Political DiscussionA place to hold political debates and general discussion. Please remember to always respect the opinions of other members and above all else, be civil.
Welcome to civicforums.com!
Welcome to civicforums.com.
You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, at no cost, you will have access to start new topics, reply to conversations, privately message other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join civicforums.com today!
Ok, I'm no PoSci major or anything of that nature, but this situation has left me scratching my head. Why doesn't Sharon just turn over the land and the Jewish people who don't want to live under Palestinian governance can just leave on their own? I'm sure the situation is a bit more complex, but it sounds like a good idea.
Does anyone here know more about this situation and can enlighten me as to why this solution wouldn't work?
To remove this ad, register today for free or log in if already registered!
__________________ I have too much respect for the idea of God to make it responsible for such an absurd world.
-Georges Duhamel
The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them.
-Mark Twain
Sponsored Links
To avoid seeing this ad in our forum please register at CivicForums.com
By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features.
One of the main purposes of making all Israelis move out is to help end violence/suicide bombings in the area and bring about some kind of social and economic stability to a potentially very profitable piece of land. If there are still Israelis living in the disengagement zone (i.e. if all of them are not forcibly removed by their own government), then the chances for continuing violence and economic instability are going to continue to be higher. Of course, things are much more complicated in the fact that there are international pressures and no matter what happens, some population will feel betrayed and/or exploited.
i have never paid one minutes attention to that RETARDED and stupid crap over there. we are all humans and can coexist. lets whine about a little strip of land!
One of the main purposes of making all Israelis move out is to help end violence/suicide bombings in the area and bring about some kind of social and economic stability to a potentially very profitable piece of land. If there are still Israelis living in the disengagement zone (i.e. if all of them are not forcibly removed by their own government), then the chances for continuing violence and economic instability are going to continue to be higher. Of course, things are much more complicated in the fact that there are international pressures and no matter what happens, some population will feel betrayed and/or exploited.
yes. whether its pride, herritage or stubborness, right now it would probably be impossible for israellis to live in the same place as palestinians, because there will always be some idiots who will try to make life hard for the others. there will be some palestinians who will hassle the remaining israellis, if any were to stay, just because they "won" the land or whatever. the same could happen w/ radical israellis being hostile towards peaceful palestinians living there because they are bitter and hurt that they "lost" the land.
there are areas where palestinians and israellis live together in peace, like haifa, but i dont think gaza is at that stage. the conflict has been going on for too long to just settle down instantly. im sure there will be cohabitation in the future, but it will take time.
and no, the south is a very poor example of tollerance and "coexisting".
hey when i see news of jewish terrorists killing palestinians then i will feel for the palestinians. it ain't gonna happen. no one is going to leave that place. no matter how much money they get. cause if they leave then it is accepting defeat in any situation. the closest thing to peace that happened there was the 6 day war back in '67. 6 day war happened then a little peace and then it never went back to normal.
hey when i see news of jewish terrorists killing palestinians then i will feel for the palestinians. it ain't gonna happen. no one is going to leave that place. no matter how much money they get. cause if they leave then it is accepting defeat in any situation. the closest thing to peace that happened there was the 6 day war back in '67. 6 day war happened then a little peace and then it never went back to normal.
extremists are extremists, and they exist in ANY group of people. that doesnt make israelis or or palestinians or iraqis or anyone a bad people as a whole. what it does is slow progress because violence doesnt solve anything.
leaving doesnt mean defeat. leaving could be accepting the fact that thats the only way to reach peace. the same thing happened between india and pakistan after brittain relinquised its rule over india. and how did they solve it? palestine formed a separate nation and they separated. it worked. no one "lost" or got "defeated". and that kind of mentality is whats keeping this conflict going.
and no, the south is a very poor example of tollerance and "coexisting".
a bit of sarcasm there............. NOTE the smiley............................................ .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. .................................................. ......
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by ledbelly
Post a pic of an old person and predict how they will die
Well, I'm a firm believer that we are all citizens of the world. All they have to do is allow the palestinians to assume control of the region and those who don't like it or can't deal with it can move to where the Israeli government was offering in the first place. Just say, "Hey, you can stay, but the palestinians are going to be making the laws and they probably won't favor you. So, if you want to move I'll give you a house over yonder; if you don't move now, I'll keep a house for you for one year, after that you're on your own." I think that would be the best practice and you wouldn't have all the riots there now from people who don't want to move.
My philosophy is: If you want to live somewhere, fine. You just have to deal with the local laws and customs. We are all humans and, as such, have just as much right to live in Africa as we do in Antartica or Greenland.
__________________ I have too much respect for the idea of God to make it responsible for such an absurd world.
-Georges Duhamel
The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them.
-Mark Twain
part of palestine land was occupied by israelites that is called the gaza strip. the conflict is that palestinians want the israelites out of their property. however this time, prime minister of israel (ariel sharon) ordered the occupants of the gaza strip to leave the strip and go back to israel.
this has been going on forever, between palestinians led by yassir arafat before, and israelites led by ariel sharon. thus the arafat-sharon conflict.
Yes, I understand that, but if my premise is true (that we all have the right to live in any country as human beings) then the only thing Israel had to do was yield the political power to Palestine. I don't know, I'm just confused.
__________________ I have too much respect for the idea of God to make it responsible for such an absurd world.
-Georges Duhamel
The radical of one century is the conservative of the next. The radical invents the views. When he has worn them out the conservative adopts them.
-Mark Twain
part of palestine land was occupied by israelites that is called the gaza strip. the conflict is that palestinians want the israelites out of their property. however this time, prime minister of israel (ariel sharon) ordered the occupants of the gaza strip to leave the strip and go back to israel.
this has been going on forever, between palestinians led by yassir arafat before, and israelites led by ariel sharon. thus the arafat-sharon conflict.
ok, no.
it really all depends on what time you want to start looking at this from. back in the day, israel and palestine were just tribes of people, wandering nomads. this is just a very general description, basically because both both these "nations" migrated and herded their flocks of sheep wherever the food/water was. thats how nomads live(d) in the desert.
Quote:
Historical roots
For over 3,000 years, Jews have considered the Land of Israel to be their homeland, both as a Holy Land and as a Promised Land. As a result, the Land of Israel holds a special place in Jewish religious obligations and Judaism's most important sites, including the remains of the Second Temple. The importance of the Land of Israel is not limited to Judaism; it is also the place where Christianity was born, and contains many locations of great spiritual significance to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Starting around 1200 BCE, a series of Jewish kingdoms and states existed intermittently in the region for over a millennium until the failure of the Great Jewish Revolt against the Roman Empire resulted in widescale expulsion of Jews from the Land of Israel (about 25% of the Jewish population, see Destruction of Jerusalem). After crushing Bar Kokhba's revolt in 135, Emperor Hadrian renamed Provincia Judaea to Provincia Syria Palaestina, a Greek name derived from Philistine (Hebrew פלשת Pəléšeṯ).
Over the next centuries under Roman, Byzantine, and (briefly) Persian rule, Jewish presence in the province dwindled as the center of Jewish life shifted to the diaspora. However, the Mishnah and Jerusalem Talmud, two of Judaism's most important religious texts, were composed in Palestine during this period. The province became an important center of Christian pilgrimage, with a growing Christian population.
then we go to more modern times...
Quote:
Zionism and Aliyah
Following centuries of Diaspora, the first wave of Jewish emigration to Israel, or Aliyah (עלייה), to the then Turkish province started in the late 1800s as Jews fled Russian and Yemenite persecution. This was known as the First Aliyah. The end of the nineteenth century saw the founding of Zionism, the national movement to create a Jewish political entity in Palestine. However, the death of the founder of the movement, Theodor Herzl, in 1904 combined with more pogroms in Russia, reinvigorated the movement and led to the Second Aliyah during the first two decades of the twentieth century with the influx of around 40,000 Jews. After World War I, the British endorsed a Jewish homeland in Palestine by issuing the Balfour Declaration on November 2, 1917. In 1919 the League of Nations transferred control of Palestine from the Ottoman Empire to the United Kingdom as a mandate (see British Mandate of Palestine). A declaration passed by the League of Nations in 1922 effectively divided the mandated territory into two parts. The eastern portion, called Transjordan, would later become the Arab Kingdom of Jordan in 1946. The other portion, comprising the territory west of the Jordan River, was administered as Palestine under provisions that called for the establishment of a Jewish homeland. Aliyah resumed in third and fourth waves after World War I. Later, the rise of Nazism in 1933 led to a fifth wave of Aliyah, and the Jewish population in the region increased from 11% in 1922 to 30% by 1940. The subsequent attempted extermination of the Jewish people in the Shoah, or Holocaust, in which about six million Jews were murdered, led to additional immigration from other parts of Europe. By the end of World War II, the number of Jews in Palestine was approximately 600,000.
British Mandate
In 1937, following the Great Arab Revolt, the partition plan proposed by the Peel Commission was rejected by the Palestinian Arab leadership; although it was a matter of strong dispute among the Zionist leadership, it was finally rejected by them as well, though they were willing to negotiate it. As a result, in 1939, the British gave in to Arab pressure because of support needed for World War II, abandoned the idea of a Jewish national homeland, and abandoned partition and negotiations in favour of the unilaterally-imposed White Paper of 1939, which capped Jewish immigration, and subjected it to review under further agreement with the Arabs. Its other stated policy was to establish a system under which both Jews and Arabs were to share one government. The policy was viewed as a significant defeat for the Jewish side, as it placed severe restrictions on Jewish immigration, while placing no practical restrictions on Arab immigration from surrounding Arab states. Due to these limitations, it was predicted that the proposed government would be dominated by the Arab side. As a result of impending world war, the plan was never fully implemented, but the White Paper of 1939 policy was implemented well into the end of WW2, and enforced even when refugees who survived the Holocaust were fleeing from Nazi persecution. (See Struma article.)
Establishment of the State
In 1947, following increasing levels of violence by militant groups, alongside unsuccessful efforts to reconcile the Jewish and Arab populations, the British government decided to withdraw from the Palestine Mandate. Fulfillment of the 1947 UN Partition Plan would have divided the mandated territory into two states, Jewish and Arab, giving about half the land area to each state. Under this plan, Jerusalem was intended to be an international region under UN administration to avoid conflict over its status. Immediately following the adoption of the Partition Plan by the United Nations General Assembly, the Palestinian Arab leadership rejected the plan to create the as-yet-unnamed Jewish state and launched a guerilla war.
On May 14, 1948, the State of Israel was proclaimed. Recognition of the new Jewish state came quickly from the world at large. Harry Truman, the then President of the United States, signed an executive order recognizing Israel only 11 minutes after the State had been declared. Promising to annihilate the new Jewish state, the armies of six Arab nations attacked the fledgling state.
Over the next 15 months Israel captured an additional 26% of the Mandate territory west of the Jordan river and annexed it to the new state. Jordan captured about 21% of the Mandate territory (which became known as the West Bank). Jerusalem was divided into a western part annexed by Israel and an eastern part annexed by Jordan. Jordan's annexation of the West Bank in 1950 was recognized only by the United Kingdom, while Israel's annexation of part of Jerusalem also became a matter of contention. The Gaza Strip was occupied but not annexed by Egypt.
~R.I.P. Diana Ham (WhoWhatWhoa)~ 
jen is the coolest hoe in this bish! haha 
