Official "Tzipi Livni: Hot or Not?" Thread

[S00113]

Originally Posted by garo

People quote the Hamas charter calling for the destruction of Israel as proof that Palestinians and Israelis cannot live in peace or that there can be no negotiation with Hamas.

If Palestinians and Israeli cannot live side by side in peace, the only sensible solution would be to remove Israel. There are a lot more Arabs than non-Arabs in the Middle East. Also west of River Jordan. Either Israel would have to trap up their genocide on the Palestinians, or move to somewhere else where there are less Arabs in their neighborhood.

IMHO Israel should have their right to exist withdrawn. They have always behaved badly against the Arabs. That's why they got trouble in the first place, and they still don't get it. It's amazing.

[davieddy]

Am I going completely senile or did a post of mine get deleted?
The divergence into two threads doesn't help in these matters.

David

[davieddy]

Originally Posted by davieddy

Am I going completely senile or did a post of mine get deleted?
The divergence into two threads doesn't help in these matters.

David

As I suspected.

Originally Posted by davieddy

Meantime from what I can gather there is some sort of ceasefire.
Hamas will stop firing rockets for a week to give the Israelis time to
get out.
The bad news is that Hamas has vowed to rearm, which suggests
that their ceasfire was motivated by running out of rockets.

David

[BotXXX]

Perhaps a 'solution' would be to place all the connected territories (The State of Israel, West Bank, East Jerusalem, Golan Heights and Gaza) under UN control. Cancel all higher government and let it be handled by UN supervisors - including a UN peace force that watches over all areas. Allow 'free' travel within the complete territory for all - ofcourse check points and checks on imported goods to prevent movements or arms (as in weaponry) etc. Set a grace period of 5-10 years in which time there should be big investments made in to education, social health care, etc. for all regions, races, religions, etc. Then allow free elections and hope that it will be possible to form some sort of coallition government that could 'live' with each other.
Assuming that because of the improved personal situations of people in all regions that extremist parties have less followers and the majority will vote for communal living opposed to try to get revenge on the others what the others did before to them (such a never ending circle when both sides follow this pattern).

Biggest cons of this idea:
- ofcourse Jordan and Syria have to agree that they permanently loose these Israeli-occupied territories
- Israel will have to let loose of the current power and trust in UN supervisors
- Hamas will have to give up 'their' governmental powers in Gaza
- All foreign companies currently in Israel will experience a much heavier checks with their imports/exports (same level of checks as with all other regions mentioned above) which could cause problems etc.
- probably many many others

But it is much easier to have a 'think' at home with not a complete view of the region, history, parties involded etc. ;-)

[garo]

@Ernst: Not!

Objectively speaking....

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by garo

@Ernst: Not!

Objectively speaking....

Yeah, I'm more a fan of Ukrainian PM Yulia Tymoshenko myself - Couldn't help feel the evil green-eyed monster of jealousy from rearing its ugly head when I saw her sweet-talking Vladdy "love machine" Putin at yesterday's announcement of a tentative Russian/Ukrainian accord to get gas flowing again ("I vould like to thank my dear sweet snoogums, Vladimir Vladimirovich", my butt) - but w.r.to Tzipi, just thought I'd throw it out there.

[garo]

Yulia all the way baby. And what's with the hair?

[Uncwilly]

I'll go with Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf.

[ewmayer]

Originally Posted by garo

Yulia all the way baby. And what's with the hair?

Just so folks too lazy to google around know whereof we speak, here is the lovely couple in question: Big bad daddy Vladdy and Ms. "Hair Buns of Danish" Tymoshenko:

[garo]

Thanks for the pic Ernst. Show us more hair!

[ewmayer]

Interesting op-ed on the Gaza and wider Israel-Palestine conflict in today`s New York times - Interesting not just for its content but also for its author. Not sure I like the proposed name of "the one state", though: How about "Pasraelatine"? (I realize it sounds more like a chemotherapy drug than a nation.)

Op-Ed Contributor: The One-State Solution

By MUAMMAR QADDAFI
Published: January 21, 2009

Tripoli, Libya

THE shocking level of the last wave of Israeli-Palestinian violence, which ended with this weekend’s cease-fire, reminds us why a final resolution to the so-called Middle East crisis is so important. It is vital not just to break this cycle of destruction and injustice, but also to deny the religious extremists in the region who feed on the conflict an excuse to advance their own causes.

But everywhere one looks, among the speeches and the desperate diplomacy, there is no real way forward. A just and lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians is possible, but it lies in the history of the people of this conflicted land, and not in the tired rhetoric of partition and two-state solutions.

Although it’s hard to realize after the horrors we’ve just witnessed, the state of war between the Jews and Palestinians has not always existed. In fact, many of the divisions between Jews and Palestinians are recent ones. The very name “Palestine” was commonly used to describe the whole area, even by the Jews who lived there, until 1948, when the name “Israel” came into use.

Jews and Muslims are cousins descended from Abraham. Throughout the centuries both faced cruel persecution and often found refuge with one another. Arabs sheltered Jews and protected them after maltreatment at the hands of the Romans and their expulsion from Spain in the Middle Ages.

The history of Israel/Palestine is not remarkable by regional standards — a country inhabited by different peoples, with rule passing among many tribes, nations and ethnic groups; a country that has withstood many wars and waves of peoples from all directions. This is why it gets so complicated when members of either party claims the right to assert that it is their land.

The basis for the modern State of Israel is the persecution of the Jewish people, which is undeniable. The Jews have been held captive, massacred, disadvantaged in every possible fashion by the Egyptians, the Romans, the English, the Russians, the Babylonians, the Canaanites and, most recently, the Germans under Hitler. The Jewish people want and deserve their homeland.

But the Palestinians too have a history of persecution, and they view the coastal towns of Haifa, Acre, Jaffa and others as the land of their forefathers, passed from generation to generation, until only a short time ago.

Thus the Palestinians believe that what is now called Israel forms part of their nation, even were they to secure the West Bank and Gaza. And the Jews believe that the West Bank is Samaria and Judea, part of their homeland, even if a Palestinian state were established there. Now, as Gaza still smolders, calls for a two-state solution or partition persist. But neither will work.

A two-state solution will create an unacceptable security threat to Israel. An armed Arab state, presumably in the West Bank, would give Israel less than 10 miles of strategic depth at its narrowest point. Further, a Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip would do little to resolve the problem of refugees. Any situation that keeps the majority of Palestinians in refugee camps and does not offer a solution within the historical borders of Israel/Palestine is not a solution at all.

For the same reasons, the older idea of partition of the West Bank into Jewish and Arab areas, with buffer zones between them, won’t work. The Palestinian-held areas could not accommodate all of the refugees, and buffer zones symbolize exclusion and breed tension. Israelis and Palestinians have also become increasingly intertwined, economically and politically.


In absolute terms, the two movements must remain in perpetual war or a compromise must be reached. The compromise is one state for all, an “Isratine” that would allow the people in each party to feel that they live in all of the disputed land and they are not deprived of any one part of it.

A key prerequisite for peace is the right of return for Palestinian refugees to the homes their families left behind in 1948. It is an injustice that Jews who were not originally inhabitants of Palestine, nor were their ancestors, can move in from abroad while Palestinians who were displaced only a relatively short time ago should not be so permitted.

It is a fact that Palestinians inhabited the land and owned farms and homes there until recently, fleeing in fear of violence at the hands of Jews after 1948 — violence that did not occur, but rumors of which led to a mass exodus. It is important to note that the Jews did not forcibly expel Palestinians. They were never “un-welcomed.” Yet only the full territories of Isratine can accommodate all the refugees and bring about the justice that is key to peace.

Assimilation is already a fact of life in Israel. There are more than one million Muslim Arabs in Israel; they possess Israeli nationality and take part in political life with the Jews, forming political parties. On the other side, there are Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Israeli factories depend on Palestinian labor, and goods and services are exchanged. This successful assimilation can be a model for Isratine.

If the present interdependence and the historical fact of Jewish-Palestinian coexistence guide their leaders, and if they can see beyond the horizon of the recent violence and thirst for revenge toward a long-term solution, then these two peoples will come to realize, I hope sooner rather than later, that living under one roof is the only option for a lasting peace.

Muammar Qaddafi is the leader of Libya.