423
Without a Palestinian state and a multi-national presence to enforce it there will never be peace. The motive for attacks will remain.
A Palestinian state wouldn’t fix it either, considering that Hamas and similar groups in the area very explicitly want ALL the territory and want Israel to not exist at all.
Great, then it's solved. The only solution is genocide. Doesn't matter which side, just pick one, and kill them all.
That is what you're saying, right?
There is no good solution to the current state of things.
Good is relative. What you mean is that there isn't a perfect solution. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
So if your argument is that a two state solution isn't perfect, therefore we shouldn't do it, then that's tacit approval for my first solution...a final solution if you will. Just pick a side, and poof.
If you're not comfortable with genocide, then a two state solution is the only viable path forward with any hope of chance of being made into a good outcome, even if not a perfect one.
So pick one: a final solution or a two-state solution, but stop with the wishy-washy "the status quo must remain until a perfect solution is found".
To be clear, I support a free Palestine and condemn Israel’s actions.
But, something that you, and most people I see discussing this, are missing is that this isn’t just a political or land issue. This is a fundamentalist religious issue too. Both parties believe they have a sacred right to the land and that the other does not. The two parties ideologies are fundamentally incompatible with anything other than the removal of the other party. There is not, and never has been, a road to a two state solution and the actions we’re seeing now have likely always been the plan for Israel. Israel has squeezed and squeezed the Palestinians until, surprise!, they (or at the very least a subset of them) decide it’s time to fight back. That’s the excuse Israel has been looking for, an event large and egregious enough for an all out assault and to ultimately push the Palestinians into the ocean and remove them from the equation.
That's like calling the Russian invasion of Ukraine a holy Christian war.
The Zionists very clearly do not have any right to Palestine and the Palestinians very clearly do have the right to their land.
The fact that israel has been committing genocide for over 75 years there doesn't magically give them the right to anything.
You’ll notice, I don’t support either’s religious claim in my comment. I’m conveying what they believe and why it’s an untenable situation. It is, in fact, a religious war.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is a political war. They are not the same.
Don’t get me wrong I’d love a two state solution or really any solution where they stop killing each other. But in order for a two state solution to happen, you need both sides to agree on the borders, and good luck with that.
Just remind the Israeli government who holds the biggest stick and which hand feeds them.
Reminder that the UN has tried to implement the two state solution before but the Arab side said “No we want all of it”
Black South Africans wanted the entire country too. That Mandela guy sure was radical about that
load more comments
(1 replies)
I would love a solution in which they both integrate into one state with equal rights... I know it sounds impossible
Hamas has explicitly said they would accept the 1969 borders with no settlers, no IDF presence, and an actual Palestinian state that's not controlled by Israel.
So try again.
The same Hamas whose charter explicitly calls for the destruction of Israel and the Jewish people? Sure.
Go read it. No seriously. Stop letting Israel tell you what it says, and actually go read it.
Here's the link.
They clearly do not like Zionism and would love to have the entire region back. But they lay out their demands for peace pretty clearly.
Also in the linked 2017 charter they state
- The following are considered null and void: the Balfour Declaration, the British Mandate Document, the UN Palestine Partition Resolution, and whatever resolutions and measures that derive from them or are similar to them. The establishment of “Israel” is entirely illegal and contravenes the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and goes against their will and the will of the Ummah; it is also in violation of human rights that are guaranteed by international conventions, foremost among them is the right to self-determination.
Which certainly sounds like them wanting to destroy Israel.
They're saying they don't consider the state of Israel to be legal. That does not mean they intend to keep fighting after their demands for a Palestinian state are met. They are very clear about their peace goals and they do not include the dissolution of Israel.
Declare our state legitimate, but also
Your state is illegitimate.
Sounds entirely peaceful and would not lead to further future conflicts.
Sounds like something diplomacy deals with on a daily basis.
And then you look at their original 1988 charter,
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp
Where they say…
Moreover, if the links have been distant from each other and if obstacles, placed by those who are the lackeys of Zionism in the way of the fighters obstructed the continuation of the struggle, the Islamic Resistance Movement aspires to the realisation of Allah's promise, no matter how long that should take. The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said:
"The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (evidently a certain kind of tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Moslem).
Or,
“ Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it" (The Martyr, Imam Hassan al-Banna, of blessed memory). “
Well no. Because this charter is meant to supersede that. Just like nobody accuses the US of banning alcohol after having replaced that amendment with one saying alcohol is fine again. Trying to hang the original charter around their neck like an anchor is a propaganda thing meant to prevent them from moderating.
Do we want less violence or more?
Considering they have still been launching rockets at civilian centers not to mention killing innocent Israelis, taking hostages, etc since putting in the new charter, Im not sure I believe them.
load more comments
(10 replies)
You're down voted for truth.
Many Palestinians would probably be happy for recognition of state I imagine but Hamas very likely would not. It's currently a convenient excuse for them but if it happened I highly doubt they would stop trying to lob missiles over the border and be a peaceful neighbour, even if Israel stopped trying to steal land.
Not saying it shouldn't happen but it's not some magical solution like many seem to think.
Israel has been building settlements in the West Bank for years. To say nothing of their bombings in Lebanon. They are a state that consistently does not respect borders.
Yeah these Guys are so wrong in their argument
‘hAmAS wOnT aCCept a TwO sTaTE SoLuTIOn sO LeTs GEnOciDe pAlesTiniAnS’
Well Netanyahu and right wing Israelis also won’t, include that part as well, the only way is by forcing both of them by some way
load more comments
(1 replies)
An Israeli state wouldn’t fix it either, considering that Kahanites and similar groups in the area very explicitly want ALL the territory and want Palestine to not exist at all.
Israel doesn't give a shit. They were only interested in normalizing relations with Saudi Arabia to keep them away and deal with them later. Now that they've ripped their masks off and kicked the ethnic cleansing process into high gear, there's no point in normalizing relations. If Saudi Arabia has a problem with it, they'll be "regime changed". We've hit a point of no return.
To change the saudi "regime" you have to change the society itself because it is a tribal society. It will take at least one or two more generation to create any fundamental change in the kingdom.
Nah, the US just backs one of the many "princes" to usurp the throne. Failing that, they do a full-on invasion.
Impossible for a non-Islamic state to invade Saudi Arabia. There would be a profound religious war. The crown's whole legitimacy comes from them protecting Mecca.
Not at all. Most Muslims don't care about Saudi rulers and see them as massive Hypocrites collaborating with israel.
Unless their politicians hide inside Mecca it's not likely anyone will undertake action.
They derive all their power from their oil supply and their close ties to the US (which they get because of their oil supply).
They can't even do that. They might bomb cities but they cannot do a full invasion. The land is Massive with mountains, large desert and extreme heat. And if they touch Mecca or Madinah you mobilize 1 billion Muslims around the world.
load more comments
(1 replies)
If the west was going to regime change Saudi Arabia they would have done it after 9/11, which was planned financed and perpetrated by Saudis. We invaded Afghanistan and Iraq instead, two enemies of Saudi Arabia that had nothing to do with it. Israeli and Saudi dick are equally down America's throat and I honestly don't know which one NATO would side with.
Saudi Arabia is a well-tamed bitch. There was no need to go after Saudi Arabia after 9/11 because they were already fully under control. Nah, a tragedy like that is best capitalized by taking down "rogue" enemy states like Iraq. Just look at the countries that the US has involved itself in, including Syria, Libya, Somalia, etc... these are countries that weren't playing ball. It's looking like Iran's turn is soon. After all these countries have been fully taken care of, the US can take down the tamed bitches like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Basic divide and conquer, oldest trick in the book.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Who cares? Saudis are a fundamentalist theocracy built on oil money
Anyone who wants peace in the Near East as there's no way around the Saudis and their influence. They're a diplomatic heavyweight in general: Within the Arab world by tribal whatnot, elsewhere mostly fuelled by oil.
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Yeah but fuck the Saudis.
Yeah, it's terrible that they're the ones on the right side of history on this. It shows how low the US is willing to go to protect its ME interests. Literally morally lower than Saudi.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Israel has an excellent opportunity to make peace and be the economic engine of growth for the region. But the mullahs in Iran, Hamas, and present day Likud are all made for each other
It's kinda unusual for Saudi Arabia to stick up for Palestinians, isn't it? Am I wrong about that?
ETA: After a little reading, it seems that I am wrong about that but "it's complicated."
SA has been working on a two-state solution for a while now, that was what Kushner was supposed to be working on during the Trump administration when he wound up getting a loan of $5 billion from the Saudis, however Qatar is the country where HAMAS leadership are hiding out.
Yeah, just today I remembered that Kushner has already "solved" this problem when I read an interview about the future of this conflict depending on the future US president. The interviewee said Trump hates Netanyahu because he congratulated Biden when he won the 2020 election, so the US would probably not pressure Israel to resolve the conflict, but also not help Israel out.
Trump famously hated Netanyahu before 2020 also. He even said the quiet part out loud, that Netanyahu has no intention to resolve the situation whatsoever. He just also really loves Israel, so it’s kinda irrelevant.
Always painful when we need to say it, but Trump wasn't wrong on this one, that guy definitely knows autocrats very well. Netanyahu should have been ousted long ago, he's been a thorn in the side of the peace process for as long as he's had power and will continue to be.
The Saudis are never on the right side of anything. They do not give a shit about Palestinians and they never did - this just how they attempt to be a thorn in the side of the US.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The dispute over Gaza’s future — as the war rages with no end in sight — pits Israel against its top ally, the United States, as well as much of the international community, and poses a major obstacle to any plans for postwar governance or reconstruction of the impoverished coastal enclave that is home to 2.3 million Palestinians.
In the interview with “CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS,” the host asked: “Are you saying unequivocally that if there is not a credible and irreversible path to a Palestinian state, there will not be normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel?”
Earlier in the interview, when asked if oil-rich Saudi Arabia would finance reconstruction in Gaza — where Israel’s offensive has caused unprecedented destruction — Prince Faisal gave a similar answer.
At a meeting about the war on Monday, European Union foreign ministers said the creation of a Palestinian state was the only way to achieve peace and expressed concern about Netanyahu’s rejection of the idea.
Relatives of the hostages, as well as other protesters, have set up a tent camp outside Netanyahu’s residence in Jerusalem and vowed to remain until a deal is reached to bring the rest of the captives home.
But Netanyahu’s governing coalition is beholden to far-right parties that want to step up the offensive, encourage the “voluntary” emigration of hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from Gaza, and re-establish Jewish settlements there.
The original article contains 1,023 words, the summary contains 234 words. Saved 77%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2024
423 points (100.0% liked)
World News
39046 readers
2424 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS