Un, Uk Condemn Israel'S Legalization Of 'Illegal' Outposts In The West Bank

[Colin Yai]

The whole point is if they had the means they would do so without a seconds hesitation and drive the Israeli's into the sea ,do you disagree?, cos if you do you are arguing against Hamas's own Charter.

And pigs might fly if they had wings, but they don't and unless there is some bizarre evolutionary leap, never will.

Similarly Hamas does not and probably never will have the means to conquer Israel. Likewise, Israel can never militarily crush its opposition. All the military can do, as in all COIN ops, is hold the ring, minimize losses and wait for the politicians to actually sit down and work out a deal.

Sure the Arabs missed a fantastic opportunity in 1947 and they know that only to well with hindsight. The clock cannot be rewound and the problem needs to be addressed today, taking on board today's realities. The ridiculous thing is that 65 years on the 2 state solution

remains the only plausible outcome.

In the meantime people will die needlessly and one of the most festering sores on the planet today will remain unresolved, to the benefit of few people.

As per usual you are avoiding a simple question .

[folium]

The whole point is if they had the means they would do so without a seconds hesitation and drive the Israeli's into the sea ,do you disagree?, cos if you do you are arguing against Hamas's own Charter.

And pigs might fly if they had wings, but they don't and unless there is some bizarre evolutionary leap, never will.

Similarly Hamas does not and probably never will have the means to conquer Israel. Likewise, Israel can never militarily crush its opposition. All the military can do, as in all COIN ops, is hold the ring, minimize losses and wait for the politicians to actually sit down and work out a deal.

Sure the Arabs missed a fantastic opportunity in 1947 and they know that only to well with hindsight. The clock cannot be rewound and the problem needs to be addressed today, taking on board today's realities. The ridiculous thing is that 65 years on the 2 state solution

remains the only plausible outcome.

In the meantime people will die needlessly and one of the most festering sores on the planet today will remain unresolved, to the benefit of few people.

As per usual you are avoiding a simple question .

As already stated Hamas has no means to execute any existential threat toward Israel, so the fact that it is in their Charter is somewhat redundant. They might as well wish to make the Red Sea part again. Is it therefore unhelpful (to put it mildly) and an obstacle to any peace settlement? Of course but it is likely to be used as a bargaining chip in any settlement as everyone recognizes it is a pointless provocation, unachievable and a gift to those who want to avoid a settlement.

Interesting quotes below:

Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal indicated to Robert Pastor, senior adviser to the Carter Center, that the Charter is "a piece of history and no longer relevant, but cannot be changed for internal reasons." Hamas do not use the Charter on their website and prefer to use their election manifesto to put forth their agenda. Pastor states that those who quote the charter rather than more recent Hamas statements may be using the Charter as an excuse to ignore Hamas.

British diplomat and former British ambassador to the UN Sir Jeremy Greenstock stated in early 2009 that the Hamas charter was "drawn up by a Hamas-linked imam some [twenty] years ago and has never been adopted since Hamas was elected as the Palestinian government in 2006". Mohammed Nimer of American University comments on the Charter, “It’s a tract meant to mobilize support and it should be amended... It projects anger, not vision.” Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

[Colin Yai]

The whole point is if they had the means they would do so without a seconds hesitation and drive the Israeli's into the sea ,do you disagree?, cos if you do you are arguing against Hamas's own Charter.

And pigs might fly if they had wings, but they don't and unless there is some bizarre evolutionary leap, never will.

Similarly Hamas does not and probably never will have the means to conquer Israel. Likewise, Israel can never militarily crush its opposition. All the military can do, as in all COIN ops, is hold the ring, minimize losses and wait for the politicians to actually sit down and work out a deal.

Sure the Arabs missed a fantastic opportunity in 1947 and they know that only to well with hindsight. The clock cannot be rewound and the problem needs to be addressed today, taking on board today's realities. The ridiculous thing is that 65 years on the 2 state solution

remains the only plausible outcome.

In the meantime people will die needlessly and one of the most festering sores on the planet today will remain unresolved, to the benefit of few people.

As per usual you are avoiding a simple question .

As already stated Hamas has no means to execute any existential threat toward Israel, so the fact that it is in their Charter is somewhat redundant. They might as well wish to make the Red Sea part again. Is it therefore unhelpful (to put it mildly) and an obstacle to any peace settlement? Of course but it is likely to be used as a bargaining chip in any settlement as everyone recognizes it is a pointless provocation, unachievable and a gift to those who want to avoid a settlement.

Interesting quotes below:

Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal indicated to Robert Pastor, senior adviser to the Carter Center, that the Charter is "a piece of history and no longer relevant, but cannot be changed for internal reasons." Hamas do not use the Charter on their website and prefer to use their election manifesto to put forth their agenda. Pastor states that those who quote the charter rather than more recent Hamas statements may be using the Charter as an excuse to ignore Hamas.

British diplomat and former British ambassador to the UN Sir Jeremy Greenstock stated in early 2009 that the Hamas charter was "drawn up by a Hamas-linked imam some [twenty] years ago and has never been adopted since Hamas was elected as the Palestinian government in 2006". Mohammed Nimer of American University comments on the Charter, “It’s a tract meant to mobilize support and it should be amended... It projects anger, not vision.” Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

If that,s the case why does Hamas consistently refuse to renounce and condemn violence towards Israel?, this is the major sticking point to any peace negotiations, they cannot invoke their Charter simply because they haven't the military strength to do so ,however the intent is still there. Edited April 28, 2012 by Colin Yai

[Ulysses G.]

Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

Why would you quote such deceiptful nonsense as being factual? Here are a few recent quotes from Hamas.

"Whoever is killed by a Jew receives the reward of two martyrs, because the very thing that the Jews did to the prophets was done to him".

"The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah".

"Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world".

"The Jews kill anyone who believes in Allah. They do not want to see any peace whatsoever on Earth."

- Ismail Haniyeh, (head of the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip) May 2, 2011

Edited April 28, 2012 by Ulysses G.

[flying]

And quite how would Hamas take over Israel? There's a big difference between wishful thinking and reality.

That is not the question , please stop playing around with words ,

That is the first time I have heard clear logic described as playing around with the words

Sorry but you tend to always sensationalize things with these impossible scenarios & then demand an answer to your "what if"

questions.

If others prefer to deal in reality you get upset & say answer the question.

Sorry but reality does not work that way.

[Colin Yai]

Folium , pleeeze no playing about with fanciful words, lets get to facts , just Google up, "Has Hamas renounced Violence against Israel" its all there .

[folium]

Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

Why would you quote such deceiptful nonsense as being factual? Here are a few recent quotes from Hamas.

"Whoever is killed by a Jew receives the reward of two martyrs, because the very thing that the Jews did to the prophets was done to him".

"The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah".

"Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world".

"The Jews kill anyone who believes in Allah. They do not want to see any peace whatsoever on Earth."

- Ismail Haniyeh, (head of the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip) May 2, 2011

All unpleasant, unhelpful stuff but in the longrun irrelevant.

The bottom line is that if you want to see a settlement in the Middle East that allows all parties to gain suffiiciently that such a settlement becomes permanent, all sides have to hold their noses, make concessions and deal with people they have up until then demonized.

Martin McGuinness is more than likely a terrorist murderer (or at the very least an accomplice to murder) who is now the deputy first minister of Northern Ireland. Gerry Adams likewise, but to make a deal the British government had to deal with these charming people.

Similarly many of the early leaders of Israel were ex-"terrorists" (at least to the British) from their time in Lehi (the Stern gang) or Irgun, some of whose activities certainly rank as terrorism of the most base kind.

The expediency required of politics is also part of early Israeli history when Lehi sought assistance from Nazi Germany to establish a Jewish homeland in exchange for support in removing the British from Palestine. Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin were also members of Betar, an organization that was a great supporter of Mussolini to an extent that they adopted his black shirts as part of their uniform.

If Israel wants to live in peace it will have to sit round a table with Hamas. If Hamas wants peace it will have to drop its rhetoric and do a deal. At the moment both sides appear intransigent so the senseless violence continues. Neither side can "win", but plenty of people will lose out until the day that the politicians grasp this basic fact.

Edited April 28, 2012 by folium

[Colin Yai]

Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

Why would you quote such deceiptful nonsense as being factual? Here are a few recent quotes from Hamas.

"Whoever is killed by a Jew receives the reward of two martyrs, because the very thing that the Jews did to the prophets was done to him".

"The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah".

"Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world".

"The Jews kill anyone who believes in Allah. They do not want to see any peace whatsoever on Earth."

- Ismail Haniyeh, (head of the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip) May 2, 2011

All unpleasant, unhelpful stuff but in the longrun irrelevant.

The bottom line is that if you want to see a settlement in the Middle East that allows all parties to gain suffiiciently that such a settlement becomes permanent, all sides have to hold their noses, make concessions and deal with people they have up until then demonized.

Martin McGuinness is more than likely a terrorist murderer (or at the very least an accomplice to murder) who is now the deputy first minister of Northern Ireland. Gerry Adams likewise, but to make a deal the British government had to deal with these charming people.

Similarly many of the early leaders of Israel were ex-"terrorists" (at least to the British) from their time in Lehi (the Stern gang) or Irgun, some of whose activities certainly rank as terrorism of the most base kind.

The expediency required of politics is also part of early Israeli history when Lehi sought assistance from Nazi Germany to establish a Jewish homeland in exchange for support in removing the British from Palestine. Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin were also members of Betar, an organization that was a great supporter of Mussolini to an extent that they adopted his black shirts as part of their uniform.

If Israel wants to live in peace it will have to sit round a table with Hamas. If Hamas wants peace it will have to drop its rhetoric and do a deal. At the moment both sides appear intransigent so the senseless violence continues. Neither side can "win", but plenty of people will lose out until the day that the politicians grasp this basic fact.

Israel has consistently laid it on the line as part of the preconditions to sitting round the table for peace talks, Hamas has to renounce violence and recognize Israels right to exist plus stopping other Islamic sections to use Gaza as a launching pad for their rocket attacks into Southern Israel , of course if you can produce an independent link to verify this simple fact then its a whole different ball game , but unfortunately you can't can you? and with respect in closing can we stick to the present and not go back to the history books Edited April 28, 2012 by Colin Yai

[Steely Dan]

Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

Why would you quote such deceiptful nonsense as being factual? Here are a few recent quotes from Hamas.

"Whoever is killed by a Jew receives the reward of two martyrs, because the very thing that the Jews did to the prophets was done to him".

"The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah".

"Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world".

"The Jews kill anyone who believes in Allah. They do not want to see any peace whatsoever on Earth."

- Ismail Haniyeh, (head of the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip) May 2, 2011

All unpleasant, unhelpful stuff but in the longrun irrelevant.

The bottom line is that if you want to see a settlement in the Middle East that allows all parties to gain suffiiciently that such a settlement becomes permanent, all sides have to hold their noses, make concessions and deal with people they have up until then demonized.

Martin McGuinness is more than likely a terrorist murderer (or at the very least an accomplice to murder) who is now the deputy first minister of Northern Ireland. Gerry Adams likewise, but to make a deal the British government had to deal with these charming people.

Similarly many of the early leaders of Israel were ex-"terrorists" (at least to the British) from their time in Lehi (the Stern gang) or Irgun, some of whose activities certainly rank as terrorism of the most base kind.

The expediency required of politics is also part of early Israeli history when Lehi sought assistance from Nazi Germany to establish a Jewish homeland in exchange for support in removing the British from Palestine. Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin were also members of Betar, an organization that was a great supporter of Mussolini to an extent that they adopted his black shirts as part of their uniform.

If Israel wants to live in peace it will have to sit round a table with Hamas. If Hamas wants peace it will have to drop its rhetoric and do a deal. At the moment both sides appear intransigent so the senseless violence continues. Neither side can "win", but plenty of people will lose out until the day that the politicians grasp this basic fact.

The brutal truth is that Islam sees Israel as having been formed on Muslim lands. If you look at Koranic scripture you can see why this is a problem, and would always be so. It is no coincidence that the only Muslim Countries Israel has ever made peace with were ruled by military juntas or were, in the case of Turkey secular. The Palestinian cause and indeed all politics between the Muslim world and Israel hinge round this fact. The settlements are a red herring, always have been, yet will be used as a pretext when talking with western governments, just as the refugee situation is. Given a secular Palestinian authority anything is possible, but with Hamas in the fray we do not have this now.

[folium]

Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

Why would you quote such deceiptful nonsense as being factual? Here are a few recent quotes from Hamas.

"Whoever is killed by a Jew receives the reward of two martyrs, because the very thing that the Jews did to the prophets was done to him".

"The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah".

"Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world".

"The Jews kill anyone who believes in Allah. They do not want to see any peace whatsoever on Earth."

- Ismail Haniyeh, (head of the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip) May 2, 2011

All unpleasant, unhelpful stuff but in the longrun irrelevant.

The bottom line is that if you want to see a settlement in the Middle East that allows all parties to gain suffiiciently that such a settlement becomes permanent, all sides have to hold their noses, make concessions and deal with people they have up until then demonized.

Martin McGuinness is more than likely a terrorist murderer (or at the very least an accomplice to murder) who is now the deputy first minister of Northern Ireland. Gerry Adams likewise, but to make a deal the British government had to deal with these charming people.

Similarly many of the early leaders of Israel were ex-"terrorists" (at least to the British) from their time in Lehi (the Stern gang) or Irgun, some of whose activities certainly rank as terrorism of the most base kind.

The expediency required of politics is also part of early Israeli history when Lehi sought assistance from Nazi Germany to establish a Jewish homeland in exchange for support in removing the British from Palestine. Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin were also members of Betar, an organization that was a great supporter of Mussolini to an extent that they adopted his black shirts as part of their uniform.

If Israel wants to live in peace it will have to sit round a table with Hamas. If Hamas wants peace it will have to drop its rhetoric and do a deal. At the moment both sides appear intransigent so the senseless violence continues. Neither side can "win", but plenty of people will lose out until the day that the politicians grasp this basic fact.

The brutal truth is that Islam sees Israel as having been formed on Muslim lands. If you look at Koranic scripture you can see why this is a problem, and would always be so. It is no coincidence that the only Muslim Countries Israel has ever made peace with were ruled by military juntas or were, in the case of Turkey secular. The Palestinian cause and indeed all politics between the Muslim world and Israel hinge round this fact. The settlements are a red herring, always have been, yet will be used as a pretext when talking with western governments, just as the refugee situation is. Given a secular Palestinian authority anything is possible, but with Hamas in the fray we do not have this now.

On that basis why was Israel not able to come to a settlement with the secular, military regime of Syria, or the secular PLO?

It would appear that you and Colin are of the view that israel seeks peace but such an approach is not reciprocated by the palestinian organizations. IMHO it would appear that the sad status quo, presently seen, suits elements of both sides as a way of avoiding tough decisions and there is no real genuine desire for a settlement.

All good armchair stuff, but tragically the current impasse not only produces local victims but has a seriously detrimental global impact also.

What is your solution to the problem?

[folium]

Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

Why would you quote such deceiptful nonsense as being factual? Here are a few recent quotes from Hamas.

"Whoever is killed by a Jew receives the reward of two martyrs, because the very thing that the Jews did to the prophets was done to him".

"The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah".

"Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world".

"The Jews kill anyone who believes in Allah. They do not want to see any peace whatsoever on Earth."

- Ismail Haniyeh, (head of the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip) May 2, 2011

All unpleasant, unhelpful stuff but in the longrun irrelevant.

The bottom line is that if you want to see a settlement in the Middle East that allows all parties to gain suffiiciently that such a settlement becomes permanent, all sides have to hold their noses, make concessions and deal with people they have up until then demonized.

Martin McGuinness is more than likely a terrorist murderer (or at the very least an accomplice to murder) who is now the deputy first minister of Northern Ireland. Gerry Adams likewise, but to make a deal the British government had to deal with these charming people.

Similarly many of the early leaders of Israel were ex-"terrorists" (at least to the British) from their time in Lehi (the Stern gang) or Irgun, some of whose activities certainly rank as terrorism of the most base kind.

The expediency required of politics is also part of early Israeli history when Lehi sought assistance from Nazi Germany to establish a Jewish homeland in exchange for support in removing the British from Palestine. Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin were also members of Betar, an organization that was a great supporter of Mussolini to an extent that they adopted his black shirts as part of their uniform.

If Israel wants to live in peace it will have to sit round a table with Hamas. If Hamas wants peace it will have to drop its rhetoric and do a deal. At the moment both sides appear intransigent so the senseless violence continues. Neither side can "win", but plenty of people will lose out until the day that the politicians grasp this basic fact.

Israel has consistently laid it on the line as part of the preconditions to sitting round the table for peace talks, Hamas has to renounce violence and recognize Israels right to exist plus stopping other Islamic sections to use Gaza as a launching pad for their rocket attacks into Southern Israel , of course if you can produce an independent link to verify this simple fact then its a whole different ball game , but unfortunately you can't can you? and with respect in closing can we stick to the present and not go back to the history books

All good chicken and egg stuff. If there was a genuine desire for peace all parties have to denounce violence, boundaries agreed upon, "occupied/disputed" areas evacuated, continuing dialogue and confidence building measures put into action etc, etc Nothing easy, plenty of potential nightmares and massive public scepticism needs to be assuaged, but is the current situation a better option?

It's easy to point fingers and lay blame but that does little to bring peace to an area that desperately needs it.

[Jingthing]

In my 50s now and can recall talk about a two state solution going back to my earliest conscious memories. Are we closer now? No. Further. What basis is there for any optimism?

[Pakboong]

I cannot imagine why anybody would sign a peace treaty when only they can violate that treaty.

Don't you mean when they know that they will violate that treaty? The Palestinian Arabs have never had any intention to stop fighting.

They have violated every cease fire. Of course, that depends on which side of the fence you are watching from. Signing a treaty they can't possibly live up to is really stupid, regardless of the reasons.

[Pakboong]

Just a thought ,If Israel is a land hungry aggressor who takes no notice of anyone who many like to portray it as, why with it's vastly superior firepower does it not just go in and take whatever takes its fancy ?.

ummm doesn't the map in post #28 pretty much suggest just that?

also this superior firepower does come at a cost to their benefactors

who seem to be going broke themselves.

If they so wished they could take it all ,just like Hamas wants to do with the whole state of Israel .

Both sides want something to which they are not entitled. I'm not sure which of the sides is worse than the other or if worse is even relevant.

[Pakboong]

Just a thought ,If Israel is a land hungry aggressor who takes no notice of anyone who many like to portray it as, why with it's vastly superior firepower does it not just go in and take whatever takes its fancy ?.

As Israel found out in its second invasion of Lebanon in 2006 "vastly superior firepower" has little value against asymmetric warfare waged by a determined, well-equipped enemy fighting on its home turf (ie shades of Iraq and Afghanistan), particularly when there are no clear political objectives. Israel's withdrawl from Gaza and partial withdrawl from the West Bank underline that they have little to gain by military incursions into hostile territory.

As all sides to the Middle East conflict know there is no military solution. The existentential threat from neighbouring countries has been ruled out by Israel's possession of nuclear weapons, and Hamas, Hizbollah etc can do little more than be a nuisance in strategic terms. Whatever Hamas' charter may claim they have little chance of raising their flag in Tel Aviv.

In the meantime innocent civilians will continue to be killed on both sides with the occasional flare-up claiming more lives. All utterly pointless and tragic, and until all parties are prepared to sit down, make some compromises and actually want a peace deal more than the existing status quo (which will require facing down domestic opposition on both sides), nothing will change.

This is possibly the crux of the matter Hamas will not denounce violence towards Israel ,and even refuses their right to exist hardly a platform for talks!!! ,making it totally impossible to negotiate ,maybe that's why Hamas regard Fattah's Mahmoud Abbas as a traitor for entering in dialogue with Israel .

Whatever is happening, I'm pretty confident that Israel wants it that way. They actually are that good.

[Jingthing]

Just a thought ,If Israel is a land hungry aggressor who takes no notice of anyone who many like to portray it as, why with it's vastly superior firepower does it not just go in and take whatever takes its fancy ?.

As Israel found out in its second invasion of Lebanon in 2006 "vastly superior firepower" has little value against asymmetric warfare waged by a determined, well-equipped enemy fighting on its home turf (ie shades of Iraq and Afghanistan), particularly when there are no clear political objectives. Israel's withdrawl from Gaza and partial withdrawl from the West Bank underline that they have little to gain by military incursions into hostile territory.

As all sides to the Middle East conflict know there is no military solution. The existentential threat from neighbouring countries has been ruled out by Israel's possession of nuclear weapons, and Hamas, Hizbollah etc can do little more than be a nuisance in strategic terms. Whatever Hamas' charter may claim they have little chance of raising their flag in Tel Aviv.

In the meantime innocent civilians will continue to be killed on both sides with the occasional flare-up claiming more lives. All utterly pointless and tragic, and until all parties are prepared to sit down, make some compromises and actually want a peace deal more than the existing status quo (which will require facing down domestic opposition on both sides), nothing will change.

This is possibly the crux of the matter Hamas will not denounce violence towards Israel ,and even refuses their right to exist hardly a platform for talks!!! ,making it totally impossible to negotiate ,maybe that's why Hamas regard Fattah's Mahmoud Abbas as a traitor for entering in dialogue with Israel .

Whatever is happening, I'm pretty confident that Israel wants it that way. They actually are that good.

I find that offensive. It's like the myth of the "magical" all powerful Jew. Would you ascribe such irrational perfection to ANY other nation? I doubt it. What is Israel? Its many millions of people with almost as many different OPINIONS. Edited April 28, 2012 by Jingthing

[Pakboong]

Dr. Ahmed Yousef an adviser to Ismail Haniyeh has questioned the use of the charter by Israel and its supporters to brand Hamas as a fundamentalist, terrorist, racist, anti-Semitic organization and claims that they have taken parts of the charter out of context for propaganda purposes. He claims that they dwell on the charter and ignore that Hamas has changed its views with time

Why would you quote such deceiptful nonsense as being factual? Here are a few recent quotes from Hamas.

"Whoever is killed by a Jew receives the reward of two martyrs, because the very thing that the Jews did to the prophets was done to him".

"The Jews are the most despicable and contemptible nation to crawl upon the face of the Earth, because they have displayed hostility to Allah".

"Allah will kill the Jews in the hell of the world to come, just like they killed the believers in the hell of this world".

"The Jews kill anyone who believes in Allah. They do not want to see any peace whatsoever on Earth."

- Ismail Haniyeh, (head of the Hamas administration in the Gaza Strip) May 2, 2011

All unpleasant, unhelpful stuff but in the longrun irrelevant.

The bottom line is that if you want to see a settlement in the Middle East that allows all parties to gain suffiiciently that such a settlement becomes permanent, all sides have to hold their noses, make concessions and deal with people they have up until then demonized.

Martin McGuinness is more than likely a terrorist murderer (or at the very least an accomplice to murder) who is now the deputy first minister of Northern Ireland. Gerry Adams likewise, but to make a deal the British government had to deal with these charming people.

Similarly many of the early leaders of Israel were ex-"terrorists" (at least to the British) from their time in Lehi (the Stern gang) or Irgun, some of whose activities certainly rank as terrorism of the most base kind.

The expediency required of politics is also part of early Israeli history when Lehi sought assistance from Nazi Germany to establish a Jewish homeland in exchange for support in removing the British from Palestine. Yitzhak Shamir and Menachem Begin were also members of Betar, an organization that was a great supporter of Mussolini to an extent that they adopted his black shirts as part of their uniform.

If Israel wants to live in peace it will have to sit round a table with Hamas. If Hamas wants peace it will have to drop its rhetoric and do a deal. At the moment both sides appear intransigent so the senseless violence continues. Neither side can "win", but plenty of people will lose out until the day that the politicians grasp this basic fact.

Israel has consistently laid it on the line as part of the preconditions to sitting round the table for peace talks, Hamas has to renounce violence and recognize Israels right to exist plus stopping other Islamic sections to use Gaza as a launching pad for their rocket attacks into Southern Israel , of course if you can produce an independent link to verify this simple fact then its a whole different ball game , but unfortunately you can't can you? and with respect in closing can we stick to the present and not go back to the history books

Seriously Colin, what could the Palestinians gain by sitting around the table? They can't sign a treaty they cannot keep. The rockets would be flying out of Gaza before the ink was dry. It might be time better spent figuring out why the rockets can't stop.

[folium]

and with respect in closing can we stick to the present and not go back to the history books

The old Santayana quote rings very true in terms of the Middle East, namely:

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it

Ignorance of history, wilful or otherwise,is fatal in attempting to resolve any conflict situation. Understanding of the past puts the present in perspective and context, and also underlines why overly simplistic approaches and attitudes are doomed to failure.

[Scott]

The thread is not about the History of the area. If posters which to post, it is their obligation to read up on the history of the area and the current conflict.

In the past, I've tried to let these sorts of discussions run their course. Unfortunately, they tend to be pages long and go back to the Old Testament.

I have no intention of letting history repeat itself in this thread.

Please stay on the topic of the OP.

[Morch]

Just a thought ,If Israel is a land hungry aggressor who takes no notice of anyone who many like to portray it as, why with it's vastly superior firepower does it not just go in and take whatever takes its fancy ?.

It sort of did.

There's this "minor" issue of having to deal with the local population, though.

A big difference between what one can do and what's good for you.

Morch Do you think that there would be a "local population" of Jews if Hamas got there way?

I think this doesn't have much to do with building settlments in occupied/disputed/whatever territoties. You cannot seperate gaining control of an area from assuming certain responsibilities dealing with the locals as well.

Israel does not see the Hamas as more than a tactical threat. Not sure why you take it more seriously than that. Not like they can actually do much to make their fantasies come true.

[Morch]

Just a couple of OT notes:

The Hamas has little to do with the OP. Said settlements being more the PA's concern. Interestlngly, they haven't been very vocal about it - probably because they know the score (that this is more show than deeds, and even that may evaporate into nothingness). The Hamas doesn't not represent all the Palestinians, and under current conditions, it is mostly a contained threat.

Hamas declerations can often seem contradictory and confusing. This is mainly because it is not as unified an outfit as it used to be. There are at least two major factions, each trying to gain the upper hand without rocking the boat too much. While non of them is a staunch Zionist, there are some differences in their approach of dealing with things.

[Pakboong]

Just a couple of OT notes:

The Hamas has little to do with the OP. Said settlements being more the PA's concern. Interestlngly, they haven't been very vocal about it - probably because they know the score (that this is more show than deeds, and even that may evaporate into nothingness). The Hamas doesn't not represent all the Palestinians, and under current conditions, it is mostly a contained threat.

Hamas declerations can often seem contradictory and confusing. This is mainly because it is not as unified an outfit as it used to be. There are at least two major factions, each trying to gain the upper hand without rocking the boat too much. While non of them is a staunch Zionist, there are some differences in their approach of dealing with things.

Good post Morch.

The settlements are occurring at a fairly steady rate. Considering the maps posted earlier showing the erosion of the West Bank over a half century, you couple that with the 100-1 kill ratio in Gaza over the last ten years, and the Palestinians are in serious trouble. IMO, it is the Israelis who do not want the treaty how much better could they expect to get the situation via a treaty. Right now they are the completely leveraged victims who have a huge edge in every respect. No need to change anything. They couldn't give a hoot whether or not anybody recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, much less the Palestinians.

[Steely Dan]

On that basis why was Israel not able to come to a settlement with the secular, military regime of Syria, or the secular PLO?

It would appear that you and Colin are of the view that israel seeks peace but such an approach is not reciprocated by the palestinian organizations. IMHO it would appear that the sad status quo, presently seen, suits elements of both sides as a way of avoiding tough decisions and there is no real genuine desire for a settlement.

All good armchair stuff, but tragically the current impasse not only produces local victims but has a seriously detrimental global impact also.

What is your solution to the problem?

PLO, Now that's complicated, as you would say. Part of the problem any 'Palestinian' negotiator has is being a pawn in a larger game, namely doing the bidding of the Arab nations as a whole. As for Syria; firstly Assad is from a minority sect and would have faced revolt far earlier had he come to an agreement with Israel. Then there is the Golan, which is in a crucial strategic position and unlike Gaza Israel would not have therefore risked handing it back to Assad only for him to be overthrown.

The problem has no solution until some factor forces Islam to modernize and adopt a stance which departs from it's current attitude to Israel and the Jews in general. I won't be holding my breath, but in a post-oil age waning influence may become a modernizing factor.

[Morch]

Just a couple of OT notes:

The Hamas has little to do with the OP. Said settlements being more the PA's concern. Interestlngly, they haven't been very vocal about it - probably because they know the score (that this is more show than deeds, and even that may evaporate into nothingness). The Hamas doesn't not represent all the Palestinians, and under current conditions, it is mostly a contained threat.

Hamas declerations can often seem contradictory and confusing. This is mainly because it is not as unified an outfit as it used to be. There are at least two major factions, each trying to gain the upper hand without rocking the boat too much. While non of them is a staunch Zionist, there are some differences in their approach of dealing with things.

Good post Morch.

The settlements are occurring at a fairly steady rate. Considering the maps posted earlier showing the erosion of the West Bank over a half century, you couple that with the 100-1 kill ratio in Gaza over the last ten years, and the Palestinians are in serious trouble. IMO, it is the Israelis who do not want the treaty how much better could they expect to get the situation via a treaty. Right now they are the completely leveraged victims who have a huge edge in every respect. No need to change anything. They couldn't give a hoot whether or not anybody recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, much less the Palestinians.

Again, those are not new settlements. Just a a status change of existing ones, which might or might not come through. As said before, Israel never had a solid long term policy regarding it's aims, interests and actions in the West Bank. The settlements were not the brain child of some overall well thought out plan or anything.

As for "not giving a hoot' - notice that the PA isn't making a big deal out of this thing.

Both sides aren't pushing very hard for peace. Can't pin it all on Israel, can't blame it all on the Palestinians.

[Colin Yai]

On that basis why was Israel not able to come to a settlement with the secular, military regime of Syria, or the secular PLO?

It would appear that you and Colin are of the view that israel seeks peace but such an approach is not reciprocated by the palestinian organizations. IMHO it would appear that the sad status quo, presently seen, suits elements of both sides as a way of avoiding tough decisions and there is no real genuine desire for a settlement.

All good armchair stuff, but tragically the current impasse not only produces local victims but has a seriously detrimental global impact also.

What is your solution to the problem?

PLO, Now that's complicated, as you would say. Part of the problem any 'Palestinian' negotiator has is being a pawn in a larger game, namely doing the bidding of the Arab nations as a whole. As for Syria; firstly Assad is from a minority sect and would have faced revolt far earlier had he come to an agreement with Israel. Then there is the Golan, which is in a crucial strategic position and unlike Gaza Israel would not have therefore risked handing it back to Assad only for him to be overthrown.

The problem has no solution until some factor forces Islam to modernize and adopt a stance which departs from it's current attitude to Israel and the Jews in general. I won't be holding my breath, but in a post-oil age waning influence may become a modernizing factor.

Yeah Dan this just about spells it out, the Muslims just have to have accept that the Jews

have a right to exist which hitherto is sadly not forthcoming ,they hate the Jews with all the fibre of their souls and yet are clearly unable to vanquish them ,which is all to prevalent from the past wars, they just will not accept that when it comes to conflict they always finish worse off ,time to get round the table and talk peace , unfortunately if this happens the untold millions of anti Israeli money flooding in to fight Israel by proxy by various Islamic Country's and Strangely enough Norway may well cease .

Edited April 28, 2012 by Colin Yai