![](”http://static.flickr.com/44/116364022_14e11279b9_o.jpg")
Thursday, 8 Jun 2006
You've got to be kidding me!
There is apparently a new Israeli peace plan- proposed by a general called Geyor Eiland- for redrawing the borders of the Plaestinian territories , that promises to solve the palestinian problem by basically annexing pieces of land from Egypt and Jordan to help create the palestinian state. The plan basically proposes that Jordan gives the wesbank an extension of 100 KM2 from east Jordanian land and Egypt adds 600 km2 to the Ghaza strip, thus giving the plaestinains a 105% increase compared to the land they have now, which should allow them to form a strong stable government. The plan offers different kinds of compensation to both the Jordanians and the Egyptians for the land if they agree.
I am not sure how viable or serious this plan really is, but I have a single response to it: OVER MY DEAD BODY!
I am not going to allow or give a single inch, not a single god-damn inch of Sinai to anybody, whether they are jews, muslims, isarelis, arabs, europeans, or from the planet Tatooine. Egyptians fought for this land, we bled for this land, and we finally got it back, and we are not going to give a single inch of it. I don't care what Mubarak's response is going to be, god knows he has been especially silent about it, but if he even hints at maybe even considering that proposal, then he will open the gates of hell upon himself. The Egyptian people, no matter what the retarded pan arabist might try to tell us to think, will not stand for it. God knows the Jordanians are already rejecting anything that may come close to resembeling this plan of having Jordanian soil act as a substitute to palestinain one.
The king told Jordanian security cadets that if there "is anyone who
believes that it is possible to settle the Palestinian issue at the
expense of Jordan, he should know that Jordan will never be a
substitute homeland for anybody.""The Palestinians' homeland and their state should be on Palestinian soil, and nowhere else," he said.
In an interview with the Israeli newspaper Yediot Ahronot, Abdullah
told the Israeli public that he was "definitely concerned" about
Olmert's plan.
Sorry guys, but not Sinai. Never Sinai!
June 8th, 2006 at 10:28 am
Hum, isn’t that exactly the stance that the Israelis are being so condemned for?
June 8th, 2006 at 10:43 am
Do you have a link for it in English?
Wait, just found this: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/722588.html
Not much detail there, and it’s not an official plan… But I fail to understand the fury of your reaction, SM. The second link speaks of King Abullah’s concern over a possible refugee problem - and he is right to be concerned. With the civil war in PA a very likely probablity, and a unilateal formulation of borders (and the sealing thereof) by Israel close to completion, it is reasonable to assume that the Palestinians would not want to live in PA territory. Jordan and Egypt are their best options, and given the nature of Palestinian mentality I can see why a state would not want them.
And Egypt is already having problems with the Palestinians…
Trading parts of unsettled Sinai for unsettled Negev - why not? The border between Israel and Egypt is not drawn on some sort of natural barriers - it’s just a line in the desert. The Bedouins would probably not even notice if the border changes
June 8th, 2006 at 10:49 am
Now even though I’m not Egyptian my response is simply HELL NO! Over my dead body too. And they want to FREAKING criticize Iran’s president for telling Europe and America to give away Jews some land to stay in. HYRPOCRITE are the shitheads supporting this plan.
June 8th, 2006 at 10:52 am
Why should Egypt or Jordan have to sacrifice their lands??? Israel should withdraw from the occupied parts of the West bank and the Gaza strip.
June 8th, 2006 at 11:31 am
Drima -
Withdrawal from the West Bank is part of the plan. Israel has already withdrawn from Gaza. Thing is, the West Bank has some points which, if given freely to the Palestinians, will greatly endanger Israeli cities and roads. Therefore the proposal is for 88% of the territory. But Eiland believes that even 100% of the West Bank and Gaza will not be enough for a viable Palestinian state, simply because of demographic pressures (and these are not Singaporeans we’re talking about). S’not about giving the Palestinians a state in Jordan or Egypt - it’s giving them the West Bank and Gaza + bits of the unused lands of Jordan and Egypt, in return for stuff and land from Israel.
It doesn’t sound unreasonable, but I think that Eiland is talking out of his ass, trying to make a good impression before his retirement so that he will get more offers to lecture for lots of money.
June 8th, 2006 at 11:32 am
[...] Read also what Sandmonkey has to say about this, in English, HERE [...]
June 8th, 2006 at 11:46 am
“Hum, isn’t that exactly the stance that the Israelis are being so condemned for?”
What a fuck head you are. Israel is condemned for invading Palestine and taking it’s land you dumb idiot.
Screw you!
June 8th, 2006 at 11:48 am
Get the Israeli fuckers out of the palestinian lands and don’t ask us Egyptians or Jordanians to give up our land to pamper Israel the bitch. Let the Mother fuckers in the US give them one of it’s state.
June 8th, 2006 at 11:58 am
Egyptian -
Have a glass of cold water. Smoke a joint. Jerk off. Turn on the AC. After you’ve chilled out, read some history not written by the beard-and-guns crowd.
*sigh*
June 8th, 2006 at 1:30 pm
The Tommy Peace Plan:
1) Unilaterally draw borders
2) Partition Gaza and the West Bank into two separate countries.
3) Palestinian refugees: either move to Gaza or the West Bank or have the Arabs integrate them into their societies. After all, it was Arab wars of aggression that created the refugee problem. They need to step up to the plate and help fix it.
June 8th, 2006 at 2:06 pm
SM: I also don’t understand your fury. Racoon is right that this is exactly what is demanded of the Israelis. Israelis also bleed and fought for the land (even for the land captured in 1967). That is not a good reason to oppose this unofficial plan.
Really, calm down. Is not like the plan is asking for a neighborhood in Cairo, for God’s sake! I respect that you are liberal in many respects, but here you have jumped like the worst nationalist of all.
Forget about Jordan and the West Bank for a moment. Let’s talk about overcrowded Gaza. What is goin to happen with the people there? If you really care about the Palestinians then open your mind a little. I have been around Gaza, on the Israeli side. It is not a desert. There are many towns there. On the other hand, Egypt controls “egyptian” Rafiah. A town divided in half. Families divided in half. What is so crazy about asking that Egyptians give unused land to the Palestinians to solve their problems?
Really, you make it seem like the Palestinians are from another planet. They speak Arabic, you know? They have family in Egypt too. I find the plan very reasonable, and reading the knee-jerk nationalistic response of SM and other posters makes me remember why this conflict is so difficult to solve.
Come on! is not like you need to sunbathe near Rafiah to be happy…
June 8th, 2006 at 2:09 pm
I forgot to mention, but not only the Palestinians speak Arabic. They have fought hand in hand with your army in 1948 and 1967 from Gaza.
Sheesh…
June 8th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
Interesting responses from here and from world governments.
June 8th, 2006 at 3:20 pm
I agree with SM in as much as I think that Egypt has nothing to do with this.
Egypt invaded Gaza once, Israel captured Gaza and the Sinai, Egypt got the Sinai back. Israel and Egypt are now back where they started and there is no reason to change that. The border between the countries is a good border between Africa and Asia. Better keep it that way.
But I don’t understand the Jordanian King:
“The Palestinians’ homeland and their state should be on Palestinian soil, and nowhere else,” he said.
Doesn’t he remember that Jordan has been created on Palestinian soil just like Israel? Surely he must notice that 70% of his subjects are Palestinian Arabs.
I do agree with the King, however, that Jordan should not give land to the third Palestinian state. There are countries smaller than the Gaza strip which function well. And with the West-Bank and a highway/railroad connection (which they hopefully won’t blow up every two months) the area is more than big enough to be a country.
The borders between Israel/Palestine and Jordan and Egypt are the only ones that have been agreed on. Why change the only part of the story that has worked?
June 8th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
“Let the Mother fuckers in the US give them one of it’s state.”
Not needed. American Jews have full rights and can vote. They are not hunted down and killed by other Americans like minorities are in the Arab world.
Jews in the middle east need a state. Jews in Europe and America do not.
June 8th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
“The Palestinians’ homeland and their state should be on Palestinian soil, and nowhere else,” he said.
Doesn’t he remember that Jordan has been created on Palestinian soil just like Israel? Surely he must notice that 70% of his subjects are Palestinian Arabs.
I just think this needed to be posted twice.
And sorry Sandy, I also agree that Egypt lost the Sinai when it attacked Israel, but it was not war that got you the Sinai back but peace.
I still say, why does there need to be a state called Palestine? There never was before. The only reason there is a question is cause Egypt didn’t want Gaza back and Jordan didn’t want the West Bank back. No one really considered making a state of Palestine before 1967 outside of the one roundly rejected by Arabs in 1947/8.
Jordan “occupies” more of the region of Palestine than Israel does. Hm. Maybe *that’s* why Arafat tried to take it over, too?
June 8th, 2006 at 3:44 pm
Israel invaded Palestine??? When was there ever a country called Palestine that was invaded by a country called Israel??? I guess I’m not getting sufficient Arab propaganda.
June 8th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
“I still say, why does there need to be a state called Palestine? There never was before.”
“Palestine” is merely the pagan name of a region formerly known as Israel and Judaea. The Greeks and Romans named the region “Syria Palaestina” when they took it from the Jews.
“Jordan “occupies” more of the region of Palestine than Israel does. Hm. Maybe *that’s* why Arafat tried to take it over, too?”
Yes, that was why. Arafat and his pan-Arabist allies have always tried to make the entire region into one federation of dictatorships. Israel and Jordan were both in the project’s way.
June 8th, 2006 at 4:36 pm
“why does there need to be a state called Palestine? ”
Either you must be talking out of your ass or your brain is in it!
June 8th, 2006 at 4:39 pm
“why does there need to be a state called Palestine? ”
yes elengil, Indeed
Either you must be talking out of your ass or your brain is in it!
June 8th, 2006 at 4:56 pm
C’mon! SM. Just one inch.
June 8th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
Long time reader, first time poster. I felt the need to post, because this is not the Sandmonkey that I have learned to respect and whose opinion I cherish.
First of all, what’s wrong with giving them 600km? The problem with Egypt, and the Arab countries in general, is that they never put their money where their mouth is. Sure, they should have a state, sure, we should support them in every way possible, but when the time to act comes, all of sudden everyone’s silent, save for a few million thrown here and there by oil-saturated Gulf countries (all it means is more weapons for the terrorists, more spending-money for top PA officials, and one less Yacht for some Saudi Prince.)
Egypt is composed of over 1 million square kilometers of land. And you’re crying over 600km? Again, Egypt should put its money where its mouth is if it’s going to keep going on about Palestinian victimization and suffering.
Your rash, nationalist attitude is pretty much identical to the one shared by the Egptian government, and indeed, the people, 30-40years ago. This is what caused the War of Attrition and the Yom Kippur War. Fueled by the embarrasment and chagrin of getting your asses handed to you by the much smaller IDF, you kept on asking for it, so they gave it to again in ‘73.
Now I think giving Sinai back to Egypt was a good strategic move on Israel’s part. But the peace between Israel and Egypt (who knows better than you?) is a cold one. The Israeli ambassador never leaves the embassy, because the Egyptian government immediately rebuffs any co-operation efforts from the Israelis. While Israel has fulfilled all articles agreed upon by the Camp David Accords, Egypt has failed to truly fulfill a single one.
After 67′, Sinai wasn’t yours anymore. It was Israel’s. When you go to war, you put it all on the table. Double or nothing. War is for keeps. It’s not some computer RTS game where you can re-start the game all over again when you lose and you start off with the same amount of resources and starting location. So you made a gamble, and you lost big-time. And then you resorted to childish, futile efforts to fuel Nasser’s nationalist frenzy which the Egyptians blindly followed instead of sueing for true peace, which would have easily been granted by Israel. You could have had Sinai and peace in 68′, but you had to wait till 80′. The answer to “why” is a great reminder of the true personality of Egypt, in many ways true to its 60’s and 70’s image (and in other ways not.)
And if you fought over it for some sort of higher, humanitarian, defensive, noble cause, then maybe you would have some sort of argument. Fact is, Egypt lost Sinai because of its own short-sight, infantile feeling of omnipotence.
In a way, you saying you fought with your blood and guts for Sinai is like saying Germany fought with its blood and guts for the Rhineland. Personally, I think Germany should be thankful they even HAVE A PRESENCE in the Rhine after the stunt they pulled in 36′, and later on during the whole of WW2. I think you should be equally grateful Sinai is in your hands, and that Israel gave up a land vastly larger than the whole State of Israel just for a peace that Egypt seems to prove once again and again it’s not worthy of.
It’s also sad that an Egyptian can come as a happy tourist to Israel and he will never have to fear getting lynched, or insulted, or shunned, or kicked out of any public building, just because he spoke Arabic.
On the other hand, all my friends always enter Egypt with their American passports and not their Israeli ones. Also, they refrain from speaking Hebrew at all times. If one of the buddies in the group mentions anything related to the fact that they are from Israel in public, that buddy gets a swift punch in the shoulder for his tongue-slip (but you already know this, much better than I do, I’m sure.)
And besides, what are you getting so excited about? Just a few months ago an Israeli general said the Hashemite Kingdom’s days were numbered, and that it is weak and about to fall apart. Israel apologized, saying that the General’s views do not reflect the views of the government or the people of Israel, and Abdullah maturely answered: “I know.”
Maybe you can learn from his response, eh?
/End Rant of a Ranting of a Sandmonkey
June 8th, 2006 at 5:05 pm
Drima, why not answer the question?
Why does there need to be a state called Palestine? What is the requirement for this based on when for 20 years it was utterly rejected and never persued in any form?
The only basis for a state called Palestine seems to be to destroy Israel and put it there, since it has been offered in the West Bank and Gaza and again rejected.
Most of the historical territory of Palestine is sitting under … ta da! Jordan. There you go, THAT is your Palestinian state, so why does there need to be a state *called Palestine*?
The desire for it is not some cultural or historic tie, it’s the latest in the Arab’s anti-Israeli rhetoric. It’s not that there needs to be a Palestine for the sake of the Palestinians, it’s that there needs to be a Palestine in order to destroy Israel.
So you answer me, why does there need to be a state called Palestine? If you can’t answer that one simple question that should pretty much say it all.
June 8th, 2006 at 5:12 pm
Great post, Ronen.
June 8th, 2006 at 5:18 pm
Why should 2006 be any different from 1948?
NIMBY
SK
June 8th, 2006 at 6:02 pm
“The desire for it is not some cultural or historic tie”
I agree.
“It’s not that there needs to be a Palestine for the sake of the Palestinians, it’s that there needs to be a Palestine in order to destroy Israel.”
WRONG. We talk about them and refer to them as Palestinians for a reason. It is because they themselves identify themselves as Palestinians. Whatever that means I don’t care but for all of those Palestinians it matters alooooooot. When you ask a Palestinian where he is from he will always say Palestine and will say it with great patriotism and pride. Not only that but when you meet a Jordanian of Palestinian decend, he too will always answer I’m Jordanian but I’m originally Palestinian.
It’s a matter of patriotism and national pride for all of those people. Who are you to say what’s the point of establishing a Palestinian state? This is surely not the wish of those Palestinians. Your comments and ideas are NOT constructive in any way. The Palestinians deserve their own state. I don’t believe the majority of Palestinians want to destroy Israel. They’re fed up and sick of all the fighting. Who likes war?? I know they elected Hamas but I don’t think the reason was to destroy Israel. They were just sick and tired of corrupted Fatah. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL THE PALESTINIANS NOT TO HAVE A STATE OF THEIR OWN.
June 8th, 2006 at 6:16 pm
Dear sandmonkey, Don’t worry too much about these dictators giving away national territory.Any deal to sell ? land could bring down these governments,and they know it. In my limited Texas-based understanding of the conflict, the only “land” that matters is Jerusalem, and the 3rd holiest site of Islam. Violent extremists will continue , but any “peace” must include that Israel’s territory ends at the base of the wall,and that each side may have its capital there .Oh,allow me an aside: “Run,Condi, Run.”
June 8th, 2006 at 6:19 pm
Andrew, I’m so glad you pointed out Jordan’s hypocrisy. Since we were just recently discussing the origins of Israel and Jordan, I thought there would be more comments about the king’s statement.
While it’s true that since the Romans, we have referred to the Holy Land (ironically) as “Palestine”, I think they (the Romans) were naming it after the Philistines and not the other way around. I could be wrong. Nevertheless, it’s amazing how far back in history this conflict goes. They and the Israelites have always struggled with eachother for supremacy in the same land.
June 8th, 2006 at 6:32 pm
Drima aka SudaneseThinker answer me this:
Why is it that the PLO, recognized as the sole legitimate political representative of the Palestinian people by both the Palestinians and the Arabs, was created in 1964 (3 years before the Israeli occupation, while the West Bank and Gaza were under the control of Jordan and Egypt, respectively), with its main mission objective being “The Destruction of Israel”? Curious, huh…
And if you say they have changed, using the recent polls of high acceptance of the Prisoner’s Document (conveniently caled the National Reconciliation Document, instead of the [Inter]national Reconciliation Document,) why is there not a single article in this document which explicitly states Israel is a legitimate state and recognizes its right to exist?
By advocating the “Right of Return,” something which indeed is more important to them than anything else, even *gasp* Jerusalem (talks in Camp David broke down between Arafat and Barak because of Arafat’s insistence on a full right of return, even though Barak offered to give him East Jerusalem, all of Gaza and over 95% of the West Bank), they ARE openly, transparently and publicly stating that they desire the destruction of Israel.
A democratic Israel, which defends the Jewish people, can in no way be ensured without a Jewish majority. Re-instating 5 million Arabs in Israel is 1cm lower on the ridiculousness scale than all the Jews drowning themselves in the Mediterranean.
Jews can’t live with an Arab majority, and they most certainly can’t live UNDER an Arab majority. The Arab abd Muslim states are proving this on a daily basis.
Let Hamas enter Israel and instill their radical Islam on Jews, making them Dhimmis? No thanks.
And what is this right of return nonsense anyways? Nobody grants the Mexicans right of return to California, or the Bolivian/Peruvians right of return to Atacama, and certainly not the right of return of hundreds of thousands of Jews who were expelled from all Arab nations following the 1948 War (and had *all* their property confiscated from them)… But I’m sure you didn’t know about that, now did you?
Very recently, the ex-CIA chief, recently relieved of this duty, said that when Palestinians speak of “occupation,” they aren’t referring to the West Bank or Gaza, but rather the Israeli Occupation of Tel-Aviv.
June 8th, 2006 at 7:10 pm
Ronen, thank you for getting that out. I wanted to say the same thing but could not do half as good of a job of it as you did. People please learn some history, preferably from more than one source and viewpoint as Ronen has. Will save a lot of anger. As far as giving up land goes from Eygypt and Jordon to the Pali, why not just give “Palistine” back to Jordon and get on with it. Squatters are what the Palis are and squatting on a piece of land only gives rights to land if the prior owner has not got the balls to throw them off. No one has ever accused these Jews of not having BIG BALLS and the ass to back up what they say. Either the Pali take what they what or go elsewhere and live under the laws of that land. Hard as it may be for some of “YOU CHILDREN” to understand it is still true that whiniing will not make people do as you want. Eygypt is Eygypt, Jordan is Jordan and Isreal is now Isreal. Deal with it. Nobody is going to give them anything. Let them either take it (and the Palisitinians have tried) earn it, or deal with what they have..
June 8th, 2006 at 8:04 pm
A piece of land for peace in the region??? That’s a bargain. I’d do it in a second.
June 8th, 2006 at 8:14 pm
Hey ARAB. its not your land. ITS MINE!!!!!!
Fucking Coptic Pig.
June 8th, 2006 at 9:57 pm
The angry Libyan guy is off his meds again. I view it as a good thing that Zarqawi’s death has caused “LibyanWarrior” to have a psychotic episode. I also view it as proof positive that Zarqawi was nothing more or less than the murdering terrorist he seemed to be. Good riddance. May the rest of your heroes meet the same fate, LW.
BTW, you guys should check out Leilouta’s blog and see the vile garbage he said to her. He’s gonna be “AngryLibyanAmericanBreathingThroughAStraw” if her husband ever gets ahold of him.
June 8th, 2006 at 11:07 pm
Wonderful to hear such strong, accurate, and realistic info re Israel and its history.
so where is Sand Monkey? a logical man such as he has got to get the message that little israel has balls and rightful ownership, and has indeed offered and given plenty- due to its pragmatic nature as well as its hukkmanitarian nature. Arab nations, get your act together. Also- doesnt the intelligentsia want to support a nation such as Israel in their midst?
June 9th, 2006 at 1:35 am
Amazing, SM. Israel has time and time again offered land it’s fought for (successfully, by the way) and which its soldiers have died to take and defend to people who hate it and try to kill its citizens on the regular . All it gets is “that’s not enough.” Egypt gets asked to give a small (and sixty by ten kilometers is small) piece of the Sinai to its Palestinian brothers, related in blood and language, and the immediate reaction, even from the most moderate and reasonable of Egyptians such as yourself, is “eat us, you won’t get an inch.” The only reason Egypt has the Sinai today is that the Israelis valued peace with Egypt over land. Anyway, this shows that the peace process is just another club used to beat Israel over the head, and has no value to the Arabs other than that. Who could have guessed?
June 9th, 2006 at 2:08 am
YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO TELL THE PALESTINIANS NOT TO HAVE A STATE OF THEIR OWN.
They have a state of their own, it’s called Jordan. So again, the question is, why must they have a state specifically called Palestine for them to be happy? I don’t need a state called “Scottish-English-Swedish State of America” to make me feel I belong in it.
Jordan is comprised of over three quarterse of historic Palestine, the vast majority of its citizens are Palestinian and it is the only other nation in the Middle East who actually granted citizenship to the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza.
So why do they need a state *called Palestine* when they already have a Palestinian state?
June 9th, 2006 at 2:31 am
Sand Monkey
I really like your blog and respect your views and was so sure that the first time you say something that does not please those right-wing, blindly pro- Israel thugs, you will get those comments from them! Yes, what’s the problem for them? Let Egypt give some land and “everything will be fine”, as if we are selling some potatoes on a Sunday market and have to fix the price! This is insane!
Or that meathead that says Israel has a “humanitarian nature” !! What the heck is that supposed to mean? When did any NATION on earth have a Humanitarian nature? Yes, it’s so humanitarian that I think sometimes it’s the country of angels, no doubt!
Or the other fuckhead that says that Jordan is the state of Palestine!!! This is fucking insane! Yes, people, read some history and not that of Israeli propaganda!
Anyway, whether you like it or not, whether you want to give them land or not, the Arab-Israeli fight is still too “young” , it’s less than 7o years - a lot has yet to come!
June 9th, 2006 at 2:35 am
WOW. HELL FUCKING NO. Since when is it Egypt’s responsibility to give up our OWN FUCKING LAND to placate the Palestinians and let the Israelis get away with keeping uncharted territories. Egyptian land is EGYPTIAN LAND. It is NOT for the Palestinians and it is certainly NOT for Israel to decide to give to Palestine. This is incredibly fucked up. Over my dead body!!!!!!!!
Anyone who calls this plan remotely reasonable is an illiterate fuckhead.
June 9th, 2006 at 2:56 am
“the fight is still too young….a lot has yet to come” If that’s how you want it! What stupid suckers for punishement! With all that has been said above and that is all you can say, P.G.? I guess you get your historical info. from those famous Palestinian textbooks that are devoid of facts and filled with hate. You don’t have to open an Israeli history book to know that most of Palestine is now present day Jordan. So yeh, there already is a Palestine, but stupidly, it is named Jordan. And if you want a second Palestine, why then maybe we should have two Israels for f…ck sake!! Oh whatever.
June 9th, 2006 at 3:35 am
“blafasel Says:
June 8th, 2006 at 10:28 am
Hum, isn’t that exactly the stance that the Israelis are being so condemned for?”
Yep, exactly, and Egypt is as justified in taking that line as Israel is.
I agree with elengil and Andrew Brehm that the idea of a state called “Palestine” is an ex post facto rationalization of anti-Israeli hysteria, and indeed, the land now called “Palestine” was Egyptian and Jordanian before 1967, but Cairo and Amman chose not to seek the return of that land (Of course not; they don’t want to have to govern a suicide-cultists’ compound masquerading as an ethnic homeland.), BUT…
….but the plan is still stupid. The idea that a solution shouldn’t come at the expense of Israel does not justify dragging in Egypt or Jordan and making them cough up. It neither brings the area closer to peace, nor advances any issue of justice, even if Egypt and Jordan agreed to it. It accomplishes nothing.
The only way I can see this making any sense is if the Israeli General was trying to make a point to the effect that Israel shouldn’t be expected to sacrifice it’s security, and this was supposed to be an object lesson to show that Jordan and Egypt wouldn’t do it. If this is serious, it’s a waste of time.
June 9th, 2006 at 4:42 am
Two points:
(1) All this discussion of any Arab state doing anything meaningful to achieve peace between Palestine and Israel is moot. A resolution to this conflict is the last thing they want. In fact, I am certain that they have consistently strived to maintain the status quoue. That is, a never-ending conflict of moderate violence which is safely contained within small geographic area, close enough away to watch.
The reasons are perfectly logical. It is simply the cynical politics of self-preservation as conducted by the ruling elites of the ME Arab nations.
I wrote a brief essay on my blog explaining why this is:
http://ron_larson.blogspot.com/2005/05/middle-easts-conflict-of-interest.html
Thus, any politician can use the conflict to market themselves as “doves” or peace-makers. They can take up the cause of peace, throw ideas around, talk the talk, and know that it is all for nothing. It is a cheap political trick.
For an example, in the US, candidates sometimes take up an “extreme” position on a decisive issue such as gay-marriage, abortion, etc., in order to appeal to voters with extreme politics. They do this knowing full well that they will not actually have to deliver any such promises because they will never be able to gather enough wide-spread support to do so.
(1) Is there, or was there, a Palestine?
WHO CARES? There wasn’t a United States of America 300 years ago. Does that make the US illegitimate? There wasn’t a Germany. It was Prussia. It doesn’t god-damn matter. The people there call themselves Palestinians. Who the hell are we to tell them otherwise? They can call themselves “Freedonions” or “MacSillys” or the “&%%^”. Or whatever.
Things change. We aren’t living on a museum for planet. Deal with it.
June 9th, 2006 at 4:44 am
Isn’t it curious how we are incessantly told all the Palestinians want is peace, yet as soon as one of them opens his mouth, it’s “the fight is still young”.
And the vehemence with which Egyptians oppose giving up 0.006% of Egypt’s (uninhabited) territory to help their Palestinian brothers is interesting, while Israel is expected to give up 30% of its territory, which Israelis also paid in blood for and forcibly remove 200000 Israelis for the sake of people whose greatest wish is to destroy Israel.
Anyway territory is overrated. The Palestinians could create a successful and viable state on whatever territory they have. The problem is that they have not ther slightest wish to move from Jew-killing to nation-building. I mean look what they did with Gaza, looting and burning the greenhouses, destroying the economy, complete breakdown of public order, rival gangs daily fighting in the streets and more than 6000 rockets launched at Israel since the withdrawal. And you expect them to run a state?
June 9th, 2006 at 4:49 am
The people there call themselves Palestinians.
Oh. Ok so as long as I get enough people together we can call ourselves Shitheads and demand a state of Shithead and if we don’t get it, we’ll just blow up enough people until they give it to us.
I agree, it’s rediculous to ask Egypt or Jordan, sovereign nations, to willingly give up any of their territory. Just as it is rediculous to ask Israel, a sovereign nation, to give up any of it’s territory, won *legally* in a defensive war against aggressive nations that lost that land.
West Bank and Gaza is NOT “occupied Palestine” … It is Israel, or would be if any other nation in the world were involved. But because It’s Israel, somehow that’s in dispute. Either way, it’s still not some occupied nation of Palestine, at best it’s occupied Jordan and Egypt, but it’s not occupied land, in fact it is land Israel won in war.
Palestinians have a nation. It’s called Jordan.
Israel should not have to give up a single inch of it’s land to terrorists either.
June 9th, 2006 at 4:55 am
Things change. We aren’t living on a museum for planet. Deal with it.
Things change. Doesn’t mean they change to everyone’s liking. Israel is there now. Deal with it. Palestinians maybe need to deal with the reality that they aren’t entitled to a country on whatever land they choose, especially not if they continue to do the things they do.
The thing is, I’m not even against it, but the arguments that people make for it are rediculous and the demands that they make on Israel for it are even worse.
If the Palestinians want a nation in the West Bank and Gaza and want to be taken seriously, they need to start ACTING like it. They are not acting like a nation, they are acting like thugs and terrorists and spoiled children.
If the Palestinians simply want a nation of palestinians, for the last time IT’S CALLED JORDAN.
But what the Palestinians have proven over and over that they want is not Palestine, but a lack of Israel. I dont’ think they really care WHAT nation controls that strip of land, so long as it isn’t controlled by Jews. That’s what they have proven they really care about, since no one screamed “Occupation!” when Jordan and Egypt moved in and took over in 1948. So as long as it’s their fellow Arab nations that are occupying them, they’re fine and dandy with that, it seems.
June 9th, 2006 at 4:56 am
“They have a state of their own, it’s called Jordan.”
elengil, if you see it that way then good for you. Have fun convincing those who want a state called Palestine about it.
Ronen Noy,
I hate to admit but YES no duh, this conflict is saturated with pure blind hatred and I do agree with many things you said.
STILL YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TELLING PALESTINIANS NOT TO HAVE THEIR OWN STATE… A STATE CALLED PALESTINE AND NOT JORDAN…
Don’t drag Egypt and Jordan into something that has been settled ages ago. Don’t bring back the past to poison the present.
June 9th, 2006 at 5:02 am
You still have yet to explain exactly WHY they are in such desperate need of a state called Palestine.
June 9th, 2006 at 8:14 am
SM: I have posted a reply and a question to you in my blog. If you want to come by, you and everybody else is invited. Best.
June 9th, 2006 at 9:16 am
“Why does there need to be a state called Palestine?”
Because no other state wants these people.
“First of all, what’s wrong with giving them 600km?”
They don’t deserve it. Egypt does.
“Your rash, nationalist attitude is pretty much identical to the one shared by the
Egptian government, and indeed, the people, 30-40years ago.”
Actually, his is a patriotic attitude. The nationalist attitude would be to help the Arab
“brothers”, no matter the cost for one’s own country. 30-40 years ago nationalism was the
ideology of the day. Today more Arabs seem to become patriots. That is a good thing.
“We talk about them and refer to them as Palestinians for a reason. It is because they
themselves identify themselves as Palestinians.”
I’m afraid the reason is racism. You refer to them as “Palestinians” and you use the term
to exclude Jews. A “Palestinian” is an inhabitant of Palestine. Like a “German” is an
inhabitant of Germany. The idea that Jews are not a part of the definition is plain
racist. It is true that they identify themselves as Palestinians; but so have the Jews of
Palestine before the founding of Israel. (And I have heard that the Arabs of Palestine
did not call themselves “Palestinians” before 1947 or 1967, but nobody who claimed they
knew that they did has ever given me a source for the claim.)
It is indeed strange that of all the parts of Palestine, exactly that part should be
named after the mandate. Why not name Jordan “Palestine”? 70% of Jordanians are
“Palestinian”. Assuming that the term really is an identifier of a people, naming the
country where most of them traditionally lived would make sense.
But I believe that the term is used simply to exclude Jews and create a claim of one
people to a land which housed a mere 500,000 of them in the past and which they never
developed. (How many people lived in Jerusalem before the Jews arrived in the late 19th
century?)
Jordan was created out of Palestine to give the Hashemites something to rule after the
Saudis expelled them from Arabia. I believe that was a good move by the British. But it
doesn’t mean that we can simply forget that Jordan’s population is Palestinian. The
population in question did not suddenly end at the Jordan river, it continues to the
desert, obviously. (And in 1948 Jordan made it clear that they would not have a problem
with the Arab part of Cisjordan to become a part of a Jordanian kingdom either.)
There already are two Palestinian states, a Jewish state and an Arab state (even if it is
ruled by Bedouins, and why not?). The question is, should there be a third Palestinian
state (i.e. a second Arab Palestinian state). I think there should be. In fact I think
there should be two more (Judaea and Samaria as one, Gaza as another).
“I think they (the Romans) were naming it after the Philistines and not the other way
around.”
You are right. But I didn’t say it was the other way around. The Romans named the
territory after the pagan Philistines to insult the Jews. I know why the Christians
continued to use the pagan name for the land. But I don’t understand why Muslims insist
on the pagan name.
Afterall, the land _used_ to be called Israel and Judaea in the past, before the pagans
took it. That was what G-d, should we believe Tanakh and Qur’an, wanted to name the land.
If we don’t believe in G-d, we can still look at both books to find out what people used
to think about the land. It is clear that Jews thought it was their land. It is also
clear that the pagan Romans thought they could drive the Jews out of it. And it is clear
that Muhammed thought it was Jewish land (because the Qur’an refers to G-d giving the
land to the Jews). It is also clear that Muhammed thought that the Jews would return to
it (because the Qur’an mentions that as well). And it is clear that Muhammed thought that
the Jews would not leave again (because the Qur’an mentions two exiles, not three).
None of that is an argument for a Jewish claim, because both religions could be man-made
inventions. It is a question of belief.
What I don’t get is why so many Muslims ignore their prophet on this subject and insist
on the pagan name for the land.
The irony is of course that Arab wars against Israel have so far given exactly the
results the Qur’an predicted: the Jews would mingle in a place and there are only two
exiles.
For me the pagan name of the region is good enough, as a _name_ for the region. But to
use that name and apply it to only one group of people who historycally lived there is
racist, I think.
There are Arab, Jewish, Druze, Circassian, and Armenian Palestinians. Some of the Arab
Palestinians are Bedouins (who, as nomads, might not technically be “Palestinians”). The
Druze seem happy under Jewish majority rule. The bedouins seem to accept it. The
Circassians do, I think. I have not heard of the Armenians (in Jerusalem), but my bet is
on them preferring Jewish rule over Arab rule (although many people argue that Arabs
should rule them, no idea why).
“hundreds of thousands of Jews who were expelled from all Arab nations following the 1948
War (and had *all* their property confiscated from them)”
I advocate paying compensation to all refugees. The Arab countries should decide how much
is due. Israel will then pay that amount to Arab refugees (represented by an Arab
Palestinian state). And the Arab countries will pay the same amount to the Jewish
refugees (represented by Israel).
“A piece of land for peace in the region??? That’s a bargain. I’d do it in a second.”
It worked with Egypt. It never worked with some of the other groups.
June 9th, 2006 at 9:17 am
Great, Notepad or Firefox reformatted my pasted text. I apologise and hope everybody can still read it.
June 9th, 2006 at 9:18 am
“Don’t drag Egypt and Jordan into something that has been settled ages ago. Don’t bring back the past to poison the present.”
Yepp, that was my point too. Egypt and Jordan are out of this.
They have made peace with their former enemies, and so it shall remain. They have nothing to do with it any more.
June 9th, 2006 at 6:56 pm
> But I fail to understand the fury of your reaction, SM.
ROTFL^3
June 9th, 2006 at 7:01 pm
> Why does there need to be a state called Palestine?”
We don’t need another “Palestine”.
What we need is an island covered by sand and stones - perhaps
with some swamps - very far away from any gentile population,
giving the master race a chance to show their capability to make
a desert bloom.
June 9th, 2006 at 7:27 pm
And they would!!
June 9th, 2006 at 9:32 pm
Hahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa….
Wow. Eight years at university, two degrees and
still believing in the tooth-faery.
Amnesian uber alles.
ROTFL.
June 10th, 2006 at 6:15 pm
Ronen says:”It’s also sad that an Egyptian can come as a happy tourist to Israel and he will never have to fear getting lynched, or insulted, or shunned, or kicked out of any public building, just because he spoke Arabic.
On the other hand, all my friends always enter Egypt with their American passports and not their Israeli ones.”
I once went to Egypt with my mother - her first time back since all the Jews were expelled in 1956. We were in Luxor and we were talking to a store vendor telling him how my mother was from Cairo - Heliopolis to be exact - when he asked me a simple question in Hebrew and I instictively said yes in Hebrew. He then yelled that he knew we were Jews and started chasing us with hate filled eyes. My mother was in her mid sixty’s and we had to run for our lives. I’ve always felt that I was inches away from being murdered because I was a Jew.
Also maybe Egypt should consider the fact that they expelled the Jews because my mothers family left behind everything.
June 11th, 2006 at 12:09 pm
> and we had to run for our lives.
Sorry - but that’s what many palestinians will know quite well.
> Also maybe Egypt should consider the fact that they expelled
> the Jews because my mothers family left behind everything.
And this also applies for the palestininans - but the master race
never cared.
June 12th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
“> and we had to run for our lives.
Sorry - but that’s what many palestinians will know quite well.”
Care to try it out?
I am willing to bet on it. I will be in Israel in August. Let’s try it out.
I will be wearing a T-shirt with a Palestinian flag in Israel, and you will wear a T-shirt with an Israeli flag in the territories.
We will both explain to anybody who asks that we support the cause of the flag shown. And neither of us is allowed to ask our assigned side for assistance.
I’ll bet you ten bucks that I will live longer!
We’ll see whether a Palestinian (Arab) would be treated like that in Israel. We’ll see.
Put your money where your mouth is!
“> Also maybe Egypt should consider the fact that they expelled
> the Jews because my mothers family left behind everything.
And this also applies for the palestininans - but the master race
never cared.”
You and your master race are beginning to bore everyone. Do you not notice that? What the feck is a “master race” anyway?
Perhaps you should explain your ideology to us? Does it have to do with the dream of a Jew-free middle east?
June 16th, 2006 at 1:46 am
Hello all…
The Israelis are not able to make a successful agreement wth Palestinians, will they make a good one with Palestinians and Jordanians and Egyptians?
I dont think so!
though it looks an interesting plan !
June 16th, 2006 at 2:04 am
Drima Aka… you said wonderful things !