2 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Neither side would want or accept that , so it would be pointless even bringing that suggestion to the table

Well, if it could be 'imposed' in the 1940s why not now?

3 minutes ago, ronnie50 said:

Well, if it could be 'imposed' in the 1940s why not now?

It wasn't imposed in the 1940s , the Palestinians rejected the offer of a Country , as they do now

49 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

I said that "Expelled" , Palestinians do not have the right to return to the West bank because they weren't born there .

You then said that Jews were expelled from the land 2000 years ago , suggesting Jews don't have the right to live there either

Palestinians weren’t born in the West Bank?

Yes the Jews were expelled 2000 years ago, what was left behind are now the Palestinians.

8 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Neither side would want or accept that , so it would be pointless even bringing that suggestion to the table

I think you are oversimplifying and I think it may be more nuanced than that.

Here is AI (which I realize is not 100% reliable, but ..)

From the Palestinian side, 51% of people polled support a two-state solution, but Hamas does not. So it's complex, but doesn't mean there can't be a shift and it's entirely impossible.

2 hours ago, unblocktheplanet said:

I agree completely. But spending three years turning Gaza to rubble, targeting hospitals, schools, medics, journalists and children is not the correct responce.

Imagine this happened to Israel.

Thankfully probably not long to wait judging by the way things are going.

9 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Yes the Jews were expelled 2000 years ago, what was left behind are now the Palestinians.

Weird that isn't it?
And another 108 times they've been kicked out.
Zero ability to read the room outside of their liittle echo chambers

23 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I think you are oversimplifying and I think it may be more nuanced than that.

Here is AI (which I realize is not 100% reliable, but ..)

From the Palestinian side, 51% of people polled support a two-state solution, but Hamas does not. So it's complex, but doesn't mean there can't be a shift and it's entirely impossible.

IF Palestinians voted for Hamas as a political entity with competition from the PLO aso. AND disbanded its militant wing, there could be a solution. But when your country is reduced to rubble, they may well go with Hamas as the only option to stop Israel's predations. In any case, it's entirely up to the Palestinians, no one else.

33 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

It wasn't imposed in the 1940s , the Palestinians rejected the offer of a Country , as they do now

Not sure about now, Nick. I think the majority could be persuaded, with the right concessions from Israel, to accept a binational or two-state solution. Israelis are terrified of Palestinian terrorists and are afraid they will become a minority so Israel would not accept a binational state, the most friendly solution.

36 minutes ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Not sure about now, Nick. I think the majority could be persuaded, with the right concessions from Israel, to accept a binational or two-state solution. Israelis are terrified of Palestinian terrorists and are afraid they will become a minority so Israel would not accept a binational state, the most friendly solution.

The Camp David Summit (2000): U.S. President Bill Clinton, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, and Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat met to negotiate final-status borders. Israel proposed the creation of a non-contiguous Palestinian state covering approximately 90-95% of the West Bank and all of the Gaza Strip, with shared authority in Jerusalem. Yasser Arafat rejected the proposal, and the summit collapsed.

https://imeu.org/resources/palestine-101/what-happened-at-camp-david-in-2000-1/353

The Annapolis Conference (2007) and Olmert Proposal (2008): Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert presented a detailed map for a two-state solution to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Olmert offered a Palestinian state on roughly 93.5% to 94% of the West Bank, with land swaps making up the difference, the division of Jerusalem with an internationally administered "holy basin", and a highway connecting the West Bank and Gaza. Abbas did not accept the offer before Olmert left office.

The two-state solution map that promised to solve Middle...

In 2008, Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert urged the Palestinian leader to agree to a two-state solution. The map he drew has never been revealed to media - until now.

All because of ego...

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

I think you are oversimplifying and I think it may be more nuanced than that.

Here is AI (which I realize is not 100% reliable, but ..)

From the Palestinian side, 51% of people polled support a two-state solution, but Hamas does not. So it's complex, but doesn't mean there can't be a shift and it's entirely impossible.

Neither leadership would accept a 2 state solution, you know, the people that sign the agreements

2 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Will you be applauding Israel for confronting Hamas and Hezbollah ?

When pigs fly.

1 hour ago, unblocktheplanet said:

Not sure about now, Nick. I think the majority could be persuaded, with the right concessions from Israel, to accept a binational or two-state solution. Israelis are terrified of Palestinian terrorists and are afraid they will become a minority so Israel would not accept a binational state, the most friendly solution.

Yeah of course a rabid "anti-Zionist" would call a plan "friendly" that ensures the end of Israel. You're not fooling anyone.

Edited June 10Jun 10 by Jingthing

1 hour ago, Tourist2 said:

Weird that isn't it?
And another 108 times they've been kicked out.
Zero ability to read the room outside of their liittle echo chambers

Racist Jew hating talking points.

Also Palestinian Arabs as we know them today (a very recent identity group actually) certainly didn't exist in any form in Israel 2000 years ago.

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Well I do think west bank settlements would be legitimate bargaining points if the Palestineins ever decide to pursue peace rather than erasing Israel.

Don't hold your breath for that.

The astonishing thing is , if the Palestinians had accepted statehood in 1948 and spent all their money on house building instead of spending all their money waging war , those 500 000 Jews living in the West bank in settlements would be Palestinians living in villages with their own Country .

The Palestinian locals in their West bank villages could have gone to work in Israel .

But no, they choose rejection .

12 hours ago, save the frogs said:

A bit off topic, but Massie slams Israel.

Zionist lobbyists must be fuming.

Zionist lobbyists are more likely chuckling to themselves. Massie lost the Republican primary election for his House seat on May 19. Massie got 45% of the vote, his opponent got 55%. He will be out of office on Jan. 3, 2027.

Massie is a prime example of the intersection of the left and right on the issue of Israel and Jews. On motions relating to Israel or antisemitism, Massie voted with the most left-wing Democrats rather than Republicans.

A plausible case could be made Massie is the most antisemitic member of the U.S. Congress. In 2022, he had been the only member of the House of Representatives to vote against a resolution condemning the rise of antisemitism in the U.S. and the world. The resolution passed by a vote of 420 in favor, one (Massie) against.

https://time.com/6178902/thomas-massie-anti-semitism-libertarian/

As far as what Palestinians want:

www.allarab.news/new-poll-reveals-most-palestinians-dont-want-two-state-solution-support-for-two-states-plunging-especially-in-gaza/

Despite an aggressive push by U.S. President Joe Biden and other world leaders for Israel to accept the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state when the October 7th war ends, it is clear that most Palestinians do not support a two-state solution anymore.

Only 32% of Palestinians support a two-state solution at this point, according to a new poll conducted by Dr. Khalil Shikaki, director of the well-respected Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) based in Ramallah, the effective capital of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

Even if you see a poll showing a majority of Palestinians supporting a two state solution, you will find that is NOT the same thing as supporting PEACE and NORMALIZATION of relations with Israel. What does that mean, you might ask? It means they want a state as a starting point to build strength to invade Israel. Israel can't accept a Palestinian state under those circumstances because as I've said before, much to the displeasure of obsessive "anti-Zionist" Israel demonizers, Isreal is not suicidal.

Edited June 10Jun 10 by Jingthing

18 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

you will find that is NOT the same thing as supporting PEACE and NORMALIZATION of relations with Israel.

But Palestine would need to be armed/funded by other Arab nations to attack Israel and hope to succeed.

And it seems to me the The Abraham Accords are designed to avoid that scenario and maintain peace and normalization between Arab countries and Israel.

But continued conflict despite the Abraham Accords is contradictory ...

28 minutes ago, Evil Penevil said:

Zionist lobbyists are more likely chuckling to themselves. Massie lost the Republican primary election for his House seat on May 19. Massie got 45% of the vote, his opponent got 55%. He will be out of office on Jan. 3, 2027.

Massie is a prime example of the intersection of the left and right on the issue of Israel and Jews. On motions relating to Israel or antisemitism, Massie voted with the most left-wing Democrats rather than Republicans.

A plausible case could be made Massie is the most antisemitic member of the U.S. Congress. In 2022, he had been the only member of the House of Representatives to vote against a resolution condemning the rise of antisemitism in the U.S. and the world. The resolution passed by a vote of 420 in favor, one (Massie) against.

https://time.com/6178902/thomas-massie-anti-semitism-libertarian/

AIPAC threw millions at defeating Massie.

Well past time AIPAC was registered as an agency of foreign Government.

6 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

AIPAC threw millions at defeating Massie.

Well past time AIPAC was registered as an agency of foreign Government.

5 million, I think.

JFK was pushing for that -- registering AIPAC as a foreign entity.

And it didn't end well for him (not because of that maybe ... but who knows if that was part of it).

3 hours ago, ronnie50 said:

Well, if it could be 'imposed' in the 1940s why not now?

How do you intend to "impose" a solution on both parties?

4 hours ago, Jingthing said:

We get it.

You're "anti Zionist" and hate Israel.

I hate Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity.

I’m not a Zionist.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I hate Israel’s war crimes and crimes against humanity.

I’m not a Zionist.

But you obviously want the Palestinians to have a state but not Israelis.

What would be the root of that hypocrisy? Hmmm.

8 minutes ago, Effective altruism said:

How do you intend to "impose" a solution on both parties?

You don't.

It didn't happen in 1948 either as only the Jewish side agreed.

45 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Well past time AIPAC was registered as an agency of foreign Government.

Stop being antisemitic. AIPAC is funded and run by U.S. citizens. In the USA, people are free to start organizations to lobby for and fund causes that they believe in.

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Racist Jew hating talking points.

Also Palestinian Arabs as we know them today (a very recent identity group actually) certainly didn't exist in any form in Israel 2000 years ago.

Straw man garbage

1 hour ago, Effective altruism said:

Stop being antisemitic. AIPAC is funded and run by U.S. citizens. In the USA, people are free to start organizations to lobby for and fund causes that they believe in.

Here we go again, call someone antisemitic, its tiresome

5 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Will you be applauding Israel for confronting Hamas and Hezbollah ?

You need to look at who and why they exist.

Hamas is a response to the ashkenazi Palestinians who had their lands stolen.

Hezbollah are a response to protect Lebanese lands.

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

But you obviously want the Palestinians to have a state but not Israelis.

What would be the root of that hypocrisy? Hmmm.

An odd thing to say given my past statements in support of a two state solution and my explicit support for to right of Israelis to live peacefully within their own borders.

So no not hypocrisy, rather you assuming views in my behalf that I have never expressed.

10 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

You need to look at who and why they exist.

Hamas is a response to the ashkenazi Palestinians who had their lands stolen.

Hezbollah are a response to protect Lebanese lands.

They are trapped in a vicious cycle.

The more land they steal, the more terrorist organizations fight back, and the more paranoid they become that they will be wiped out so the more aggressive they need to become to defend themselves even more.

1 hour ago, Effective altruism said:

Stop being antisemitic. AIPAC is funded and run by U.S. citizens. In the USA, people are free to start organizations to lobby for and fund causes that they believe in.

Citizens acting on behalf of foreign powers is nothing new.

AIPAC primarily lobbies for policies that favour a foreign state.

3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

AIPAC threw millions at defeating Massie.

Well past time AIPAC was registered as an agency of foreign Government.

Time to put a cap on PACs and Super-PACs. $100,000, no more. Just like Canada. Campaign lasting 3 months instead of spending millions and campaigning while pols should be governing.