TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- is israel poking a beehive ???
Pages (4): [1] 2 3 4 »

is israel poking a beehive ???

quote:

Israel will defy American pressure to halt the construction of controversial Jewish housing in Arab east Jerusalem, when President Obama meets Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel�s Prime Minister, in the White House today. Fresh from his historic victory to reform American healthcare, the US leader is to be confronted, within hours, with a foreign policy crisis. This time Mr Obama must resolve the worst breakdown in relations in decades between America and its closest regional ally, Israel, and try to get the Arab-Israeli peace process moving again. But any hopes of a compromise were dashed yesterday when Nir Barkat, the Mayor of Jerusalem, insisted that Jewish settlements would go ahead in spite of US objections. Mr Barkat said that Israel had not intended to insult America, when it announced a 1,600-home plan in Ramat Shlomo during a peace mission by Joe Biden, the US Vice-President, earlier this month. He remained adamant that the project would go ahead. �I do not think anybody intended, naturally, to try to insult,� he said in an interview at the Israeli Embassy in London. �But let us not get mixed up. Planning in the city of Jerusalem has to, should and will continue. We want to be sensitive to the American Administration but I want to make sure people realise there is no [housing] freeze in the city of Jerusalem.� The former paratrooper added that not only would the development proceed, but he also revealed details for another housing project in east Jerusalem. The �King�s Garden� project in the flashpoint Arab area of Silwan, the scene of regular disturbances beween Palestinians and Jewish settlers, envisages the demolition of 80 Palestinian homes to make way for a park. The status of the holy city is supposed to be negotiated as part of a final settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, who want the Arab side of the city to become the future capital of their state. Mr Barkat said that Jerusalem would remain the capital of the Jewish state. It is believed that Israel may be prepared to hold off for a matter of weeks to enable talks to resume with the Palestinians, but has ruled out a permanent freeze. He was strongly backed last night by Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli Prime Minister, who offered an uncompromising defence of Israeli construction in East Jerusalem. "The connection between the Jewish people and Jerusalem cannot be denied," he told a conference in Washington. "The Jewish people were building Jerusalem 3,000 years ago and they are building Jerusalem today." He said that the city was "not a settlement - it's our capital" and added that nearly half its Jewish population lived beyond the 1949 armistice line in what is considered East Jerusalem. "Everybody knows that these neighbourhoods will be part of Israel in any settlement," he claimed. "Therefore building in them in no way precludes a two-state solution." Mr Netanyahu was speaking to more than half the members of Congress at a dinner hosted by America's most prominent pro-Israel lobby. He meets President Obama in the White House later today. His remarks, and those of Mr Barkat, were in sharp contrast to the views expressed by Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, yesterday in an address to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the powerful Israel lobby meeting in Washington. She said: �New construction in east Jerusalem or the West Bank undermines mutual trust and endangers the proximity talks that are the first step toward the full negotiations that both sides want and need,� she said. Mr Barkat said that the city was planning 50,000 apartments, two thirds for Jewish neighbourhoods and a third for Arabs, in proportion to the existing size of the two communities.

and

quote:

Binyamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, will use a visit to Washington this week to press the US to release sophisticated bunker-busting bombs needed for a possible strike on Iran�s nuclear sites. The trip comes as both sides strive to defuse the crisis provoked by Israel�s announcement during a visit by Vice-President Joe Biden this month of the building of 1,600 houses in east Jerusalem. Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations secretary-general, said in Ramallah yesterday: �Let us be clear: all settlement activity is illegal anywhere in occupied territory, and this must stop.�

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ne...icle7071927.ece

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/ne...icle7069724.ece

why is israel so adamant in provoking a new wave of violence??

Why? Because they don�t know any better. Their solution to everything one way or another involves the use of violent. I doubt that Obama could stand against their actions for too long since Israel has way too much influence within the US government.
Perhaps one day the U.S will stop sending billion worth of military equipments to them. As time goes on I believe that the American people are beginning to wonder where da fuck is all their money going? And for what reason do they have to defend a country that kills innocents and occupies lands without listening or following any international laws.

Israel's strategy is to settle the desirable disputed areas and build a significant population base in same. The end game is that when they finally do seek to negotiate a lasting two state solution (probably in two generations) they will have legitimate claims to these areas and will be able to leverage that into maintaining control over them. They are presently banking on the US having no other reliable and politically acceptable allies in the region and that while they may employ a great deal of rhetoric they will not abandon their ally. Unfortunately, I think Israel has not clued into the reality that the region is less important now then it was 20 years ago and it's importance will only decrease with time. If anyone is interested I would highly recommend Gwynne Dyer's "The Mess They Made."

I could be wrong but under international law are these settlements not in direct violation of the Geneva Convention?

quote:

Originally posted by LightsOut I could be wrong but under international law are these settlements not in direct violation of the Geneva Convention?

I do not believe so, as all the area is within Israel's recognized territory.

Re: is israel poking a beehive ???

quote:

Originally posted by Xavier Moriarty why is israel so adamant in provoking a new wave of violence??

Because they want "peace"

possession is 9/10 of the law. nobody is going to slap israel around for doing whatever they are doing.

whether what israel is doing is legal or not is up to debate, but the core of the matter is, what is someone (UN, Arab world or etc) do about it?

with successful containment of Gaza and Sri Lanka crushing Tamil Tigers, maybe the Israelis decided to provoke a new intifada to crush the Palestinian resistance once and for all...

Funny how nobody's pointed out that Obama has effectively been issuing the same demands to Israel and using the same negotiating strategy as the Palestinians themselves (using every concession as a foothold for escalation to greater concessions).

"Compromise" my left nut, this is a manufactured conflict by the Obama administration to deflect attention from his abject failure of an Iran policy and erode popular support in Israel for Netanyahu's "right-wing" government.

But then who follows politics for a geographical area that's not important anymore, right? It's easier to just blame Israel whenever tensions rise.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Funny how nobody's pointed out that Obama has effectively been issuing the same demands to Israel and using the same negotiating strategy as the Palestinians themselves (using every concession as a foothold for escalation to greater concessions). "Compromise" my left nut, this is a manufactured conflict by the Obama administration to deflect attention from his abject failure of an Iran policy and erode popular support in Israel for Netanyahu's "right-wing" government. But then who follows politics for a geographical area that's not important anymore, right? It's easier to just blame Israel whenever tensions rise.

do you ever not support Israel? for the first time in years the U.S government has grown some balls to question Israel's actions. I say keep it is about fuckin time.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer do you ever not support Israel? for the first time in years the U.S government has grown some balls to question Israel's actions. I say keep it is about fuckin time.

Nope he won't.

I'm surprised and slightly impressed that the US is growing a pair when it comes to Israel..but I don't expect it to last or go anywhere.

quote:

Originally posted by gummybear I'm surprised and slightly impressed that the US is growing a pair when it comes to Israel..but I don't expect it to last or go anywhere.

It will never go anywhere as long as there is such strong Israel lobbyist and influence in the U.S.

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard I do not believe so, as all the area is within Israel's recognized territory.

recognized by who?? israel?? lol

question is sill there. why is israel so adamant on triggering a new age of violence (there's talk of iran asking Hezbollah to join the fight and if that happens all hell is about to hit the shitfan)????

at this time and age where all world is hellbent on stopping jihad, why is almost everybody turning an blind eye on this Jewish version of holy war?? mind you, its not about the teritory, its all about religion!!

quote:

Originally posted by Xavier Moriarty recognized by who?? israel?? lol question is sill there. why is israel so adamant on triggering a new age of violence?

Like always they want to see how much then can push everyone around and they know no one will try to stop them.

If shit hits the fan this time more then before at least we know which side started it all and dont have to blame the "palestinian terrosists" for once.

quote:

Originally posted by Xavier Moriarty question is sill there. why is israel so adamant on triggering a new age of violence (there's talk of iran asking Hezbollah to join the fight and if that happens all hell is about to hit the shitfan)????

I answered this above... Israel's strategy is to create legitimate claims to the lands it desires by establishing a substantial population base within same so that when a 2 state solution is negotiated they have a better negotiating position for those lands. They are willing to live with the violence in exchange for a shot at a more favorable partition when that partition finally happens... this is long term thinking on Israel's part.

quote:

Jewish version of holy war?? mind you, its not about the teritory, its all about religion!!

Suggesting that this is religiously motivated shows a complete lack of understanding for Israeli politics. Of course the Israelis give much lip-service to their religion and tribal heritage; however, they are not motivated by it and very few vote based on religious concerns. This is a territory grab for political/economic reasons; not religious.

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard This is a territory grab for political/economic reasons; not religious.

The rest of the world doesn't see it that way it seems.

Either way, who ever controls that area will always have problems.

Even if Israel did go back to their 1948 border. There will still be problems. Most of the arab world doesn't want jewish neighbours.

Both sides are the problem. Also the UN part of this problem. If the UN wants to be sort of helpful it better grow some balls and be more like NATO and less like Switzerland (neutral). Actually the UN is for sure not neutral in this whole Israel conflict, they usually side with the Arab states.

In my honest opinion. This problem will never go away. One side wants something more than the other or one person will give something up but the other will not.

Best thing to do is expel both parties from the region for the next century or so.

quote:

Originally posted by jester The rest of the world doesn't see it that way it seems.

That doesn't make them right though. One need only look to the cedeing of the Gaza settlements as evidence that the motivation is not religious. Gaza is most definately part of the Eretz Israel and considered sacred to Jews; the fact that they gave these settlements up voluntarally speaks volumes about whether or not this is religiously motivated.

quote:

Even if Israel did go back to their 1948 border. There will still be problems. Most of the arab world doesn't want jewish neighbours.

Meh, I wouldn't be so certain that the Arabs cannot co-exist with Jews. Most of the Arabs don't have any particular love for the Palestinians (as illustrated by the fact that none would accept them as refugees in 67). I would suggest that by and large the neighbouring Arab states tend to use Israel as a distraction for their people and create a false conflict as a unifying force. You must keep in mind that most of the Arab regimes are quite oligarcial and repressive of the general populace. The entire Islamist movement was born of frustration with the governments of Arab states and overthrowing them is their real goal. In order to quelle opposition states often try to focus attention on external enemies; Israel is a very good external enemy for the arab regimes to focus on. The reality is that the arab regimes will only be able to hold onto power for another generation or so tops. Once the repressive arab regimes collapse my guess is that you'll find anamosity between Israel and it's neighbours (excluding the Palestinians) will decrease dramatically, as the newly reconstituted states focus on their internal affairs.

Regardless, as long as Israel has the nukes and superior military capability to hold the boarders they are not really worried about their neighbours.

quote:

Actually the UN is for sure not neutral in this whole Israel conflict, they usually side with the Arab states.

Given that the UN is a democratic institution this is to be expected... there are more Arab states and states that benefit from positive relations with Arab states then there are supporters of Israel.

quote:

In my honest opinion. This problem will never go away. One side wants something more than the other or one person will give something up but the other will not. Best thing to do is expel both parties from the region for the next century or so.

Expelling both parties would not help the situation. This will resolve itself in time. At present, Jewish (ethnically, not necessarally religiously) Israeli citizens outnumber Palistinian Israelis (both muslim and christian) by about a million people. The Palistinian Israelis are growing at a slightly faster rate then are the Jewish. Before the century is out the Palistinians will have the numbers, which makes all the difference in a democracy. The ruling class in Israel knows this; subsequently, they know that the staus quo cannot last or else they will lose power. The only viable solution for the survival of the "Jewish state" is to reach a two state solution or to drive all ethnic Palistinians from Israel (which would be unacceptable to the vast majority of Israelis). The two state solution will be achieved in time as it is the only way that both sides can be assured continued existance and autonomy. This understanding is the driver behind Israel's current policies regarding the Palistinians and settlement of the occupied territories... positioning for the eventual negotiations.

quote:

Originally posted by gummybear Nope he won't. I'm surprised and slightly impressed that the US is growing a pair when it comes to Israel..but I don't expect it to last or go anywhere.

I don't think US is annoyed at Israel because Israel is building these homes.

But more like, timing of the announcement during Biden's visit. By making this announcement during Biden's visit, Israel was trying to put a spin on this like US was endorsing the Israel home building.
US felt like it got diplomatically blindsided and is expressing their displeasure according.

And Israel is still laughing, because frankly, US is another dude just to be used for Israel's advantage. I really think Israel thinks there's just them, enemies and neutrals in the world. (remember Canadians being pissed at Mossad using Canadian passports for their spy ops? the Brits are also pissed about this too)

Sure, the Yanks will throw a fit, but in the end, practical reality of situation means it'll be a lot of loud noises right now which will end up amounting to nothing much.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer do you ever not support Israel?

Grossman is a Jewish name no???

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer If shit hits the fan this time more then before at least we know which side started it all and dont have to blame the "palestinian terrosists" for once.

Because if someone pitches a tent on your front lawn, the acceptable response is to drop a bomb on it. Gotcha.

quote:

Originally posted by Spam Because if someone pitches a tent on your front lawn, the acceptable response is to drop a bomb on it. Gotcha.

no, but it is ethnic cleansing by Israel

A 1993 United Nations Commission defined ethnic cleasing more specifically as, "the planned deliberate removal from a specific territory, persons of a particular ethnic group, by force or intimidation, in order to render that area ethnically homogenous."

ps: did I just drop a bomb in this thread? lol

quote:

Originally posted by Spam Because if someone pitches a tent on your front lawn, the acceptable response is to drop a bomb on it. Gotcha.

and then you have Israel's response which is to demolish the whole Neighbourhood and turn it into ground zero and kill as many people as they can just to kill that one "terrorist. It is a neverending god damn cycle there.

^^^

Just to touch on that point, I was watching a great Ross Kemp documentary the other week about the conflict in the area, and he threw out some crazy statistics that really made me question Israels use of military tactics in terms of dealing with 'terrorists'....

it was something like...

...in the last 10 years, Palestinian suicide bombers have been directly responsible for 50 something deaths inside Israel, and in retaliation, surface-to-surface rocket attacks by Israel on 'suspected militant locations' inside Palestine has resulted in over 2300 civilian deaths....

50 to 2300...that's a pretty disgusting ratio...

quote:

Originally posted by LightsOut ^^^ Just to touch on that point, I was watching a great Ross Kemp documentary the other week about the conflict in the area, and he threw out some crazy statistics that really made me question Israels use of military tactics in terms of dealing with 'terrorists'.... it was something like... ...in the last 10 years, Palestinian suicide bombers have been directly responsible for 50 something deaths inside Israel, and in retaliation, surface-to-surface rocket attacks by Israel on 'suspected militant locations' inside Palestine has resulted in over 2300 civilian deaths.... 50 to 2300...that's a pretty disgusting ratio...

Exactly my point and yet the U.S continues to give millions worth of military equipment to Israel every year to kill civillians.
Israel does not follow any international laws and never gets punished for it's crimes against humanity. Last time I chekced you get punished for committing genocide but I guess Israel is special and they get to walk away.

nah. you gotta wait until about couple hundred thousand before you reach genocide level

people who use words like genocide... usually overdramatic

quote:

Originally posted by Xavier Moriarty question is sill there. why is israel so adamant on triggering a new age of violence (there's talk of iran asking Hezbollah to join the fight and if that happens all hell is about to hit the shitfan)????

You obviously don't follow the politics there to any extent. Beware of drawing too many conclusions from a few out-of-context articles.

Israel has not substantively changed any of its policies, with the notable exception of playing the Obama administration's recent games, ceding control of certain territories and - originally - stopping new construction as requested. That led them to where they are now - more violence, more rocket attacks, and more pressure from Obama to cede even more territory and give into even more demands. On the flip side, not a single serious demand has been made against the Palestinians - like, for example, I don't know, stop shooting rockets into Israeli cities?

So try, for a moment, to put yourself in Netanyahu's shoes (and I know, it's hard to feel any sympathy for the jooooos!). Obama now appears to be playing the exact same shady political games that the Palestinians have been playing for the past 20 years, and has now escalated to demands that are absolute non-starters, such as negotiating a "right of return." These simply aren't negotiable, and Obama knows that - or else he's even stupider than I could possibly have imagined.

No other U.S. president, Democrat or Republican, has ever tried to be more than a "mediator" in the dispute. Suddenly, the good ole' USA starts putting pressure on Israel to throw the match, at the same time that domestic terrorist activity has already been starting to escalate. The actual likelihood of any party being interested in a peaceful and equitable solution is vanishingly small.

So what would you do, in his position? Give into further demands, stop construction that has already started, release more prisoners, cede control of more territories, and bring Hamas back to the "negotiating" table, all with the knowledge that this would at best result in an ephemeral pause in the "violence" that already exists? Hezbollah's already been in on the fight; the "threat" of them starting up again isn't news.

Or would you simply reject such demands out-of-hand - knowing full well that it can't make the terrorism situation much worse than it already is - and risk possibly souring relations with a U.S. president who's already clearly communicated that he's not batting for them anyway?

Ultimately the only nation that this is really going to hurt is the U.S., because Israel is their proxy against Iran. Obama has already proven, to himself and to the public, that he is not capable of achieving his aims by diplomacy alone. He na�vely believes that by souring relations with Israel, Iran and the other Arab states will somehow be more likely to cooperate with America. He knows that Israel cannot and will not accept the new demands, which is precisely why he's made them.

Israel really does not have much choice in the matter; they can either accept a completely unreasonable set of demands (and receive nothing in return), or reject them and risk negative publicity, oh wait, they already have that. Really tough choice there.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.