Israeli PM stakes out positions for peace talks

Status
Not open for further replies.

JEDIYoda

Lifer
Jul 13, 2005
33,986
3,320
126
You have to start somewhere!! Recognition of israel as the Jewish homeland was IMO going to be one of the requirements...

Let`s wait and see what transpires...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100822/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_israel_palestinians

JERUSALEM – Israel's prime minister demanded Sunday that any future Palestinian state be demilitarized and recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland, as he staked out his starting position for new Mideast peace talks.

Benjamin Netanyahu said reaching a deal will be difficult but possible. The conditions he laid down, coupled with a swift Palestinian rejection, illustrated just how difficult the task will be for the U.S. to meet its goal of brokering peace within a year. Talks are set to begin in Washington next week.

"We want to surprise all of the critics and skeptics. But to do that we need a real partner on the Palestinian side," Netanyahu told his Cabinet Sunday. "If we discover that we have such a partner, we will be able to quickly reach a historic agreement between the two peoples."

In his first public comments since the White House announced the planned resumption of talks on Friday, Netanyahu gave the first signs of what has been an extremely vague vision for a final settlement.

He said any future Palestinian state would not be allowed to have an army, would have to recognize Israel as a Jewish state and accept other Israeli security demands, he said, without elaborating.

He did not address what are considered the conflict's thorniest issues: borders, the status of Jerusalem and the fate of the Palestinian refugees.

He will be negotiating with the Palestine Liberation Organization, which holds sway only in the West Bank, the territory squeezed between Israel and the Jordan River. The PLO wants a state in all of the West Bank, neighboring east Jerusalem and the seaside Gaza Strip on the other side of Israel.

Gaza is ruled by the Islamic militant group Hamas, which refuses to recognize Israel.

In the past, Netanyahu has said Israel would have to maintain a security presence along the West Bank's border with Jordan to prevent arms smuggling, and that east Jerusalem, the sector of the holy city claimed by the Palestinians as their capital, must remain under Israeli control.

His Likud party is also a champion of the four-decade-old movement to settle Jews in the West Bank, which Israel captured along with east Jerusalem and Gaza in the 1967 Mideast war, though it withdrew from Gaza in 2005.

"Achieving a peace agreement between us and the Palestinian Authority is difficult but possible," he said.

The Palestinians have long rejected Netanyahu's demands.

They say that recognizing Israel as a Jewish state would threaten the status of Israel's Arab minority and undermine the rights of Palestinian refugees whose families lost homes during Israel's creation in 1948.

They also say a future Israeli presence in the West Bank would be unacceptable.

Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said Netanyahu's comments were "dictation, not negotiation."

"If he wants negotiations, he knows that these conditions won't stand," Erekat said.

During nearly two decades of failed negotiations, previous Israeli governments have offered broad withdrawals from nearly all of the West Bank. But talks have bogged down over the extent of the withdrawal and the sensitive issues of refugees and Jerusalem.

Netanyahu's predecessor, Ehud Olmert, who left office last year, has said he proposed a withdrawal from nearly all of the West Bank, offered to turn over parts of east Jerusalem to Palestinian sovereignty and agreed to a symbolic return of some Palestinian refugees to what is now Israel.

Olmert's talks with the Palestinians broke down, however, after Israel launched a war against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip in December 2008. Netanyahu was subsequently elected, and talks have been on hold since then.

Something close to the Olmert proposal — including a Palestinian presence in east Jerusalem and a near-complete withdrawal from the West Bank — is widely seen as the basis for a future settlement. But Netanyahu, who leads a coalition dominated by hard-line nationalistic and religious parties, has signaled he is not willing to go that far.

He pointedly insisted that there be no preconditions for him to rejoin the peace talks, and his aides have given no details about what concessions he is prepared to make, saying that is a matter for negotiations.

In a key test, an Israeli slowdown on settlement construction in the West Bank is set to expire next month, and some of the coalition's hawkish members have said the government's stability will be threatened if Israeli construction in the West Bank does not resume in full.

Erekat, the Palestinian negotiator, said that if the slowdown ends, Israel "will have closed the door to negotiation."

The Western-backed Palestinian government in the West Bank resisted entering direct peace talks with Netanyahu for months, fearing they would not be productive.

It agreed under heavy American diplomatic pressure and assurances from the international community that a final peace settlement must end "the occupation which began in 1967."

With the gaps so wide, expectations are low all around. Israeli and Palestinian newspapers greeted news of the new talks with pessimism Sunday, and one leading Israeli newspaper, Maariv, buried its report on page 10.

Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov, an analyst at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, said the gaps on key issues are so wide "they have taken on a mythical status."

He said any breakthrough would require heavy involvement by President Barack Obama, and the best hope at this stage would be for an interim agreement that puts off a decision on the sensitive issues of Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees.

Looming over the negotiations is the continued control of Gaza by Hamas militants. The Iranian-backed group, which seized control of Gaza in 2007, has condemned the negotiations, and it is unclear how any peace deal could be carried out as long as it rules one of the two areas claimed by the Palestinians.

Militant groups like Hamas have tried to sabotage past peace efforts by attacking Israeli targets. And in late 2000, the second Palestinian uprising broke out just as President Bill Clinton was making a final push for peace before leaving office.

But Gaza militants, skeptical about the prospects for success, appear unlikely to disrupt what has been a general period of calm since Israel ended its offensive in January 2009.

The Israeli military refused to say whether it had taken any special precaution, saying only it is "prepared for any eventuality."
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I will not say our OP is biased, when its Bozo Netanyuhu who is living on fantasy Island. Ole Bozo wants his cake and to eat it too, it simply is not tenable, there will either be a viable Palestinians State with borders, sovereignty, and its a going to be really Israeli expensive to address the right to return.

When the larger world dismantled that other Apartheid State of South Africa, they were presented with no such fantasy Island choices, it was done with voting power and nothing else. Suddenly it was done with black majority power and nothing else.
And Botha and friends struck downright luck, when Nelson Mandella and Desmond Tutu, as the new majority government renounced revenge as a future South African government policy.

But there are just two ways forward for a Israeli mid-east peace process, either a separate and totally equal Palestinian State, or Israeli assimilating the Palestinians with equal voting rights. The South African method.

What Bozo Netanyuhu wants will never fly. Never. And if Netanyuhu wants his fantasy he may find Israel will face the same economic embargo that forced South Africa to give full voting rights to blacks.
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
LL you litterally wrote a post of complete blabber.


Israel wants the other side to recogize it's existance. it also doesnt want the other side to have a military, which makes total sense since no one will attack them unless they attack others( they have their loving brothers in other countries and Israel that only cares to protect its own citzens), ontop of all the terrorist attacks on israel launched from gaza and the west bank


these are basic things in the peace process. the borders, right of return and jerusalem issues are like 1000% more likely to derail these peace talks
 
Last edited:

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
No FGD, you can't recognize fantasy when you see it.

Maybe ole Jansis said it best with Lord won't you buy me a Mercedes bend, my friends all drive porches I must make amends, I probably have drawn the wrath of the song police already, but Israel won't get to a just peace in the mid-east cheap.

Ole Bozo might have a opening bid in a horse trade, but the other side have their own fantasy Island horse trade position too.

The large world will maybe accept a position where both sides end up meeting in the middle, but the Bozo Netanyuhu position stands no chance of being final. But yes, Israel can find every excuse to derail peace, but the pressure is now mounting on Israel to get real.

But failing some meet in the middle, the South African solution looks better and better every day.

Think I am wrong FGD, wait awhile, and you may find I am.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Surprise lemonloser is here parroting the terrorist viewpoint.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Excuse me insincear, explain to all of us how the State of Israel is any less terrorist than Palestinians?

The only way to arrive at a just mid-east peace will to remove and reduce past injustices!

To pretend that all past injustices are only Palestinian and not Israeli will never buy us Mid-east peace. Especially when Israel is the biggest thief and the biggest winner.

The problem is and remains, how to get to a just and viable mid-east peace. To pretend that Israel will somehow retain all past gains in that process, is true pure fantasy Island unrealistic.

Maybe your fantasy, but an unrealistic one. The world fixed the Peter Botha fantasy island delusion, and the larger world may have to fix the Israeli apartheid delusion in the same way. Its that other option.

If ole Bozo rejects one, he will get that other option.
 
Last edited:

ZzZGuy

Golden Member
Nov 15, 2006
1,855
0
0
I don't understand this Israeli demand of "recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland" bullshit.

All it is is spitting in the eyes of the arabs, rubbing it in some more. Israel does not need another country or group of people to tell them they are mostly jewish to enact immigration policies (including arabs from west bank/gaza) that heavily favor jewish people.

It's like not splitting Jerusalem (or for that matter, making it their captial in the first place :confused: ) and letting the arabs use the other half as their capital as well. It's a god damn archeological dig site with layers upon layers of rubble with some houses built on top.

It's just barriers Israel is trying to throw up in the hopes the arabs reject it and they have a excuse to keep what they got and get even more. I will say however that Israel would likely take genuine peace if offered but all it's arab "friends" are one coup away from turning hostile (or not, eg Turkey) and the rest smile with daggers behind their backs.

Nothing will come of this and even if a full agreement was made to end the conflict the PA does not speak for most of the arabs involved and thus the conflict will continue. At best Israel gets its iron dome up and the terrorists can no longer do anything to warrant a response like cast lead.

Then there is that little Israeli civil war coming when non jewish citizens hit 51%, or will they say fuck it and expel everyone before then?
 

Freshgeardude

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2006
4,506
0
76
No FGD, you can't recognize fantasy when you see it.

Maybe ole Jansis said it best with Lord won't you buy me a Mercedes bend, my friends all drive porches I must make amends, I probably have drawn the wrath of the song police already, but Israel won't get to a just peace in the mid-east cheap.

Ole Bozo might have a opening bid in a horse trade, but the other side have their own fantasy Island horse trade position too.

The large world will maybe accept a position where both sides end up meeting in the middle, but the Bozo Netanyuhu position stands no chance of being final. But yes, Israel can find every excuse to derail peace, but the pressure is now mounting on Israel to get real.

But failing some meet in the middle, the South African solution looks better and better every day.

Think I am wrong FGD, wait awhile, and you may find I am.

more blabber.


LOL these issues have been brought up every time peace talks tried to occur. these issues are really non-issues. palestinians will have to agree on these issues if they want israel to even look at their issues
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I can't understand the ZZ opening statement of, "I don't understand this Israeli demand of "recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland" bullshit."

Maybe somewhat valid in 1948 but no longer valid now. And if Arabs and Palestinians refuse the Israeli right to exist in 2010, there is no hope for a mid=east peace ever. But in the larger sweep of time, no Arab and Palestinian recognition defaults to an eventual point where all Israeli Jews are driven into the sea and butchered. In the end, the Arab majority and all their oil money will prevail, as just one more example of the holy land of Israel changing hands between Christians, Muslims, and now after a 1800 MIA, the Jews again.

But to truly examine the ZZ contention, we need to go back to 1933 and before. As that arch European villain Hitler and his ilk, yep tell the damn truth, it was Europeans who could have said oh no you don't to the holocaust and did not. As Hitler tossed living human beings, Jews and other minorities into gas ovens and got gold teeth and fertilizer out the other end. How industrialized German efficient. The marvel of the age, European mass murder as a new gem of human evolution and a new sign of European human progress.

But wait, ole Hitler and Europe fucked up by coming up a wee might short with that final solution to the Jewish problem, and many other problems as well. And Europe can only kill Hitler but once. But what about the equally guilty European states that looked the other way and suddenly had millions of still alive Jewish refugees Europe forgot to murder. No, No, and no Europe could not man up and confess their sins, and instead concocted this brilliant plan to foist them off on the Arabs who screamed NIMBY. Its been downhill ever since.

Do Israeli Jews now deserve a homeland, I have no problem with that, but they can't get to that deserve by being the new Nazi's or that same ole same ole one group pigging all of Israel.

But we have a chance now to have a new model, three major religions fairly sharing the holy land of Israel. It can happen and be a win win win for everyone.

But it requires all of us saying to the pigs on all sides, fuck your delusions. You have to fairly share.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.