I believe the two state solution for Israel and Palestine will work

Pete

Repete
It will happen the day after we pay off our national debt. :patriot:

I do not understand these myths that our politicians cling to and spend so much time and money pursuing.
 

b23hqb

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
It will happen the day after we pay off our national debt. :patriot:

I do not understand these myths that our politicians cling to and spend so much time and money pursuing.
:lmao:

And that will happen only after pigs fly.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
Bolton says he prefers the "three state" solution - and I agree with it, even if it may not gain acceptance easily.

Originally - the Israelis HAD the West Bank. It was part of the original plan for Israel and Trans-Jordan (now Jordan).

Jordan TOOK the West Bank in 1948-50 (depending upon whether you consider "taking" informally or formally).
Israel took it back in 1967.

So who owns it? Israel, because they took it back after it was given to them, or Jordan because they took it a year or two after being formed as a nation and having it for twenty years?

Jordan clearly doesn't want to take the "Palestinians" - the name given to mostly displaced Jordanians after the wars - back.
They've been mostly favorable to the United States for many years, but while they could solve the Middle East problem by taking in their former people - they won't.

The "three state solution" is simple - Gaza goes back to Egypt. West Bank goes back to Jordan. And with it, the residents. No separate Palestinian state, which in all truth, would
just be a launching ground to push Israel into the ocean. Roll back the clock. I think the BIGGEST hurdle to that is - Jordan doesn't want all those people. They'd rather have
a destitute Palestinian state than accept back their own people.

What's strange is that the ONE state option is gaining ground, even among Palestinians - but I think only because Israel would have to cease to be a strictly Jewish state if
they had to grant equal rights to the Arabs living within their borders (which would include the West Bank). And I don't just mean freedom and treatment under the law, but access to
the higher levels of government.

And I've no doubt that no matter how the laws were constructed, the Arabs within Israel would still use it to push to their advantage - the ONE thing out of Kerry's speech I agreed with -
there would never be peace, but only because the Arabs don't want it.
They want annihilation of Israel, and a one-state solution is simply another path to that goal.
 

Pete

Repete
Bolton says he prefers the "three state" solution - and I agree with it, even if it may not gain acceptance easily.

Originally - the Israelis HAD the West Bank. It was part of the original plan for Israel and Trans-Jordan (now Jordan).

Jordan TOOK the West Bank in 1948-50 (depending upon whether you consider "taking" informally or formally).
Israel took it back in 1967.

So who owns it? Israel, because they took it back after it was given to them, or Jordan because they took it a year or two after being formed as a nation and having it for twenty years?

Jordan clearly doesn't want to take the "Palestinians" - the name given to mostly displaced Jordanians after the wars - back.
They've been mostly favorable to the United States for many years, but while they could solve the Middle East problem by taking in their former people - they won't.

The "three state solution" is simple - Gaza goes back to Egypt. West Bank goes back to Jordan. And with it, the residents. No separate Palestinian state, which in all truth, would
just be a launching ground to push Israel into the ocean. Roll back the clock. I think the BIGGEST hurdle to that is - Jordan doesn't want all those people. They'd rather have
a destitute Palestinian state than accept back their own people.

What's strange is that the ONE state option is gaining ground, even among Palestinians - but I think only because Israel would have to cease to be a strictly Jewish state if
they had to grant equal rights to the Arabs living within their borders (which would include the West Bank). And I don't just mean freedom and treatment under the law, but access to
the higher levels of government.

And I've no doubt that no matter how the laws were constructed, the Arabs within Israel would still use it to push to their advantage - the ONE thing out of Kerry's speech I agreed with -
there would never be peace, but only because the Arabs don't want it.
They want annihilation of Israel, and a one-state solution is simply another path to that goal.
They are intellectually dishonest. They know the singular goal of the Arabs, minus the Jordanians perhaps, is the elimination of Israel. Period. Any negotiation, and compromise, and deal is nothing more that a step to that end. The non-muslim world, despite spending an awful lot of time condemning Israel for exploiting the "spoils of war" will not allow Israel to be conquered. Yet....
 

Monello

Yeah, whatever
PREMO Member
Let me just add this about Palestinians. In many cases these are young boys that are already poisoned by the hatred of Israel & the west.

911rightwingnews.jpg

c4e92f18ff0d0f078ea66a588d7a560a.jpg
 
Top