Yeah they can have California. We get rid of a liberal pit and Israel loses its annoying neighbors.
Posted on 05/16/2009 10:23:34 AM PDT by Evil Slayer
^It’s a two-solution state, not a two-state solution! lol
That’s....just....awesome!
Thanks :)
Ping to #22
They already have Dearborn Michigan.
Whew, I was worried about a Palestinian state in the US.
**That’s already there. Israel and Jordan.**
But as expected, the Pali’s are chosing the WRONG ONE!!!
You said — Two State solution = suicide.
—
Actually, it’s the one-state solution that’s suicide. And Israelis know that, which is why they’ll never go for a one-state solution...
You said — That’s already there. Israel and Jordan.
—
Ummmm..., Jordan worked too hard to kick the Palestians out of Jordan. They’re not about to invite them back in again... LOL...
Ever heard of Black September?
You said — The A-rabs were already given 70% of Palestine, all of which was originally intended as a protectorate for the Jews. This 70% was called Trans-Jordan and is now simply known as Jordan. It was and is enough.
—
That is true enough for the land area, but the “ticking time bomb” is not related to land area, but to the issue of which “country” are the Palestinians going to be a “citizen” of.
None of the surrounding Arab/Muslim countries will take them, including Jordan (which worked so hard at kicking them out). Thus Israel is stuck with them, and Israel doesn’t dare propose a “one-state solution” (because of the Palestinians) or else they would be committing suicide to do that.
Actually, Netanyahu has already agreed to a two-state solution, by agreeing to abide by and uphold all the previous agreements. That includes the fact that a two-state solution was started way back with the Oslo Accords. Netanyahu is “on board” with this one. So, that’s not the problem.
The problem (in terms of Netanyahu’s concerns) has to do with the timing of the two-state solution. You can see that “timing” is addressed in the article, but doesn’t make it clear.
The article is pandering to those who may want to think that Netanyahu is refusing to agree with a two-state solution (which he’s not...), by the vagueness of the article and how it’s written. This writer knows that Netanyahu has already agreed to that, and it’s only a matter of timing and other specific conditions that Netanyahu is talking about.
Besides, Israel (and Netanyahu) knows that a “one-state solution” (like some might want to propose here) is “committing suicide” for the State of Israel...
He already backs a two-state solution. He’s just reduced to trying to stall.
There is a way out of this, but it’s complicated, will be a long-term project, & the Israeli “leaders” don’t have the knowledge or the determination to do anything besides spin in circles babbling about peace, land & negotiations.
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
The hawkish prime minister
Netanyahu wants to protect the citizens of Israel and that makes him right-wing and hawkish.
Maybe I just don't understand the meaning of these words. *sigh*
Arafat’s little private club, with Abbas as the money man. They should have a state in Antarctica. Only the penguins will complain..
You said — They should have a state in Antarctica. Only the penguins will complain..
—
There’s a problem here, though. That problem is shown by the answer to this question —
“What country are Arabs/Muslims of the P.A. areas — a “citizen” of?”
Every person is a citizen of some country. So, all those in Gaza, in what country do they hold citizenship?
Is it in the nation of Israel? (well.., Israel doesn’t want them and they would “get them” if they took over the land, which is why Israel won’t take the land for Israel proper).
It’s not of Egypt, of Jordan, of Lebanon, of Syria, of Saudi Arabia, of Iraq or any of the other nearby countries.
So..., what country are they a citizen of?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.