Oh Israel..

[regexcellent]

This is just allowing for the natural growth by birth of existing settlements in the west bank, it's not "new settlements."

[notyoueither]

East Jerusalem should be the capital of a Palestinian state. There is no other viable way forward. I would like to see Jerusalem, as a whole, being an open city where Jews and Palestinians can live in any part of the city and live together in peace.

That being said, let's hope that this is just a bargaining chip for Israel and not an intentional derailment of yet unstarted peace talks.

Generations have been born into war over there and it will be difficult for all, but all sides must persevere.

I don't see that as any kind of viable way forward.

You require Israel to give up the biggest bone, and they are in no position to have to do so.

[regexcellent]

You're talking about the Palestinians?

No, the Palestinians haven't lived there at any point in their lives.

This approval is just allowing for the natural growth by births of existing Jewish communities. That's all. It's not creating any new settlements. Incidentally, the land the Palestinians would like in a future state is all of Israel, so all Israeli building is in land that they want.

[regexcellent]

Okay I think I posted the same (or similar) things twice in this thread but it's not updating no matter how much I refresh it :\

[Dr Strangelove]

How many of the prixoners were just protestors?

[Aeson]

When the police in Vegas answer to you and you have troops patrolling its streets, I will recognize your claim.

So you recognized the Nazi claim to Paris?

[Felch]

Yes, because HC was alive in the 1940s.

[Asher]

His ethics certainly were.

[Asher]

I'm curious what would happen if we said "You know what, F*** this. We don't care about what happens in the Middle East anymore. Don't bomb us and don't use nukes and we'll leave you all alone."

That's been my stance for years. They both act like children, let them fight it out. People have tried for decades to help, but all they end up doing is bankrolling the violence.

[Aeson]

Yes, because HC was alive in the 1940s.

Thanks, now I'm sure he'll check it out

[PLATO]

I don't see that as any kind of viable way forward.

You require Israel to give up the biggest bone, and they are in no position to have to do so.

I don't know about that. 65 years of conflict could be solved. It is unlikely that there will be peace without the Palestinians having East Jerusalem as there Capital.

I believe that this is one of those rare conflicts that being "in no position to have to do so" is not really applicable. Sure, the Israeli's have the power on the ground and have some heavy weight political support in the U.S., but if the really want a chance for peace then they are going to have to negotiate with the Palestinians as if they were equal.

I see the deal as being East Jerusalem for the Palestinians giving up their claim of a "right to return". It is a fact that the vast, vast majority of Palestinians have never lived a day in Israel proper...regardless of where their grandparents lived.

[PLATO]

That's been my stance for years. They both act like children, let them fight it out. People have tried for decades to help, but all they end up doing is bankrolling the violence.

I never knew you were a proponent of Israel committing genocide on the Palestinians. "Fight it out"? Really? What do you really think the outcome of all out Israeli-Palestinian war would be?

[PLATO]

OK, so change it to "We get out of Dodge, but warn other nations that we're still their international allies - just not getting involved in any regional conflict. As long as no nations that aren't in the Middle East or Northern Africa or wherever the hell Turkey is get involved, we're staying out of it.

The problem is that Russia is heavily involved in the Middle East and has been for decades. No matter how you style it a U.S. disengagement will leave a power vacuum that Russia will try to fill. This would, most likely, be contrary to our interests in many different ways.

[snoopy369]

The real question is, at what point do one of two things occur:
a) Israeli right loses power due to [something - economics?] and the left takes control for long enough to force peace
b) Israeli people get tired of the constant security state/threats/danger and decide it's worth it to have a peace where they actually give something up

If that point is prior to the elimination of the Palestinian people (I'd use the 'g' word but that might be inflammatory), then there will be peace. If not, there will be a different sort of peace...

[Asher]

I never knew you were a proponent of Israel committing genocide on the Palestinians. "Fight it out"? Really? What do you really think the outcome of all out Israeli-Palestinian war would be?

Honestly don't care. It's not my business.

If Israel wants to commit genocide, then I'm sure the Good Folks in Amurica would nuke them for it.