Obama says Palestine must be based in 1967 borders

[Raja.Pakistani]

Well, there is nothing need to be corrected since I have never denied those conflicts between you two.

Arabs attacked Israel since they believe that is their land and U.K. stole that and gave to Jews. They wanted it back.

Israel believed that is god-given land so that it is theirs as well.

About who started the war first in 1967, well both sides can argue for days, or even years. One can say the other side initiated the threat first, while the other side can say you opened fire first.

If winner told the loser of the war to fxxk-off and get them off once for all, there won't be any problems or issues need to be discussed. The problem is that, whether you call them Arabs or Palestinians, they have lived there for hundreds of years or more than one thousand years. They were the land owners then for centuries while you indeed are not. They have nowhere to go. You have to learn to co-exist no matter how hard you have fought each other, or how much hatred you have against each other. Well, someone mentioned that Jews bought a lot of lands from Arabs then. Foreigner investors can buy the whole Manhattan, it does not change the fact that it is still part of U.S.

You have to find a way to minimize the negative and maximize the positive. Otherwise, except more bloodshed, anything better can turn out miraculously?
Indeed Arabs has lost the wars and Israel won them and grabbed more lands.

Isreal was established after World War two as an international apology for the atrocities against the Jews. The site of Modern isreal was taken from other countries under the impression that the land belonged to the isreali people according to holy documents such as the bible. All in all, hundreds of Arab villages were completely destroyed, Bedouins in the Negev and the Galilee kicked out of their ancestral lands, mixed towns like Haifa were nearly wiped clean of their Arab populations, and brutal massacres were committed against the Arab populations both during the '48-49 war in what would become Israel (e.g. Deir Yassin) and up through the mid-50's against Palestinians in Jordanian territory (e.g. Qibya)

It is easy to condemn the Palestinians for their attacks on Israeli civilians, particularly suicide bombings. At the root of all this though, whether in Gaza or Tel Aviv, lies the denial of Palestinian rights. Many other Peoples would resist the theft of their land, the humiliation and despair which has been the lot of the unfortunate Palestinians. Israel's overwhelming might necessitates a form of bloody guerrilla warfare, of which suicide bombing and missile attacks form modern components. It is disingenuous to attempt to characterize these as somehow more barbaric or beyond the pale than many another atrocity of war.

Unrest in Gaza has as its root cause the actions of Israel. Most Palestinians wish to co-exist with Israel but on the basis of a fair settlement with mutual respect; a two State solution. Israel's present right wing stance is unable to contemplate this in any realistic way. Many Israelis seem to regard themselves as superior to Palestinians (among others) due to their supposed position as 'God's chosen people'. Until this changes, groups such as Hamas will exist and will not lack for support.

 

[gubbi]

Isreal was established after World War two as an international apology for the atrocities against the Jews. The site of Modern isreal was taken from other countries under the impression that the land belonged to the isreali people according to holy documents such as the bible. All in all, hundreds of Arab villages were completely destroyed, Bedouins in the Negev and the Galilee kicked out of their ancestral lands, mixed towns like Haifa were nearly wiped clean of their Arab populations, and brutal massacres were committed against the Arab populations both during the '48-49 war in what would become Israel (e.g. Deir Yassin) and up through the mid-50's against Palestinians in Jordanian territory (e.g. Qibya)

You seem to have overlooked the fact that there was no nation called Palestine. It was the British mandate of Palestine which created Israel for the Jews and Jordan which housed the majority of the Palestinians. When you can question the creation of Israel by the British, you should have the balls to question the creation of Pakistan from the British colony of India!

You talk about massacres of Arabs by the Jewish people, but conveniently fail to acknowledge the massacres of Palestinians in far greater numbers by fellow Muslims, especially by your very own Zia-ul-Haq - who was awarded for this feat by the King of Jordan!! Hypocrisy much?

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

Well their belief has nothing to do with reality. Britain captured Ottoman Emire lands and gave 99.8% to Arabs. Then remaining 0.2% was devided by UN between Arabs and Jews.

It is important to note that in 1947, Jewish land ownership was under 7%, yet the UN General Assembly proposed partition and granted the "Jewish state" ABOUT 60% of the total area of Palestine.

Would Americans cede sovereignty and over 60% of its land to a foreign minority, say Canadians, who actually owned under 7% of the land? If such a plan is unthinkable for an American, then how can one ask Palestinians to make a similar sacrifice? Perhaps that’s why the partition agreement was not so “agreeable” to Palestinians.

In November 1967, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242 which laid down a formula for Arab-Israeli peace whereby Israel would “withdraw from territories occupied in the war in exchange for peace with its neighbors.” This was never honored by Israel.

Instead, Israel militarily occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip – the remaining 22% of mandatory Palestine – and began building settlements (only for Jewish Israelis) on land confiscated from Palestinian Muslims and Christians. It has demolished more than 18,000 Palestinian homes since 1967. In 2005 Israel returned Gazan land to its owners, but continues to control its borders, ports, and air space, turning Gaza into a virtual concentration camp where 1.5 million people are held under what a UN Human Rights Commissioner described as “catastrophic” conditions.

 

[Meengla]

You seem to have overlooked the fact that there was no nation called Palestine. It was the British mandate of Palestine which created Israel for the Jews and Jordan which housed the majority of the Palestinians.

In your attempt to kiss Israeli a$$ you Indians can lie to a funny level.
So you are saying that the British Mandate did not foresee a Palestine state between the Jordan River and Med. Sea? Just because Jordan had a large number of Palestinians does not mean that there were no large numbers of Palestinians in the land between Jordan River and Med. Sea. What are you trying to say here?
Oh, let me guess: There was no 'Palestine' as a nation and Jordan is the real Palestine. Conclusion, Pals--all 4+ million of them should go to Jordan.

My God you need to realize how much damage you are going to do to India's image by kissing Israeli a$$es just because of your antagonism toward Pakistan. But your govt. is more sensible and knows which way the international wind is blowing. You bloggers are a different case.

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

^ These guys have this bad habit to bring india vs pakistan discussion in every single topic

 

[Raja.Pakistani]

You seem to have overlooked the fact that there was no nation called Palestine. It was the British mandate of Palestine which created Israel for the Jews and Jordan which housed the majority of the Palestinians.

Great Britain did NOT have a legal right to make that determination. Palestine was already settled by the indigenous Semite population who had been there for 1200 years. Naturally, the Jewish people could not settle in Palestine without illegally removing the people already living in those villages and on their properties. For the most part, the Palestinians were removed aggressively from their properties via assaults by the Zionists who were determined to make Palestine the home of Jews regardless of any impedance.

 

[gubbi]

In your attempt to kiss Israeli a$$ you Indians can lie to a funny level.
So you are saying that the British Mandate did not foresee a Palestine state between the Jordan River and Med. Sea? Just because Jordan had a large number of Palestinians does not mean that there were no large numbers of Palestinians in the land between Jordan River and Med. Sea. What are you trying to say here?

A$$ kissin? You kidding right?
Werent both Israel and Palestine supposed to be created at the same time? Didnt Arabs oppose the plan in UN and started the civil war in 1947? Didnt Arab Muslim nations attack the Jewish people and were subsequently vanquished, a trend which became all to familiar in the coming years?

Now where did I ever say that Palestine was not supposed to exist? FYI, India was/is a staunch supporter of the Palestinian cause, Yasser Arafat was a frequent visitor to the power corridors in New Delhi - he had direct access to Indira Gandhi and her son! It was only after the Oslo accords between Rabin and Arafat did India initiate diplomatic relations with Israel - that too when Arafat said he had no issues with that!!

My God you need to realize how much damage you are going to do to India's image by kissing Israeli a$$es just because of your antagonism toward Pakistan. But your govt. is more sensible and knows which way the international wind is blowing. You bloggers are a different case.

[/quote]

How is Pakistan even related to this issue, except for the fact that your beloved Gen Zia-ul-Haq was awarded by King of Jordan for killing Palestinians!! The same Zia-ul-Haq who went on to radically Islamize Pakistan and was instrumental in creating many of those monsters which today are eating Pakistan withinout. And now many Pakistanis claim to be the torch bearers of the Palestinian conflict! Now aint that hypocrisy?

India was/is one of the most ardent supporters of the Palestinian cause, IIRC espousing the '67 borders as the starting point for negotiations. We all know which way international wind is blowing now.

 

[gubbi]

Great Britain did NOT have a legal right to make that determination. Palestine was already settled by the indigenous Semite population who had been there for 1200 years. Naturally, the Jewish people could not settle in Palestine without illegally removing the people already living in those villages and on their properties. For the most part, the Palestinians were removed aggressively from their properties via assaults by the Zionists who were determined to make Palestine the home of Jews regardless of any impedance.

Neither did Britain have the right to divide people of the Indian sub-continent into two different nations. Your arguments can be perfectly applied to pre-independence India's case.

But, I do sometimes sympathize with your POV. But much has happened in the years gone by, which cannot be undone. Sometimes, it would be wise to accept reality on the ground and learn to live with it, rather than fight and destroy whatever is left. This particular case warrants such understanding.

 

[EjazR]

To raise WHAT IF questions and the bogey of Palestinians will ask for more if the '67 borders with agreeable landswaps deal is adhered to is incorrect and scare mongering.

Back in 2002, the Saudi led Arab peace plan categorically stated the idea of two state solution. It even gave concession on the right of return of refugees which is mandated under International law.

In return the Arab League would not only recognize Israel, but establish full diplomatic and trade relations. Nothing could be more clear cut on the Arab position on Israel. The ball is in Israel's court weather it wants to be a part of the middle east family or an outpost of the western influence in the region.

The Palestine Papers have shown clearly the level of concessions that the Palestinians have given to the Israelis and have been rejected. The Palestinians agreed to give away 45-50% of the West Bank to Israel, accept a police only state as well as offer the biggest Jerusalem to Israel in history.
Palestine Papers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think anyone who objectively looks at the conflict would expect the Israeli side to show genuine peace moves and not sidetrack the issue. I think it would be in Israel's best interest to stop the hawks and the right hijack its policy and listen to other voices.
Just FYI, 64% of Jewish Americans supported Obama's ME policy in a recent poll. Food for thought.

 

[CardSharp]

In your attempt to kiss Israeli a$$ you Indians can lie to a funny level.
So you are saying that the British Mandate did not foresee a Palestine state between the Jordan River and Med. Sea? Just because Jordan had a large number of Palestinians does not mean that there were no large numbers of Palestinians in the land between Jordan River and Med. Sea. What are you trying to say here?
Oh, let me guess: There was no 'Palestine' as a nation and Jordan is the real Palestine. Conclusion, Pals--all 4+ million of them should go to Jordan.

My God you need to realize how much damage you are going to do to India's image by kissing Israeli a$$es just because of your antagonism toward Pakistan. But your govt. is more sensible and knows which way the international wind is blowing. You bloggers are a different case.

^ These guys have this bad habit to bring india vs pakistan discussion in every single topic

Sometime I think if Pakistan or Muslims are for saving the rainforest, he'd go on a rant about how rainforests are evil and hypocritical.

 

[gubbi]

Here cometh "Mr Touch-me-not, I am so sensitive" with the usual 'sensitive' ranting.

 

[gubbi]

To raise WHAT IF questions and the bogey of Palestinians will ask for more if the '67 borders with agreeable landswaps deal is adhered to is incorrect and scare mongering.

Back in 2002, the Saudi led Arab peace plan categorically stated the idea of two state solution. It even gave concession on the right of return of refugees which is mandated under International law.

In return the Arab League would not only recognize Israel, but establish full diplomatic and trade relations. Nothing could be more clear cut on the Arab position on Israel. The ball is in Israel's court weather it wants to be a part of the middle east family or an outpost of the western influence in the region.

The Palestine Papers have shown clearly the level of concessions that the Palestinians have given to the Israelis and have been rejected. The Palestinians agreed to give away 45-50% of the West Bank to Israel, accept a police only state as well as offer the biggest Jerusalem to Israel in history.
Palestine Papers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I think anyone who objectively looks at the conflict would expect the Israeli side to show genuine peace moves and not sidetrack the issue. I think it would be in Israel's best interest to stop the hawks and the right hijack its policy and listen to other voices.
Just FYI, 64% of Jewish Americans supported Obama's ME policy in a recent poll. Food for thought.

You are right about Israeli hawks. I read recently that Netanyahu is at the cusp of a historic moment where he can either make it or break it with the Palestinians. Till now, uttering the two state solution was political suicide in Israel. But now surely but quietly, its becoming an accepted fact. Its only a matter of time now. The Saudi plan in 2002 was too early for its time. Then there is the issue of refugees. If you had watched the talks between Netanyahu and Obama, the Israeli premier clearly said that no concessions will be given to the refugees.

Obama, after his '67 borders speech still enjoys considerable support from the Jewish American community speaks volumes. But being the devil's advocate here, that speech poured water over Palestinian hawks' plans of unilaterally declaring Palestinian statehood in the UN in coming months. Also did Obama squander the settlement freeze initiated by Netanyahu?

 

[kamakazi attack]

you would be dumb and naive to think that somehow it is obama's initiative in asking israel to negoitiate for a plaestinanin state based on 67' border. This is Jewish American and all Israeli lobbying groups' prerogative that peace succeed in this region unless israel give up alot more than it's publicaly willinng to do now.

hahahahaha jewish lobbyists are the most powerfull people in washington, you think obama would publicly "denounce" them if he wasn't assured by AIPAC?

this is all negotiation shenanigans, israel have to be seen given alot to get arab support.

 

[CardSharp]

you would be dumb and naive to think that somehow it is obama's initiative in asking israel to negoitiate for a plaestinanin state based on 67' border. This is Jewish American and all Israeli lobbying groups' prerogative that peace succeed in this region unless israel give up alot more than it's publicaly willinng to do now.

hahahahaha jewish lobbyists are the most powerfull people in washington, you think obama would publicly "denounce" them if he wasn't assured by AIPAC?

this is all negotiation shenanigans, israel have to be seen given alot to get arab support.

This whole thing definitly ties into the Arab spring, definitly a show for the Arab world. The degree of Israeli cooperation is another thing

 

[500]

It is important to note that in 1947, Jewish land ownership was under 7%, yet the UN General Assembly proposed partition and granted the "Jewish state" ABOUT 60% of the total area of Palestine.

You should keep and mind that majority of the lands were belong to state (mandate) and not to private ownership. Over 70% of territory allocated for Jewish state was completely empty Negev desert, where no one never ever lived and which was belong to no one.

Also private ownerhsip has nothing to do with sovereignity. Today 20% of Israel's citizens are Arabs and they own lots of lands in Israel.

You should count by population: Jews were 2-3% of Middle East population, but they got some 0.1% Middle East of territory.

In November 1967, the UN Security Council adopted Resolution 242 which laid down a formula for Arab-Israeli peace whereby Israel would “withdraw from territories occupied in the war in exchange for peace with its neighbors.” This was never honored by Israel.

Thats not true. This resolution was rejected by the Arabs on sumit in Khartoum. Hamas rejects this resolution till today.

In 2005 Israel returned Gazan land to its owners, but continues to control its borders, ports, and air space, turning Gaza into a virtual concentration camp where 1.5 million people are held under what a UN Human Rights Commissioner described as “catastrophic” conditions.

Infant mortality rate:

Gaza Strip - 18.35
Iran - 35.78
World - 42.09
Pakistan - 65.14

By the way, Israel does not control border with Egypt.