-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
The One-State Solution
- Thread starter hendrix
- Start date
hendrix
Well-known member
Do you have a point to make?
Ausage
Well-known member
First the Middle East. Then the world.
Victor Ian
Well-known member
I'm calling my state "Ignorance".
harsh.ag
Well-known member
And your currency "IanMoneys"?
hendrix
Well-known member
You made a sarcastic comment on my own position, and now you're presuming me to have "picked a side". Do you realise I just posted a video of an informed guy who completely disagrees with my position?
If you're going to accuse me of ignorance on the issue then you need to actually state your own position: any idiot can sarcastically point out the negatives of a certain position regarding something as complex as Israel/Palestine. From your post it seems that you don't think Israelis and Palestinians coud live together. As far as I can tell, you're taking this position due to indoctrination, a "cycle of violence" and something about the Ottoman Empire. You're actually going to have to be a whole lot more specific than that, especially if you're acusing me of repeating buzzwords.
Victor Ian
Well-known member
I don't get it
Ignorance is a closed economy and since my state has a population of 1 I don't need currency.
Indipper
Well-known member
I am amused that you think King Abdullah "completely disagrees" with you. He states several issues of the conflict that you would no doubt also have stated. Though he doesn't use the same kind of emotive language, a la open-air prison or apartheid. Nor does he say anything about how deplorable the existence of Zionism is. If he isn't seeing the one-state solution, that might be because he is more of a realist.
My own position is that my Father is Jewish and I grew up in East Germany. So, in spite of not being Jewish in any religious way, I'd rather not see Israel go under. But I do hope to have maintained some critical distance.
Oh and, has it ever occured to you that whatever solution only makes sense if there is peace? Cause you will not get peace through forming states. Has not worked in the past, will not work now.
hendrix
Well-known member
I am not calling for Israel to go under. I am calling for Israel and Palestine to operate together as a single state, called Israel and Palestine. In the West Bank you have people who can pretty much come and go in and out of Israeli/Palestinian territory (Israelis and Arab Israelis) and you have another set of people who are stuck in that place and unable to go to other areas within the Israeli state. I do call that apartheid. The policing is in effect run by Israeli authority with whom the Palestinian authority works - so already that part of the Palestian territories is effectively operating as part of the Israeli state. Gaza itself is a walled off city from which people may not come and go. I do call that an open air prison.
The history of how the situation emerged and got to this point is long and complex. Most of the failures have been extremely poor leadership on the behalf of the Palestinians, who have in effect sent their own people to their deaths and negotiated extremely poor deals resulting in the outcomes we have today. Jordan itself has been part of this process, and its ceding of the West Bank may in part be why King Abdullah has his own conclusions about the way forward. RE: Zionism - yes, I do think it is deplorable. I am against nationalism in general, except as a response to imperialism. The idea of "A Jewish State for Jewish People" is not something that should ever be translated into law.
One of my refugee friends has now returned with his young family to Homs, Syria as there is no longer a war in that area. A city that looks like this:
Arabs living in the West Bank or overseas as refugees cannot return to cities that look like this:
So yes, I do think a Right To Return is a valuable concept.
I think a single Arab-Israeli state would facilitate a lot of these problems much better than two states. It's not a perfect solution. It doesn't fix all the problems. It doesn't even fix very many problem at all. But I think it would help to address some key issues that are very much restricting Palestinians in the palestinian territories, and Palestinian refugees abroad.
Indipper
Well-known member
I didn't say you did.
Let us examine that, shall we? I will admit that my understanding of Apartheid is not as complete as that of others, but I think there are some differences there. For one thing, Israel has, as far as I know, never been about racial segregation, which was the whole idea about Apartheid. That might sound weird in the face of practice but Israel is about preserving Jewish identity, giving Jewish people from around the world a home and defending that home. No Arabs were ever forced to learn Hebrew, at least, not to my knowledge. I am not at all saying that what happened was good and jolly, or actually, in many cases, downright disgusting. But Apartheid is another animal altogether. What happens between the Jews and the Palestinians is not worse than what happened to most minority groups.
That is simply because of the Oslo accords. If the PA had ever stepped up and managed to build up its own bureaucracy and executive, then Israel would no longer have been needed to collect taxes for them. Alas.
Gaza is a huge problem, no doubt about that. I understand that Israel concerned about weapons smuggling and tunnel diggers, but the whole sea blockade thing is over the top. A prison tough? People there still go to work in Israel. And there's that border with Egypt.
Yes I don't think the leaders on either side were particularly skillful in the making peace department. The Israeli leaders at least managed to be more competent in the military area.
If you are talking about Zionism as a modern-day ideology, fair play. If you are talking about the idea of Jewish people wanting their own state cause they were sick of getting their shop windows demolished, being spat on or beaten to death in 19th century Europe then I don't have any words.
While I personally see your point, that will not happen. Much like the Benes decrees in Czechoslowakia, the expulsion of the Arabs simply serves a practical purpose now. People who aren't there cannot democratically abolish Israel. And less said the better about the Arab's strength at procreation. Both are real fears of certain Israelis.
I still think you would have to make peace and i mean real peace before you attempted that. Disarm the militants. If the IRA can do it, surely Hamas can. Please consider that the wall that everyone is so upset about was built because of a grassroots initiative called wall4life after the dolphinarium bombing.
hendrix
Well-known member
By law, Jewish people around the world enjoy open immigration rights to Israel. Yet Arab exiles who were actually kicked out of Israel have no such rights. That to me is racial/ethnic segregation. Either way, whether you want to call it apartheid or whatever, it is deplorable.
That's kinda my point. The PA failure is as much responsible for this as anyone else. But the outcome is that Palestinians in the West Bank cannot enter Israel, cannot vote in Israeli elections, cannot get an Israeli passport or enjoy any of the benefits of Israeli citizenship, and yet they're being policed by the Israelis. Add to that the settlements that have now been protected by Israeli law and granted legitimacy, I cannot see how a two-state idea is any more realistic than a one-state solution.
The Oslo accords, from a historical perspective were an absolute disaster.
Since 2005 they have to be granted permits to work in Israel, and very, very few do. People in prison also work in the community as part of rehabilitation. I stand by the comparison.
A Jewish state is not the only possible solution to discrimination against Jews. But nonetheless that's what we have, so moving forward that's fine, my problem is not the historic idea. But protection of the modern Israeli state as being "for Jews" is outrageous and is discriminatory in itself. I do think it's utterly deplorable.
The Israeli fear of an Arab majority is a problem. I think it would be less of a problem if Arabs were living in a state in which they had the same rights as people in neighbourhoods next door to them such as in the West Bank.
I also feel that excercising undemocratic policies based on this fear is...well, undemocratic.
I understand that the wall was built for security. I don't think the ends are justifying the means.
hendrix
Well-known member
I also think a major problem here is that the UNRWA is a seperate entity from the UN commission for refugees, and has led to major corruption and changes in status for Palestinians. The outcome being that refugees from around the world are able to return to their country after wars have finished (as my friends have now done moving back to Syria), whereas Palestinian refugees are in a constants state of limbo.
Ausage
Well-known member
The Onion has it to be specific.
Not sure if the ramifications of that are hilarious or terrifying.
Prince EWS
Global Moderator
People always have a chuckle when I post that article, and it was written as a joke, but I sincerely believe this.
Groundking
Well-known member
Whilst I agree that a two state solution is increasingly becoming an impossibility, I fail to see how the region could get to the point where a one state solution is possible with how entrenched the hate and distrust of both sides is, and how the leadership (particularily in Gaza) is dominated by the extremists.
