up2 them. Security arrangements could be made to begin with. But in time provided they are law abiding and simply want to practise their faith, they could become acceptable citizens.

Bear in mind that at the moment Palestinians are attacked/ killed on almost a daily basis because of their ethnicity in their own land.

[Morch]

6 hours ago, dexterm said:

I was not being flippant. There are many fanatically religious Jews who would want to stay in a Palestinian state. Up2 them. Security arrangements could be made to begin with. But in time provided they are law abiding and simply want to practise their faith, they could become acceptable citizens.

Bear in mind that at the moment Palestinians are attacked/ killed on almost a daily basis because of their ethnicity in their own land.

 

I don't know what you were, but you're wrong anyway. There are no "many" such Jews. There is not much willingness on either side for such arrangements. That you decree otherwise doesn't make it so. Other than in your fantasies, there is not much goodwill, open mindedness and tolerance as you post about.

[Scott]

A number of posts and replies have been removed.  Do not make inflammatory remarks toward other members.  Do not comment on moderation.  Do not post if you have nothing to say.  

 

Keep it civil or you will face a suspension.