 |
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000
time: 07:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
With regards to the OT: I say let anyone who wants to stay there stay. It's just as unfair to uproot people who lived there for 20 years, as it is unfair to uproot palestinians. They can arrange their own militia, and defend themselves. |
I agree as far as fairness is concerned, but is it practical? Leaving the settlements to their own means will cause a hell of a lot of chaos and death in the territories.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000
time: 07:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kamrat X
And who says that IDF isnīt deliberately killing civilians? Itīs just that they mask it as "war on terror"... |
It would be impossible for the IDF to do so under current conditions. Oh sure, a crazed soldier here and there can kill an innocent civilian, or some company may have a faulty "culture" and be reckless in it's operations, but as an organization the IDF has too many restraints on it to actually have a policy of "deliberately killing civilians".
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:22
|
|
settlers in Gaza - while theyre not commuters, they are a mix of backgrounds and, apparently, motives. Haaretz has a nice guide to the Gaza settlements (and the 4 in northern west bank which will also be included in the disengagement) Some had settled in Sinai and were later moved to Gaza. Some are religious, some secularists, some are in collective or semi-collective settlements. A few intend to stay on, some intend to move back to Israel, and at least one group plans on moving to a Kibbutz!!!! And BTW, not all who settled with religious/nationalist motives are equally militant or violent.
As for settlers living under Pal rule - well the problem is that SOME folks in Palestine wont want them there, and whenever something bad happens to them, or allegedly bad, it will create a stink in ISRAELI politics - all in all, given the delicate nature of things, it would be much better if theyd simply leave. Its just trouble waiting to happen if they stay on.
As for Arabs in settlements, IIUC Israeli Arabs in theory could move to Israeli settlements in the territories. Im not aware any have though, which i suspect is a function of both a hostile social environment in the settlements, and Israeli arab refusal to lend any legitimacy to the settlements.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
 |
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:22
|
|
quote:
I disagree.
First, while the success of the negotiations is uncertain, their failure will definetely be certain if the settlements remain only with their own means. Whatever chance the peace process has will be destroyed by the outbreak of new, disorganized and much more brutal warfare in the territories.
|
Oh, I don't think it will happen now. It's what will happen when the real stuff will come to the table, and the **** will return to it's beloved fan.
quote:
Second, why do you think the "death and destruction" will be rapid? The settlers wont be able to win, only to hold out for as long as possible. So a rapid end means the death of all settlers. Hardly utilitarian. |
You think that the settlers are in a bad shape?  The settlers will probably get thousands of volunteers. They have the funding to secure arms shipments. Many of them are well trained. I don't fear for them or their existance as an entity.
As to the utilitarianism of the stance, this is a very important part of the "cut your losses" plan that I envision as the short term strategy of our oasis of sanity. I've thought about it a lot, and it's the most utilitarian solution, at this point.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zevico
|
|
Melbourne
Apr 2002
time: 15:22
|
|
quote:
Hmm. I was led to believe that most of the settlers were relatively harmless commuters, not the crazed 'I'm raising my kids to kill Arabs' types. |
This is true in the vast majority of cases. There are is a small extremist population among them, but most settlers are not. Most are right-wing, yes, but they aren't facists. There is a very large gap between right-wing and facist, and the mainstream settler movement is certainly not the latter. As I said before, there are Kahanists (which might be compared to a 'Jewish KKK'), but these are quite a small proportion of the population in general.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Edan
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Of course, but how likely do you think it would be that settlement people would accept Palestinian citizenship?  |
Most probably wouldn't, but some might:
quote:
A founding member of a Gaza Strip settlement said Monday that he and other residents of his northern Gaza enclave were prepared to live under Palestinian rule and even vote for the Palestinian parliament, if they were allowed to remain in their present homes. |
quote:
Referring to Israeli Arab members of Knesset, Farah told Army Radio that "Ahmed Tibi and Azmi Bishara live in peace and quiet in the state of Israel. There's no reason why Jews can't live under Palestinian sovereignty. We must be creative." |
http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/540173.html
Doesn't explicitly state that they would be accepting citizenship, but it does sound like it.
BTW, IIRC, one of the possibilities the vague Saudi Plan from a few years back considered was allowing settlers to stay under Palestinian soverenty.
Last edited by Edan on 25-02-2005 at 11:15
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Proteus_MST
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azazel
There are no resources in this land. It's all man-built. |
Hm,
arenīt Israels main sources of freshwater part of the westbank?
(and would fall into the control of a palestinian state if Israel left the whole territory of the westbank to the palestinians?)
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
25-02-2005 00:02
|