How do we solve the Middle East problem.

[gerryh]

We are going to go at this just a tad differently than previously. Attacks will not be tolerated. If your comments are not contructive and conducive to civil discussion then the post will be asked to be removed. Stay on topic, if you start rambling or introducing subjects that are not in keeping with the objective of the OP, your post will be asked to be removed.


This thread will be dedicated to ideas of how to solve the Middle East problem. NOT to point fingers. At this point in time the history of the area is irrelevant. Using the history of the area to justify the actions of one side or another is an excersise in futility, and here is why:
"History is a myth agreed upon." Napoleon Bonaparte.

"No two historians ever agree on what happened, and the damn thing is they both think they're telling the truth." Harry S. Truman.

Let's deal with the here and now and see if we can't come up with something that "could" be acceptable to all sides of this conflict.

There is enough blame to go around to all party's involved, both Hamas AND Isreal. The following article discusses the problems with dumping billions in aid into Palistine all the while Isreal and Hamas continue to ensure the area is unstable and insecure.

The billions of aid dollars poured into the Palestinian territories in the past 15 years have failed to bring about development because donors have overlooked everyday insecurity, health researchers say.
Some $9.4 billion in aid disbursed since 1994 has not met its goals, with evidence in recent years pointing to a reversal in development in the Gaza Strip and West Bank, according to a study in a special issue of the Lancet medical journal focusing on Palestinian health.
Rajaie Batniji of Oxford University, one of the study's authors, said the international community had done little to stop threats to the basic security of the territories' 3.8 million inhabitants, targeting the effects of the violence rather than its causes.
"Ensuring that every person has the security to survive, to function normally is a requirement for development efforts to work," he said. "Giving aid without doing things to open the economy, giving aid without taking measures to ensure people are safe might not achieve the effects we're all hoping for."
Batniji's team analysed direct threats to Palestinians' security, including aerial bombings, the use of guns by the Israeli military, demolition of homes and land confiscation.
Since 2000, some 6,100 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli military action, and another 600 by fighting between Palestinian factions, according to the study. Over the same period, more than 35,000 have been wounded in the conflict.

http://wap.alertnet.org/db/an_art/20...5-085634-1.htm

As you can see, the health issues, both physical and mental, need to be addressed as soon as possible before other social and economic issues can be resolved in both Gaza and the West Bank.
Isreal's continued policy of aphartied, in the guize of their "security wall" needs to be revisited for the good and security of both Palestinians and Isreali's. The continued confrontational policy's of check points and the secirity wall must stop.
As much as many are loathe to consider this next step..... Hamas, at this point in time, IS the governing body in Palestine. Isreal and the "west" need to sit down and discuss how to best solve the existing animosity's and problems.
We'll start out with this.

 

[CDNBear]

Gh, I've read this piece you provided a few times now, I agree that it is in the best interest that the conflict be resolved for the good of the noncombatants, that's a given.

But I must ask, how can any healing begin, as the article asserts, without the conflict coming to a close first?

This is a monumental version of the age old question...Which came first, chicken or egg?

IMHo, the conflict is causing the health issues, therefore the health issues can not be adequately addressed until the conflict is removed from the equation.

Now to do that, Israel must pull back to the 67 lines, I know this is a source of consternation for some of us Israeli 'shills', myself included. But it is IMHO the simplest way to start the process.

Then Hamas and its supportive states must acknowledge Israel's right to exist.

Then and only then can we sit down and negotiate the right to access and a meaningful peace negotiation.

 

[Ron in Regina]

"The Moderation Staff has worked with Gerryh over the past
week with respect to the initiation of this Thread, and it's
intentions, and will work towards this Thread adhering
to the Spirit of the Opening Post."
______________________________

 

[gerryh]

Gh, I've read this piece you provided a few times now, I agree that it is in the best interest that the conflict be resolved for the good of the noncombatants, that's a given.

But I must ask, how can any healing begin, as the article asserts, without the conflict coming to a close first?

This is a monumental version of the age old question...Which came first, chicken or egg?

IMHo, the conflict is causing the health issues, therefore the health issues can not be adequately addressed until the conflict is removed from the equation.

Now to do that, Israel must pull back to the 67 lines, I know this is a source of consternation for some of us Israeli 'shills', myself included. But it is IMHO the simplest way to start the process.

Then Hamas and its supportive states must acknowledge Israel's right to exist.

Then and only then can we sit down and negotiate the right to access and a meaningful peace negotiation.

Ok....you are going to have to elaborate. What 67 lines..... before the return of the Sinia to Egypt? Would Isreal retain the Golan heights?

 

[CDNBear]

Ok....you are going to have to elaborate. What 67 lines..... before the return of the Sinia to Egypt? Would Isreal retain the Golan heights?

In 67 Egypt, Jordan and Syria waged war against Israel, Israel was victorious against the three Armies and captured territory in doing so. One would have to understand that Jordan had already annexed the West Bank and given citizenship to the Arabs residing there. Egypt had annexed Gaza. Though no citizenship was offered, Egypt claimed Gaza as Egyptian territory. Similarly Syria claimed the Golan Heights as theirs.

Under International Law, pertaining to war reparations, land can be claimed as reparations. Despite what some claim to be false. This confusion stems from, firstly, using Amnesty Internationals definition of law, which is patently false. Secondly, the attempt to use the contemporary resolutions of the Rome Conference.

Unfortunately, neither applies to International Law of 1967, in which land was and had been for some time, as seen in Europe after the Second World war, a source of war reparations.

 

[gerryh]

The lines I was thinking about would be more in line with what President Clinton proposed at the 2000 Camp David talks.

 

[CDNBear]

The lines I was thinking about would be more in line with what President Clinton proposed at the 2000 Camp David talks.

Could you refresh my memory?

I'll go looking but if you have a link in mind, I would be much appreciative. ;-)

 

[CDNBear]

Found it, lol

Can you give me a minute to go over the details?

 

[Machjo]

Where do you think grassroots projects such as the following fit in all of this:

American Friends of Neve Shalom/Wahat al-Salam

And how could Canada help in this? One thing I could see would be making personal financial contributions to it be tax deducible. I wouldn't give to them myself since I'm a creature of habit and have my own charties I've been giving to for a while now. But you nevr know, some people might want to give to them.

Any thoughts on this?

 

[Machjo]

Also, the federal government should not expres its opinion about issues beyond its jurisdiction except via the UN. Just as citizens respect local bi-laws, and local governments respect provincial and federal laws, so national governments must respect and uphold international resolutions, the closest we have to international laws. Besides, if the government can't lead by example in respecting international laws, then how can it count on its citizens to respect its laws. If a government is above the law, then so are its people.

 

[darkbeaver]

It is unresolvable without war, the last six decade prove that beyond any doubt. I wish it wasn't so but I believe if there were a peacefull solution it would have been implimented by now. The questions seem eternal, who will rule and where are the borders?

 

[MHz]

You can't, and the men (33 countries)who created the problem have washed their hands of it all many decades ago. Too bad, that means the same thing can happen anywhere at any time. Nor will blame be placed on Bankers who kept money locked up before war broke-out and once it did break out factories worldwide were at full production.

PS Why has this never been before the UN court that was supposed to resolve issues between the two. This thread isn't binding on anybody.

 

[gerryh]

It is unresolvable without war, the last six decade prove that beyond any doubt. I wish it wasn't so but I believe if there were a peacefull solution it would have been implimented by now. The questions seem eternal, who will rule and where are the borders?

That maybe a distinct possibility DB...what this thread is for is to throw around the possibilities. What options that may be available but have never been tried...what options that have been put forward in the past but weren't really tried. The big thing is, if you have a proposal, put it out there, but also be prepared to defend that position without all the rhetoric that is prevalent in every other thread on the ME.

You can't, and the men (33 countries)who created the problem have washed their hands of it all many decades ago. Too bad, that means the same thing can happen anywhere at any time. Nor will blame be placed on Bankers who kept money locked up before war broke-out and once it did break out factories worldwide were at full production.

PS Why has this never been before the UN court that was supposed to resolve issues between the two. This thread isn't binding on anybody.

That's a pretty defeatist atitude, but then again, if you feel the problem is unsolvable, then I assume we will not see you posting in this thread.

 

[gerryh]

Also, the federal government should not expres its opinion about issues beyond its jurisdiction except via the UN. Just as citizens respect local bi-laws, and local governments respect provincial and federal laws, so national governments must respect and uphold international resolutions, the closest we have to international laws. Besides, if the government can't lead by example in respecting international laws, then how can it count on its citizens to respect its laws. If a government is above the law, then so are its people.

Ok.....then how can the UN help?

 

[MHz]

That's a pretty defeatist atitude,

There was opposition from the Arabs in the 1930's. Since UN 181 was signed into being problems were to go to this body. It's 6 decades old and the same political conditions exist, saying it might go on another 6 decades is not defeatist it is quite possible. So far firepower has been the method used to try and solve things. That option will never be taken off the table. Why isn't this option the first and only one?

2. International conventions

The State shall be bound by all the international agreements and conventions, both general and special, to which Palestine has become a party. Subject to any right of denunciation provided for therein, such agreements and conventions shall be respected by the State throughout the period for which they were concluded.
Any dispute about the applicability and continued validity of international conventions or treaties signed or adhered to by the mandatory Power on behalf of Palestine shall be referred to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the Court.


Their address can be found and all their cases going back to 1946 are archived. There should be tons of cases for Israel/Palestine. The link below comes up with two hits. one about the wall (year 2000+) and an unrelated case.

​

Cases*|*International Court of Justice

 

[darkbeaver]

That maybe a distinct possibility DB...what this thread is for is to throw around the possibilities. What options that may be available but have never been tried...what options that have been put forward in the past but weren't really tried. The big thing is, if you have a proposal, put it out there, but also be prepared to defend that position without all the rhetoric that is prevalent in every other thread on the ME.




That's a pretty defeatist atitude, but then again, if you feel the problem is unsolvable, then I assume we will not see you posting in this thread.

Defeatist my butt, I said the problem is resolvable through warfare. You have not even defined the problem ,the middle east is a big place it is not just the war in Palestine how then can you expect reasonable input on an imperfectly defined question? Every concievable peacefull solution has been put forward and rejected in favour of war. The final solution is being pushed to completion as we speak, and that friend gerry is total global war. What about Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Eygypt are they to be left out of any proposed solutions? All of these and more face internal interferrance by the one. Are we to sacrifice the rights and lives of the many for the few? And if so why?

 

[gerryh]

There was opposition from the Arabs in the 1930's. Since UN 181 was signed into being problems were to go to this body. It's 6 decades old and the same political conditions exist, saying it might go on another 6 decades is not defeatist it is quite possible. So far firepower has been the method used to try and solve things. That option will never be taken off the table. Why isn't this option the first and only one?

2. International conventions

The State shall be bound by all the international agreements and conventions, both general and special, to which Palestine has become a party. Subject to any right of denunciation provided for therein, such agreements and conventions shall be respected by the State throughout the period for which they were concluded.
Any dispute about the applicability and continued validity of international conventions or treaties signed or adhered to by the mandatory Power on behalf of Palestine shall be referred to the International Court of Justice in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the Court.


Their address can be found and all their cases going back to 1946 are archived. There should be tons of cases for Israel/Palestine. The link below comes up with two hits. one about the wall (year 2000+) and an unrelated case.


​

Cases*|*International Court of Justice

DO you have an option to put forward? Or are you just going to rehash what has been done, or not done, in the past?

 

[MHz]

what options that have been put forward in the past but weren't really tried

People from 33 Nations sat around some 'retreat in affluent USA' deciding what was in the best interest of the residents of the region called Palestine. What hasn't been tried was taking a vote based on the numbers when it would have actually mattered 1922. At that time the Arabs were 8x in number. The promotion of a free democracy should not start with the confiscation of 20,000sqkm of land.

This was such an easy question. "Why isn't this option the first and only one?"

 

[gerryh]

Defeatist my butt, I said the problem is resolvable through warfare. You have not even defined the problem ,the middle east is a big place it is not just the war in Palestine how then can you expect reasonable input on an imperfectly defined question? Every concievable peacefull solution has been put forward and rejected in favour of war. The final solution is being pushed to completion as we speak, and that friend gerry is total global war. What about Lebanon, Syria, Turkey, Eygypt are they to be left out of any proposed solutions? All of these and more face internal interferrance by the one. Are we to sacrifice the rights and lives of the many for the few? And if so why?

DB...try reading what I said in relation to the quotes....I didn't say you had a defeatest attitude.

I did not "define" the problem on purpose. What I see as the problem, may not be what you see as the problem. I left it open.

The only thing I want to see is an honest attempt at debate, rather than another thread bashing one side over the other.

 

[gerryh]

People from 33 Nations sat around some 'retreat in affluent USA' deciding what was in the best interest of the residents of the region called Palestine. What hasn't been tried was taking a vote based on the numbers when it would have actually mattered 1922. At that time the Arabs were 8x in number. The promotion of a free democracy should not start with the confiscation of 20,000sqkm of land.

This was such an easy question. "Why isn't this option the first and only one?"

One last time..... do you have an option or solution to put forward. If so, lay it out.