What's new

Israel does not want peace

Falcon29

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
31,647
Reaction score
-10
Country
Palestinian Territory, Occupied
Location
United States
Israel does not want peace - Israel Conference on Peace Israel News | Haaretz

Israel does not want peace. There is nothing I have ever written that I would be happier to be proved wrong about. But the evidence is piling up. In fact, it can be said that Israel has never wanted peace – a just peace, that is, one based on a just compromise for both sides. It’s true that the routine greeting in Hebrew is Shalom (peace) – shalom when one leaves and shalom when one arrives. And, at the drop of a hat, almost every Israeli will say he wants peace, of course he does. But he’s not referring to the kind of peace that will bring about the justice without which there is no peace and there will be no peace. Israelis want peace, not justice, certainly not anything based on universal values.

Thus, “Peace, peace, when there is no peace.” Not only is there no peace: In recent years, Israel has moved away from even the aspiration to make peace. It has despaired utterly of it. Peace has disappeared from the Israeli agenda, its place taken by the collective anxieties that are systematically implanted, and by personal, private matters that now take precedence over all else.

The Israeli longing for peace seemingly died about a decade ago, after the failure of the Camp David summit in 2000, the dissemination of the lie that there is no Palestinian partner for peace, and, of course, the horrific blood-soaked period of the second intifada. But the truth is that even before that, Israel never really wanted peace. Israel has never, not for a minute, treated the Palestinians as human beings with equal rights. It has never viewed their distress as understandable human and national distress.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ISRAEL CONFERENCE ON PEACE

CLICK HERE TO SEE THE CONFERENCE PROGRAM

The Israeli peace camp, too – if ever there was such a thing – also died a lingering death amid the harrowing scenes of the second intifada and the no-partner lie. All that remained were a handful of organizations that were as determined and devoted as they were ineffectual in the face of the delegitimization campaigns mounted against them. Israel, therefore, was left with its rejectionist stance.

The single most overwhelming item of evidence of Israel’s rejection of peace is, of course, the settlements project. From the dawn of its existence, there has never been a more reliable or more precise litmus test for Israel’s true intentions than this particular enterprise. In plain words: The builders of settlements want to consolidate the occupation, and those who want to consolidate the occupation do not want peace. That’s the whole story in a nutshell.


On the assumption that Israel’s decisions are rational, it is impossible to accept construction in the territories and the aspiration to peace as mutually coexisting. Every act of building in the settlements, every mobile home and every balcony, conveys rejection. If Israel had wanted to achieve peace through the Oslo Accords, it would at least have stopped the construction in the settlements at its own initiative. That this did not happen proves that Oslo was fraudulent, or at best the chronicle of a failure foretold. If Israel had wanted to achieve peace at Taba, at Camp David, at Sharm el-Sheikh, in Washington or in Jerusalem, its first move should have been to end all construction in the territories. Unconditionally. Without a quid pro quo. The fact that Israel did not is proof that it did not want a just peace.

But the settlements were only a touchstone of Israel’s intentions. Its rejectionism is embedded far more deeply – in its DNA, its bloodstream, its raison d’être, its most primal beliefs. There, at the deepest level, lies the concept that this land is destined for the Jews alone. There, at the deepest level, is entrenched the value of “am sgula” – God’s “treasured people” – and “God chose us.” In practice, this is translated to mean that, in this land, Jews are allowed to do what is forbidden to others. That is the point of departure, and there is no way to get from there to a just peace. There is no way to reach a just peace when the name of the game is the dehumanization of the Palestinians. No way to achieve peace when the demonization of the Palestinians is hammered into people’s heads day after day. Those who are convinced that every Palestinian is a suspicious person and that every Palestinian wants “to throw the Jews into the sea” will never make peace with the Palestinians. Most Israelis are convinced of the truth of both those statements.

In the past decade, the two peoples have been separated from each another. The average young Israeli will never meet his Palestinian peer, other than during his army service (and then only if he does his service in the territories). Nor will the average young Palestinian ever meet an Israeli his own age, other than the soldier who huffs and puffs at him at the checkpoint, or invades his home in the middle of the night, or in the person of the settler who usurps his land or torches his groves.

Consequently, the only encounter between the two people is between the occupiers, who are armed and violent, and the occupied, who are despairing and also turn to violence. Gone are the days when Palestinians worked in Israel and Israelis shopped in Palestine. Gone is the period of the half-normal and quarter-equal relations that existed for a few decades between the two peoples that share the same piece of territory. It is very easy, in this state of affairs, to incite and inflame the two peoples against one another, to spread fears and to instill new hatreds on top of those that already exist. This, too, is a sure recipe for non-peace.

...........................


This is a long article, rest of is in link.
 
.
Of course not. If the apartheid state wanted peace they would stop their illegal settlements, give the Palestinians their basic rights and pursue an independent Palestinian state which is the only thing that will help end this conflict.

Yet they are not taking either of those 3 steps and dozens of others.

How can that not be interpreted as anything but unwillingness?

Rabin and Arafat were close to a historical deal but that ended when a fanatical Zionist killed Rabin in 1995.

Assassination of Yitzhak Rabin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
.
Who are these 'Palestinians' I keep reading about ? :what:
 
.
Of course not. If the apartheid state wanted peace they would stop their illegal settlements, give the Palestinians their basic rights and pursue an independent Palestinian state which is the only thing that will help end this conflict.

Yet they are not taking either of those 3 steps and dozens of others.

How can that not be interpreted as anything but unwillingness?

Rabin and Arafat were close to a historical deal but that ended when a fanatical Zionist killed Rabin in 1995.

Assassination of Yitzhak Rabin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I have seen you repeatedly claim that the world is tired of this conflict, but you seem immune from the ennui. Do you have a personal connection to the conflict?
 
.
Of course not. If the apartheid state wanted peace they would stop their illegal settlements, give the Palestinians their basic rights and pursue an independent Palestinian state which is the only thing that will help end this conflict.

Yet they are not taking either of those 3 steps and dozens of others.

How can that not be interpreted as anything but unwillingness?

Rabin and Arafat were close to a historical deal but that ended when a fanatical Zionist killed Rabin in 1995.

Assassination of Yitzhak Rabin - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There is an independent Palestinian state. That is called Jordan.
 
.
It takes two to tango.

Palestinians too (well the dominating militant wings and parties like Hummus) do not want peace with Israel.
 
.
I have seen you repeatedly claim that the world is tired of this conflict, but you seem immune from the ennui. Do you have a personal connection to the conflict?

The world is tired of the conflict. That's correct. Can you show proof of the opposite being the case? How does that prevent me from commenting on the conflict?

Yes, as an fellow Muslim and Arab this conflict concerns me.

There is an independent Palestinian state. That is called Jordan.

No, it's not. Palestinians are not native to Jordan. Try again.

Maybe you should worry about all those Arabs turned into Jews from Morocco to Yemen, Eastern Europeans and Africans? I think they left their native countries to settle in land inhabited by natives (Palestinians).

Both of you were obviously unable to counter what I wrote in my first posts because every sane person can see that it is correct.

@Hazzy997
 
.
The world is tired of the conflict. That's correct. Can you show proof of the opposite being the case? How does that prevent me from commenting on the conflict?

Yes, as an fellow Muslim and Arab this conflict concerns me.



No, it's not. Palestinians are not native to Jordan. Try again.

Maybe you should worry about all those Arabs turned into Jews from Morocco to Yemen, Eastern Europeans and Africans? I think they left their native countries to settle in land inhabited by natives (Palestinians).

@Hazzy997

It's not your commentary on the case that makes me wonder, it's your emotion (colonizer, invader, murderer, terrorist, etc.) that makes me wonder. If you, who has nothing to do with the conflict, can develop such emotional investment, it's clear the conflict will not reach a peaceful conclusion.

Are Palestinians who are resident in Jordan considered invaders/colonizers by the natives?
 
.
It's not your commentary on the case that makes me wonder, it's your emotion (colonizer, invader, murderer, terrorist, etc.) that makes me wonder. If you, who has nothing to do with the conflict, can develop such emotional investment, it's clear the conflict will not reach a peaceful conclusion.

Are Palestinians who are resident in Jordan considered invaders/colonizers by the natives?

I don't think that I have used the word colonizer. I have used illegal. Such as illegal settlers. Invader. Yes, the illegal settlers are invaders. Murderer? Yes, when a Palestinian civilian is killed every 3 day on average I have my right to call their killers for what they are; Murderers. Terrorist? Yes, same logic again.

I have everything to do with the conflict as an Muslim and Arab. You will not understand this.

The point is that they are native. Jordanians are. Jordan is their country. Palestine is the country of Palestinians.
 
.
No, it's not. Palestinians are not native to Jordan. Try again.

There was no historic country called Jordan or Palestine. Turks didn't recognized them nor did Egyptians and Arabs. It was British who has given the Palestinians the lands they have now. Jordan is effectively Palestine because it was just divided by the river Jordan. Palestinians have ample land to live in Jordan, West bank and Gaza. Why fight for the only land Jews have. That is the only thing they got.

Besides many lands on Israel was bought over by Jews from Arabs and others were conquered in a self defense struggle. There fore the lands Israel occupies now are fully legit. Israel has no ambiguous lust for land. They have given lands they conquered back for friendship. They only kept the lands which are vital for their existence.

I don't think that I have used the word colonizer. I have used illegal. Such as illegal settlers. Invader. Yes, the illegal settlers are invaders. Murderer? Yes, when a Palestinian civilian is killed every 3 day on average I have my right to call their killers for what they are; Murderers. Terrorist? Yes, same logic again.

I have everything to do with the conflict as an Muslim and Arab. You will not understand this.

The point is that they are native. Jordanians are. Jordan is their country. Palestine is the country of Palestinians.

Then what about the Arabs, Turks and every other invaders tred over the Palestinians? Have they struggled against those as well?
 
.
I don't think that I have used the word colonizer. I have used illegal. Such as illegal settlers. Invader. Yes, the illegal settlers are invaders. Murderer? Yes, when a Palestinian civilian is killed every 3 day on average I have my right to call their killers for what they are; Murderers. Terrorist? Yes, same logic again.

I have everything to do with the conflict as an Muslim and Arab. You will not understand this.

The point is that they are native. Jordanians are. Jordan is their country. Palestine is the country of Palestinians.

You're right, I don't understand. Palestinians who are alien to Jordan have your blessing, while Jews who, according to you, are alien to Israel, are to be condemned. Meanwhile, according to you, Palestinians are your Arab kin, but are also genetically distinct from Arabs and are indigenous to the Levant. And finally, since you are a Muslim, you (and other distant Muslims, like Pakistanis and Turks) have the right to be involved, but Jews, no matter their geographic origin, have no right to be involved in the birthplace of Judaism.

Superb logic. That must be why I don't understand the conflict. It's also why a peaceful end to the conflict is impossible
 
.
There was no historic country called Jordan or Palestine. Turks didn't recognized them nor did Egyptians and Arabs. It was British who has given the Palestinians the lands they have now. Jordan is effectively Palestine because it was just divided by the river Jordan. Palestinians have ample land to live in Jordan, West bank and Gaza. Why fight for the only land Jews have. That is the only thing they got.

Besides many lands on Israel was bought over by Jews from Arabs and others were conquered in a self defense struggle. There fore the lands Israel occupies now are fully legit. Israel has no ambiguous lust for land. They have given lands they conquered back for friendship. They only kept the lands which are vital for their existence.



Then what about the Arabs, Turks and every other invaders tred over the Palestinians? Have they struggled against those as well?

Nonsense. First of all all people in the Arab world are mixtures of various ancient Semitic peoples and Arabs who are Semites themselves. All natives of the ancient Arab world and ME.

That's a screwed up logic. Iraq as a modern-state and in its current form is less than 100 years ago yet the area of today's Iraq has one of the longest histories in terms of nation states. Same with large areas of the Arab world. If not the oldest. Same with Jordan. The name does not matter. Jordan has been ruled by ancient Semitic people and civilizations who the modern-day Jordanians can claim as their ancestors. Be it Arabs, Nabateans etc. Same with the Palestinians. Be it Canaanites, Hebrews, Arabs etc.

Ottomans were only reelvant from the 1500's to the late 1800's. Overall that period is a tiny, tiny period in the long history of the region. Also what the hell do Turks, Brits or anybody else to do with that ancient history or the NATIVE people? They cannot change anything. Tomorrow the Chinese can rule Palestine and nothing would have had changed.

Nobody cares about some borders drawn by Brits less than 100 years ago when history and ancient historical claims are discussed.

No, Jordan is not the homeland of Palestinians and is a seperate country. Quit spreading ignorant nonsense because you have no ide about the regions history.

Nonsense. Then why all the illegal settlements in the West Bank?

The ancient Hebrews (who do not exist anymore) where invaders themselves as they are not native to what is now Israel. The ancient Canaanites.

You're right, I don't understand. Palestinians who are alien to Jordan have your blessing, while Jews who, according to you, are alien to Israel, are to be condemned. Meanwhile, according to you, Palestinians are your Arab kin, but are also genetically distinct from Arabs and are indigenous to the Levant. And finally, since you are a Muslim, you (and other distant Muslims, like Pakistanis and Turks) have the right to be involved, but Jews, no matter their geographic origin, have no right to be involved in the birthplace of Judaism.

Superb logic. That must be why I don't understand the conflict. It's also why a peaceful end to the conflict is impossible

What a screwed up logic. Are you drunk? Palestinians are natives. They were kicked up by their land by allien migrants from across the world. Then those same hundred of thousands of Palestinians sought refugee in other states. One of them being Jordan who ACCEPTED them. Do you understand it now?

The rest of your posts is nonsense and you should read my reply to the Sri Lankan. All Arabs in the Arab world have Arab admixture but they also have admixture of people that lived prior to the Arabs. In 95% of the cases fellow ancient Semitic peoples. The same is the case in Arabia itself.

Who said that Jews cannot be involved? Are you inventing more nonsense for the occasion.

Why don't you two edcuate yourself before lecturing locals and writing nonsense due to ignorance?

@Hazzy997

Can you tell me why we keep bothering? I don't know why anymore.
 
Last edited:
.
What a screwed up logic. Are you drunk? Palestinians are natives. They were kicked up by their land by allien migrants from across the world. Then those same hundred of thousands of Palestinians sought refugee in other states. One of them being Jordan who ACCEPTED them. Do you understand it now?

The rest of your posts is nonsense and you should read my reply to the Sri Lankan. All Arabs in the Arab world have Arab admixture but they also have admixture of people that lived prior to the Arabs. In 95% of the cases fellow ancient Semitic peoples. The same is the case in Arabia itself.

Who said that Jews cannot be involved? Are you inventing more nonsense for the occasion.

Why don't you two edcuate yourself before lecturing locals and writing nonsense due to ignorance?

@Hazzy997

Can you tell me why we keep bothering? I don't know why anymore.

Jews were also accepted by the non-elected Ottoman and non-elected British sovereigns (for a time) and then Israel. What is the difference between that scenario and the non-elected Jordanian sovereign accepting alien Palestinians? I don't understand the difference.
 
.
There was no historic country called Jordan or Palestine. Turks didn't recognized them nor did Egyptians and Arabs. It was British who has given the Palestinians the lands they have now.
And since when there was a historic country called Israel? Since 1948. Actually Jordan is 2 years older than Israel. Nice try.
 
.
Jews were also accepted by the non-elected Ottoman and non-elected British sovereigns (for a time) and then Israel. What is the difference between that scenario and the non-elected Jordanian sovereign accepting alien Palestinians? I don't understand the difference.

Are you deliberately trying to troll me?

Do you even have any idea about the demographic history of what is now Palestine, Israel and Jerusalem during the Ottomans and Brits? If you did you would know that the vast majority of the population were Muslim and Christian Arabs (Palestinians). In Jerusalem that only changed from the 1880's due to the rapid increase of Jewish settlers from Europe due to the advent of the Zionism movement that was sponsored by wealthy Jewish families.

Demographic history of Jerusalem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Population of Israel/Palestine (1553-Present) | Jewish Virtual Library

Now, what are you even comparing to begin with?

Palestinians are native inhabitants. In any case more native than the current day Jews who have little to do with the now extinct ancient Hebrews and Israelites.

The FUNDAMENTAL difference with your flawed example is the simple fact that Palestines were FORCED to flee their NATIVE lands and were welcomed in a foreign country (Jordan).

The Jews who were welcomed to Palestine/Israel were/are not locals.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom