• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Abbas nixes direct Israeli talks without Israeli concessions.

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
As I said in previous threads, it is somewhat crunch time for Israel, and Israeli was going to get no where fast without agreeing to a Israeli settlement freeze extension past 9/2010 for the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

Now the Palestinian authority and Fatah have made it official, they refuse direct talks with Israel without those preconditions. Calling the talks not only pointless, but a waste of time without building on the limited progress of the Annapolis conference.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100711/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinian

The Joker in the deck may be Obama or George Mitchell who may sweeten the pot for Abbas with some unspecified concessions, but still, the major players may not be just the USA, Israel, and the PA, it may be more the international community that gives Israel until no later than 2012, to ink a deal or else regarding a viable Palestinian State.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
So the Palestinians have now demonstrated that they are not willing to talk unless they can get their way.

Israel has stated that something could be hammered out within 10 months in face to face talks.

I would suspect that Gaza would be exempted unless Hamas is willing to show and demonstrate honesty.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,510
0
76
So you are placing this on Israel? Does not surprise me at all!


Abbas in in no position to make demands like this. israel put a temporary freeze to get abbas on the table, something that if abbas came could easily and justifiably a longer freeze on settlements.


This has everything to do with abbas and fatah getting billions of dollars from donations and foreign aid, than it does with peace.
 

Sclamoz

Guest
Sep 9, 2009
975
0
0
The only thing I can find that Abbas has required is a settlement freeze. If the Israeli's wouldn't agree to that I probably wouldn't negotiate with them if I was in his position either.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,510
0
76
The only thing I can find that Abbas has required is a settlement freeze. If the Israeli's wouldn't agree to that I probably wouldn't negotiate with them if I was in his position either.

really.... so the settlement freeze right now that is due to expire actually means nothing then.

Israel placed a settlement freeze to get them on the table. if they wanted a permanent freeze, they should have came.

They are 10 minutes from each other ffs
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
So you are placing this on Israel? Does not surprise me at all!


Abbas in in no position to make demands like this. israel put a temporary freeze to get abbas on the table, something that if abbas came could easily and justifiably a longer freeze on settlements.


This has everything to do with abbas and fatah getting billions of dollars from donations and foreign aid, than it does with peace.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, FGD, you may miss the whole point, while Abbas is powerless to make any demands, Israel, has finally totally lost all the moral high ground.

And its now the entire world that has lost all faith in all the Israeli excuses used for the past 37 years, and if Israeli refuses to make a settlement freeze while TALKS on a Viable Palestinian State PROGRESS FORWARD, the same ole same ole Israeli stall tactic
are going to go over like a lead balloon. And Israel will not like the consequences.

Unless I am wrong, the rising tide of Israel receded years ago, and the Israeli falling tide is to the point where its apparently falling fast. Nor is the USA the mid-east decider, its mainly the entire rest of the world that is disgusted with Israeli present politics.

The point being, the world is behind the Abbas position because it makes logical historical sense, and the Israeli position will not fly.

To a certain extent A. Lieberman is about as credible as the Iraqi information minister. Another tough talking vainglorious clown who said Iraq would kick US butt, and the damn fool did not shut up until US tanks rolled into Baghdad, surrounding his radio station among other things, and he finally decided to STFU. He was such a damn clown, that the US did not even try to press criminal charges against him.
 
Last edited:

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
The title should be "Abbas nixes direct Israeli talks because Israel refuses to respect Palestinian rights", as the entirety of the the West Bank, East Jerusalem included, is Palestinian territory under international law. Hence, Israel ending their colonization of that territory can't rightly be called a "concession", it's an obligation.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
The title should be "Abbas nixes direct Israeli talks because Israel refuses to respect Palestinian rights", as the entirety of the the West Bank, East Jerusalem included, is Palestinian territory under international law. Hence, Israel ending their colonization of that territory can't rightly be called a "concession", it's an obligation.
Don't forget the $65 trillion we are obliged to pay NK!

Let me tell you what talks with pre-conditions means- It's a way of guaranteeing they never happen. We keep hearing that Israel has no choice. Yes they do. They just don't show up. The consequences will be that people on internet will beat their chests. Israel really cares about that- not.
 

Sclamoz

Guest
Sep 9, 2009
975
0
0
really.... so the settlement freeze right now that is due to expire actually means nothing then.

Israel placed a settlement freeze to get them on the table. if they wanted a permanent freeze, they should have came.

They are 10 minutes from each other ffs
Yeah it's due to expire, it means nothing. It also doesn't cover everywhere nor did it apply to all settlements. The current freeze also wasn't given to Abbas or to the PA to get them to agree to direct talks it was a gesture to the Obama administration.

If the Israeli's can't restrain themselves from building on Palestinians land why shouldn't Abbas and others think that Israel has any intention of stopping the settlements whether there is peace or not?
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Don't forget the $65 trillion we are obliged to pay NK!

Let me tell you what talks with pre-conditions means- It's a way of guaranteeing they never happen. We keep hearing that Israel has no choice. Yes they do. They just don't show up. The consequences will be that people on internet will beat their chests. Israel really cares about that- not.[/QUOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all due respects, Hayabusa Rider, that is nothing but a total red herring deflection. No one in the world thinks the North Korean claim has any credibility but the bulk of the world has lost all faith in Israel.

In MHO, you ought to be ashamed of yourself for engaging in that kind of thread trolling in comparing North Korea to Israel.

As for the rest of your comments, they are more in the realm of personal opinions, but I could point out you may be right if we look at just look at Israeli military options, but very wrong if it comes down to an world Israeli economic embargo.
 
Last edited:

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,510
0
76
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And its now the entire world that has lost all faith in all the Israeli excuses used for the past 37 years, and if Israeli refuses to make a settlement freeze while TALKS on a Viable Palestinian State PROGRESS FORWARD, the same ole same ole Israeli stall tactic
are going to go over like a lead balloon. And Israel will not like the consequences.
I am pretty sure it was netanyahu who said that he wants to have talks "now, a week, 2 weeks"

Israel is the one ready to talk. Israel put a temporary freeze on settlements TO TALK.


Israel is not going to make the mistake again of completely giving up everything like they did with gaza and lebanon.

If Abbas wants a permanent freeze on settlements, he needs to actually sit down and talk.

like i said, they are 10 minutes away from each other!
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,510
0
76
Don't forget the $65 trillion we are obliged to pay NK!

Let me tell you what talks with pre-conditions means- It's a way of guaranteeing they never happen. We keep hearing that Israel has no choice. Yes they do. They just don't show up. The consequences will be that people on internet will beat their chests. Israel really cares about that- not.[/QUOTE
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In all due respects, Hayabusa Rider, that is nothing but a total red herring deflection. No one in the world thinks the North Korean claim has any credibility but the bulk of the world has lost all faith in Israel.

In MHO, you ought to be ashamed of yourself for engaging in that kind of thread trolling.

You keep claiming the world has lost faith in israel, but we already posted a poll over a long period of time showing israel's approval rating growing.


Also, israel's economy is BOOMING with its GDP per capita greater than 95% of the arab countries.

Israel has the highest school life expectancy in Southwest Asia, and is tied with Japan for second-highest school life expectancy on the Asian continent (after South Korea).[252] Israel similarly has the highest literacy rate in Southwest Asia, according to the United Nations.[253]

I dont see any problems coming to israel except its neighbors threatening it's existence
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Once again, FGD, you are seemingly totally dense in saying, "I am pretty sure it was netanyahu who said that he wants to have talks "now, a week, 2 weeks"

Israel is the one ready to talk. Israel put a temporary freeze on settlements TO TALK."

Wrong on the second count, it was Obama who demanded an Israeli settlement freeze early this year.

But the real issue is and remains, the world has already been there and done that for 37 years, while Israel does nothing but talk, they keep extending control of disputed land they can never own.

The settlement freeze extension is vitally important to remove the Israel incentive to talk, make no real concessions or advances toward a just mid-east peace. Because as Israel talks, they advance their position and control of disputed lands, and that is the 37 year Israeli track record needs to come to a screeching halt.

So we can get to a position where neither side advances while they talk.
 

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
Let me tell you what talks with pre-conditions means...
I told you, ending the colonization of the West Bank isn't a precondition, it's an obligation under international law. Of course Israel can continue to thumb their nose at that obligation as long as US veto power over the UNSC is exploited to protect them form sanctions and embargoes, but that can only last so long, just like it only lasted so long with apartheid South Africa.

Israel put a temporary freeze on settlements TO TALK.
No they didn't they just claimed to, while continuing settlement expansion anyway.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,510
0
76
Once again, FGD, you are seemingly totally dense in saying, "I am pretty sure it was netanyahu who said that he wants to have talks "now, a week, 2 weeks"

Israel is the one ready to talk. Israel put a temporary freeze on settlements TO TALK."

Wrong on the second count, it was Obama who demanded an Israeli settlement freeze early this year.

the freeze was announced in november of LAST year.

But the real issue is and remains, the world has already been there and done that for 37 years, while Israel does nothing but talk, they keep extending control of disputed land they can never own.

The settlement freeze extension is vitally important to remove the Israel incentive to talk, make no real concessions or advances toward a just mid-east peace. Because as Israel talks, they advance their position and control of disputed lands, and that is the 37 year Israeli track record needs to come to a screeching halt.

So we can get to a position where neither side advances while they talk.

Israel is not going to keep giving and giving for nothing.

Israel gave up gaza and lebanon and got nothing in return.

Israel gave 6 months for talks to start. if they started, as a sign of good faith, israel would have no problem extending the freeze.

If you cant read this straight, then dont try to debate on the forum.

From the eyes of Abbas, who is controlling a group that wants to keep their homeland, if they arent going to talk when their land is kept, why would they talk when their land is being taken away, like before?
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,510
0
76
I told you, ending the colonization of the West Bank isn't a precondition, it's an obligation under international law. Of course Israel can continue to thumb their nose at that obligation as long as US veto power over the UNSC is exploited to protect them form sanctions and embargoes, but that can only last so long, just like it only lasted so long with apartheid South Africa.


No they didn't they just claimed to, while continuing settlement expansion anyway.

No its not. Israel, under international law had every right to take the land in 67. After offering gaza to egypt and west bank to jordan for peace, neither country wanted the land.


And lol at you thinking Israel is like South Africa! Israel's value to the US as an asset is amazing. Israel has hundreds of innovations a year used around the world.

what does south africa do for the world? the World Cup?



Oh and the i am pretty sure the freeze only included new buildings and not anything already planned
 

Sclamoz

Guest
Sep 9, 2009
975
0
0
No its not. Israel, under international law had every right to take the land in 67. After offering gaza to egypt and west bank to jordan for peace, neither country wanted the land.
According to the Israeli Supreme court the West Bank was not annexed and is under military occupation. It's forbidden to settle an occupied area under the Geneva Convention.
 
Last edited:

kylebisme

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2000
9,396
0
0
Furthermore, Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem has absolutely no legal basis, which is why no state other than Israel recognizes East Jerusalem as Israeli territory.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,214
126
I told you, ending the colonization of the West Bank isn't a precondition, it's an obligation under international law. Of course Israel can continue to thumb their nose at that obligation as long as US veto power over the UNSC is exploited to protect them form sanctions and embargoes, but that can only last so long, just like it only lasted so long with apartheid South Africa.


No they didn't they just claimed to, while continuing settlement expansion anyway.

Well the Iran government have been doing well too in spite of the fact their brutal government abuses it's own citizens, just as Mao purged his opposition. Nothing happens to them in spite of that, so don't expect much action against Israel.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,510
0
76
You're confusing international law with law of the jungle. Under international law, no nation has the right to acquire territory by force, Israel included, as demonstrated by the ICJ finding on the path of the separation barrier.

im pretty sure israel didnt take the land by force.

I am sure though, israel was attacked by countries and those countries were using the land to attack israel from. Also, i am sure that Jordan gave up claims to the west bank and egypt gave up gaza during the sinai penn peace agreement.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
2
0
Lets look at two FGD quotes---------------------------------------

1. "Israel has hundreds of innovations a year used around the world." Things like brutality, boarding ships on the high seas, Murdering people in other countries, Forging passports, stealing land and violating the human rights of millions of people is older than dirt fascist behavior. The problem is, does some Israeli innovations even come close to neutralizing all those Israeli vices? Even serial killers have some virtues. Bernie Madoff and Ken Lay were fine family men, and gave so much to charities. But that does not mean anyone but FGD should run around touting their virtues, or hold them up as role models.

2. "the freeze was announced in november of LAST year." But was sadly ended by Israel early this year when Biden paid a courtesy call to Israel and the US snub really stung. Now at Obama demands, Israel has extended the settlement freeze only to until 9/2010. As Bozo Netanyuhu somehow thinks he can then end the freeze, get back to Israeli settlement business as usual and get peace talks too. As a short Statement, Netanyuhu is insane if he thinks he can end the Israeli settlement freeze and have peace talks too. But Netanyuhu has a right to his own fantasy, just don't count on it ever happening. Israeli can try, but I think its safe to say, Israel won't like the price they have to pay in persisting in that now dead fantasy.

That is and remains the point FGD, will Israel get away with it or will the entire world demand Israel extend the settlement freeze for the duration of the peace talks.

Time will tell, but the tea leaves are out there for anyone to read.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,344
14,563
136
im pretty sure israel didnt take the land by force.
Of course they did. They attacked "pre-emptively" in 1967, remember? I'm not really sure that even they believed an attack on them was imminent, but they've since convinced a lot of people that it was...

If the Israelis can't find a way to accept the conditions that Abbas wants, what it means is that they're not done, not content with what they've taken, and intend to take more. Which means that Abbas shouldn't grant them any legitimacy, consent to more Israeli dodging and obfuscation... which is what they've done for over 30 years.

Only the most partisan Israeli fanbois and propagandists can fail to recognize that.
 

NoWhereM

Senior member
Oct 15, 2007
543
0
0
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. - Arthur Schopenhauer
I see you're a fan of Arthur Schopenhauer. A little ironic, perhaps, given the subject of the thread. Didn't Schopenhauer also write about "Foeter Judaicus" or something like that? I guess that line of thought is coming back in vouge in certain circles, though.

Not that I'm a partisan Israeli fanboi or anything. Stop the settlements, withdraw, go back to where you came from, etc. etc.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,816
83
91
if President Obama is willing to talk to Iran, Syria, North Korea, and Cuba without preconditions, surely Abbas can do the same with Israel.

"The notion that not talking to countries is punishment... is ridiculous. We may not trust them, but we have the obligation to find areas where we can potentially move forward and it's a disgrace that we have not talked to them."
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY