Israel / Palestine News Thread

[Nivsch]

@Breakingthewall Don't get me wrong our current hellish government (to Israelis, to the hostages, to Palestinians, to everyone) is the last one I would want to defend. I seperate the two issues.

Edited December 29, 2024 by Nivsch

[Breakingthewall]

47 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

 

3 hours ago, Nivsch said:

 

 

8 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

@Breakingthewall Don't get me wrong our current hellish government (to Israelis, to the hostages, to Palestinians, to everyone) is the last one I would want to defend. I seperate the two issues.

What would be the agenda if the more progressive opposition wins?

[Nivsch]

8 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

What would be the agenda if the more progressive opposition wins?

This:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yesh_Atid

The party that represents the Center (not right wing and not Left wing) of Israel.

[Breakingthewall]

2 hours ago, Nivsch said:

This:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yesh_Atid

The party that represents the Center (not right wing and not Left wing) of Israel.

It says they will not continue occupying land in the West Bank, which they admit that it is immoral, but it does not say that the land already occupied should be returned. It seems that Israel is an immoral state, right? They can say whatever they want on their program about LGBT, fossil fuels, but the reality is that the Jews talk about "great Israel." You know what that looks like, right? Great Germany, depopulating part of Russia of subhumans. Bad business, difficult that it have a good end, but who knows 

Edited December 29, 2024 by Breakingthewall

[Basman]

I feel really sorry for those Palestinians. It is basically over. There is no chance at a decent life for them. Either they are murdered or subject to authoritarian rule, slowly wittled down till they are no more. 

The only long-term solution for the Palestinians I think is to give up. Leave. Surely Israel would consider a permanent cease-fire on the condition that all Palestinians leave. If there where just places that would take them.

The greatest revenge is living.

[Nivsch]

@Breakingthewall It is impossible to evacuate 100K people this is why the negotations were on areas replacement as a compensation to areas that cant be given. For me it sounds fair and moral if it wil be done.

Edited December 29, 2024 by Nivsch

[Breakingthewall]

Just now, Nivsch said:

@Breakingthewall It is impossible to evacuate 100K people this is why the negotations were on areas replacement as a compensation to areas that cant be given. For me it sounds fair and moral if it wil be done.

Well, it could be. Let's be confident in that at the end the Jews are going to show that they are high level people showing respect to their adversaries, not just hate. Probably this hope is naive but who knows, I think that Jews cannot lower themselves by acting like everyone else, they are supposed to be the chosen people, right? Let's see if it shows.

[Nivsch]

3 minutes ago, Breakingthewall said:

Well, it could be. Let's be confident in that at the end the Jews are going to show that they are high level people showing respect to their adversaries, not just hate. Probably this hope is naive but who knows, I think that Jews cannot lower themselves by acting like everyone else, they are supposed to be the chosen people, right? Let's see if it shows.

I understand why it may seem that way from outside. This is the nature of looking at societies we aren't familiar with. In reality there are many colors and nuances among the Jews just as among any other society or religion.

[Raze]

5 hours ago, Basman said:

I feel really sorry for those Palestinians. It is basically over. There is no chance at a decent life for them. Either they are murdered or subject to authoritarian rule, slowly wittled down till they are no more. 

The only long-term solution for the Palestinians I think is to give up. Leave. Surely Israel would consider a permanent cease-fire on the condition that all Palestinians leave. If there where just places that would take them.

The greatest revenge is living.

Leave and go where? 

[Leo Gura]

5 hours ago, Basman said:

The only long-term solution for the Palestinians I think is to give up. Leave.

That was Israel's plan all along. That's what all their actions are designed for. Slowly squeeze them out by making their land a living hell.

Edited December 29, 2024 by Leo Gura

[Raze]

[Husseinisdoingfine]

I do actually have a sincere question for those who are really empathic towards the Palestinian cause. 

But why did the Palestinians reject the peace deals that gave them almost everything that they wanted. 

In 2000, Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak were invited to Camp David to negotiate land. Arafat was offered 90 - 95% of the West Bank (according to ChatGPT). Instead of accepting the deal, the Palestinians launched the second intifada.

And again, in 2008, they were offered 90 - 95% of the West Bank, despite the intifada, and declined it. 

If they had accepted the offer, then with their new autonomous state, they could have passed a law allowing all displaced Palestinians to go to the West Bank, and live happily ever after. But they didn't.

If they [Palestinians] accepted the offer, then there would be none of the encroaching settlements and occupation of the West Bank we keep hearing about. 

Edited December 30, 2024 by Husseinisdoingfine

[Nivsch]

[Raze]

3 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

I do actually have a sincere question for those who are really empathic towards the Palestinian cause. 

But why did the Palestinians reject the peace deals that gave them almost everything that they wanted. 

In 2000, Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak were invited to Camp David to negotiate land. Arafat was offered 90 - 95% of the West Bank (according to ChatGPT). Instead of accepting the deal, the Palestinians launched the second intifada.

And again, in 2008, they were offered 90 - 95% of the West Bank, despite the intifada, and declined it. 

If they had accepted the offer, then with their new autonomous state, they could have passed a low allowing all displaced Palestinians to go to the West Bank, and lived happily ever after. But they didn't.

It’s a myth

https://decolonizepalestine.com/myth/palestinians-sabotaged-the-peace-process/

https://fair.org/home/the-myth-of-the-generous-offer/

[Nivsch]

4 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

But why did the Palestinians reject the peace deals that gave them almost everything that they wanted. 

In 2000, Yasser Arafat and Ehud Barak were invited to Camp David to negotiate land. Arafat was offered 90 - 95% of the West Bank (according to ChatGPT). Instead of accepting the deal, the Palestinians launched the second intifada.

And again, in 2008, they were offered 90 - 95% of the West Bank, despite the intifada, and declined it. 

If they had accepted the offer, then with their new autonomous state, they could have passed a low allowing all displaced Palestinians to go to the West Bank, and lived happily ever after. But they didn't.

+1 ❤

[Leo Gura]

8 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

But why did the Palestinians reject the peace deals that gave them almost everything that they wanted. 

There were no such peace deals.

The peace deals were always designed to screw them over and leave them with crumbs.

Edited December 30, 2024 by Leo Gura

[Husseinisdoingfine]

Me to ChatGPT: What percentage of the West bank was offered to the Palestinians in The 2000, camp david summit with Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak, and Yasser Arafat?

ChatGPT:

At the 2000 Camp David Summit, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak reportedly offered the Palestinians between 91-95% of the West Bank along with additional land swaps from within Israel to compensate for the annexation of major Israeli settlement blocs in the West Bank.

However, the exact details of the offer remain a subject of debate, as no formal written proposal was presented. Additionally, the offer included shared sovereignty or special arrangements for parts of East Jerusalem, including religious sites. The Palestinians, led by Yasser Arafat, did not accept the proposal, citing concerns over the size and quality of the land being offered, sovereignty over East Jerusalem, and other issues such as the right of return for Palestinian refugees.

The summit ended without an agreement, and the lack of clarity around the details of the proposal has fueled continued controversy and differing interpretations of what was offered.

 

 

 

 

Me to ChatGPT: What was the result of this summit?

ChatGPT: The 2000 Camp David Summit, hosted by U.S. President Bill Clinton and attended by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat, ended without an agreement on a final-status peace deal. The summit's failure had significant political and social consequences for both sides, as well as for the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Key Results and Consequences:

No Peace Agreement:

• The parties could not agree on critical issues such as borders, Jerusalem, Palestinian refugees, security arrangements, and settlements.
• The lack of a formal agreement deepened mistrust between the two sides.

Blame and Controversy:

• The U.S. and Israel largely blamed Arafat for the failure, accusing him of rejecting a generous offer and not presenting a counterproposal.
• The Palestinians argued that the Israeli proposal fell short of meeting their minimum requirements for sovereignty, particularly regarding East Jerusalem and the right of return for refugees.

Outbreak of the Second Intifada:

• Shortly after the summit, in September 2000, the Second Intifada (a widespread Palestinian uprising against Israeli rule) broke out, leading to years of violent conflict.
• While the direct link between the summit's failure and the intifada is debated, the breakdown of negotiations contributed to the frustration and unrest.

Political Fallout:

• Ehud Barak's government faced significant criticism in Israel, leading to his political defeat in the 2001 elections to Ariel Sharon.
• Yasser Arafat's leadership was further scrutinized internationally, and his position as a peace partner was undermined.

Clinton's Frustration:

• President Clinton expressed disappointment with the outcome, particularly with Arafat's stance. In his later accounts, he criticized Arafat for missing an opportunity to achieve peace.

Shift in Negotiation Dynamics:

• The summit set a precedent for discussing final-status issues in detail but also revealed how entrenched and irreconcilable the positions of both sides were at the time.
• It contributed to the loss of momentum in the peace process, leading to years of stagnation.

The Camp David Summit remains a pivotal moment in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, often seen as a missed opportunity for peace. It highlighted the deep divisions and the challenges in resolving one of the most protracted conflicts in modern history.

 

 

 

 

Me: How much land was offered in 2008?

ChatGPT: 

In 2008, during the negotiations led by then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Olmert reportedly offered the Palestinians approximately 93-94% of the West Bank, along with land swaps equivalent to an additional 5-6% from Israeli territory. This would have effectively given the Palestinians a state with roughly 98% of the West Bank's total area.

Key Details of the Offer:

Land Swaps:

• Olmert proposed annexing major Israeli settlement blocs in the West Bank while compensating the Palestinians with land from within Israel.
• The proposed land swaps were intended to make the Palestinian state contiguous and address the realities of large Israeli settlement blocs.

Jerusalem:

• Olmert offered shared sovereignty over parts of Jerusalem.
• The Old City, including its holy sites, would be governed by an international committee comprised of representatives from Israel, Palestine, the United States, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia.

Palestinian Refugees:

• Olmert proposed allowing a limited number of Palestinian refugees to return to Israel as part of a broader solution but did not agree to the "right of return" as framed by the Palestinians.

Outcome:

• Mahmoud Abbas did not accept the offer, and negotiations broke down. Abbas later cited concerns over the lack of a detailed map and reservations about some aspects of the proposal, including the territorial swaps and the arrangement for Jerusalem.
• Olmert's legal and political troubles, including corruption charges that eventually forced his resignation, contributed to the collapse of the talks.

Legacy:

• The 2008 offer is often cited as one of the most comprehensive peace proposals made to the Palestinians. However, like earlier attempts, it failed to bridge the fundamental gaps between the two sides on key final-status issues such as borders, Jerusalem, settlements, and refugees.

[Nivsch]

@Husseinisdoingfine I remember that when I was a kid. The negotiations lasted long time and there were trials even after the 2nd intifada started. Let alone before that. Many many times. Always failed.

I believe that Bibi wanted them to fail, but not at all Olmert and Barak that been called traitors by the Right wingers. And Itzhak Rabin of course the most dedicated prime minister for peace.

Barak and Olmert really wanted that and with them the whole liberal camp. 

Unfortunately the more it failed, the less Israelis kept believing it.

Edited December 30, 2024 by Nivsch

[Husseinisdoingfine]

Israel offers the Palestinians the foundation of a two state solution, offering the Palestinians all this land. Instead of negotiating, they [🇵🇸] launch an Intifada. Despite launching an Intifada, Israeli leaders again offer the West Bank, and leave the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians instead of turning Gaza into the next Singapore or Hong Kong, turn it into a terror base. 

 

Edited December 30, 2024 by Husseinisdoingfine

[Nivsch]

11 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

Israel offers the Palestinians the foundation of a two state solution, offering the Palestinians all this land. Instead of negotiating, they [🇵🇸] launch an Intifada. Despite launching an Intifada, Israeli leaders again offer the West Bank, and leave the Gaza Strip. The Palestinians instead of turning Gaza into the next Singapore or Hong Kong, turn it into a terror base. 

And Israel left one-sidedly Gaza in 2005 but only got more rockets in return.

If Israel wanted to conquer Gaza it wouldn't bother to invest Billion of dollars in security upper and undergound (novel technology even) fences.

What, again, shows us that each time there is a camp (Liberals vs Messianic) that get more dominant in the decision making processes, and I don't need to tell you which camp is on the driver seat today.

Edited December 30, 2024 by Nivsch