"... saying 'one might argue' that the plan is 'unexecutable' and it might not 'gain traction.' He expressed his hope that the deal isn’t simply dismissed out of hand. 'It may be rejected. Could be in the end, folks will say, "It’s not particularly original, it doesn’t particularly work for me," that is, "it’s got two good things and nine bad things, I’m out,"' Pompeo said in an audio recording of the private meeting obtained by The Washington Post.... 'I get why people think this is going to be a deal that only the Israelis could love,' he said. 'I understand the perception of that. I hope everyone will just give the space to listen and let it settle in a little bit.'... Pompeo, unlike previous secretaries of state, is not overseeing the peace effort... [Jared] Kushner, a real estate scion from New Jersey, and [Jason] Greenblatt, the former chief legal officer for Trump and the Trump Organization, have led the initiative since the president took power. The two men, both practicing Orthodox Jews, did not come in with political experience but have shared a long interest in and connection to Israel.... [After Pompeo's meeting with Jewish leaders,] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to form a governing coalition and Israel’s parliament voted to dissolve itself, sending the country back to elections in September. Now, if the White House wants to avoid rolling out a peace plan during a sensitive election campaign period for Netanyahu, it will have to wait until at least November, when... the Trump administration will be stepping up its own reelection campaign...."
From
"Exclusive: Pompeo delivers unfiltered view of Trump’s Middle East peace plan in off-the-record meeting" (WaPo)(audio at the link).
Do you think that's something Pompeo
wanted to get out? Should we presume one of the "Jewish leaders" leaked it? What's the motivation? If
Pompeo wanted it out, is it that he believes Kushner has handled it badly and wants the blame to go where it belongs? It seems that failure of the plan is predictable, but why get the failure process going in advance? To make the collapse less sudden?
The highest-rated comment at WaPo is:
What a bunch of morons. Seriously. What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem? Why did they think prior presidents didn't do that? And now they think they can slide in with a peace plan.
Was never a big fan of the Three Stooges.
So who linked the recording?
Posts
138 comments:
The deal is DOA, and the administration wants to get ahead of the story.
With Iran's paws all over the Middle East, especially in Lebanon and Gaza and Syria, any Palestinian leader who did a deal would be a dead man before the ink was dry.
Any deal would be dead. This has nothing to do with the embassy. The Palestinians want no negotiations beyond NO ISRAEL. WaPo commentersare beyond dumb.
I'd guess sabotage. Keep Trump from doing anything that winds up well.
Re: the WaPo comment: What a bunch of morons. Seriously. What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem? Why did they think prior presidents didn't do that?
Yes, because prior presidents have been so brilliantly successful at negotiating peace between the Israelis and their enemies . . .
Frankly, though, if the Palestinian leadership can be diplomatically isolated from the Arab principalities (principally Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the military dictatorship in Egypt), it's not really clear to me that a "peace" deal is necessary. And with Hamas in control in Gaza, it's unclear to me whether a deal could even be reached by negotiating with the PA. Israel just has to grind it out.
Long ago I gave up the notion that "leaks" were "accidents". In a vacuum I am just as likely to think that Pompeo wanted to get that out there as much as some other party. And I am not above including the possibility that this "leak" was planted and that the deal is much better than this story would indicate.
That said nobody expect peace in the middle east, not achieving it would make Trump normal, presidental, meets expectations sort of guy.
The deal is DOA, and the administration wants to get ahead of the story.
Quite possibly.
There will be peace when the Palestinian leadership wants peace. All the rest is just window dressing.
Actually, the "highest rated WaPo" comment demonstrates "moronism."
The standard "negotiating posture" of the Washington "wise guys' has always been "pressure Israel to make concessions, treat the Palestinians as righteously aggrieved from whom little or nothing but 'yes' must be demanded."
Moving the embassy to Jerusalem has been promised by American Presidents for forever, failing to do it told the Palestinians they had a veto over US policy - in return for which, they gave us . . . . nothing. Well, there has to be a price for intransigence at some point in time, not to mention we need to keep our promises at some point in time.
There's no peace because the Palestinians have no interest in peace.
The terrorists and Iran don’t want peace. They live to kill Jews.
And thanks again Barack for handing all that money over to Iran so that it can fund more terrorism.
Three thoughts:
• The Palestinians are the transgender of the international community: an incredibly small proportion of the overall whole, who have managed to make much of the liberal world bend over backwards to accommodate their angst. Dead-named Jordanians, perhaps.
• This is a hand-grenade lobbed into the American Left. The media-darlings of the New Left -- Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, etc -- will no doubt find a way to take any perceived Israel-lean of the proposal into stark anti-semitic waters, of which American Jews of the Left will have no choice to see where they now fit in the progressives' pecking order. You can't be progressive about Israel when the new progressives don't believe there should be an Israel at all.
• Trump has this framed deceptively well: it is not a process, it is a deal. Take it or leave it. No deal = no 'process'. The proverbial 'pound sand' to the UN grifters, he has other deals to make. Palestinians: you're fired, so to speak.
I am Laslo.
I wish every politician or diplomat who talked about the middle east was so honest.
In public.
Bill Clinton offered Yasser "That's My Baby" Arafat everything he asked for and he turned it down. That was a pretty good clue the PLO wanted no part of a peace plan.
Strikingly similar as to why Monsignor Jesse Jackson and the Most Reverend Al Sharpton want no part of racial reconciliation.
Yes, because prior presidents have been so brilliantly successful at negotiating peace between the Israelis and their enemies
Yes.
Of course it's moving the embassy what will destroy the chance for middle east peace. Right.
I can't believe a Middle East peace plan might fail.
As for moving the embassy, why can't people say:"I really didn't think that would work, but it seems to be turning out just fine"?
Because it does.
This might seem to be another example where Americans think they can solve another country's problems in six months with a plan, the "right team," and of course the old can-do spirit. On the other hand, there are probably more Americans who have given serious thought to Israel vs. Palestine than in other cases. The Hamas leadership of Gaza doesn't want peace, the leadership of the Palestinian Authority has been unpredictable, so who exactly is Israel supposed to negotiate with? I agree with Laslo: Trump is probably being smart, not stupid.
Israel just has to grind it out.
And what does that mean? No matter how much you want to ignore the Palestinians, they are still there. What is your solution? Ethnic cleansing? Annex all the occupied territories and Gaza and make the Palestinians full citizens? That is the end of the Jewish State. You probably like the idea of Apartheid, which means the end of Israeli democracy.
So let's review Trump's promised use of his real estate negotiation skills to achieve great things in foreign affairs. Iran, Cuba and Venezuela, no progress. North Korea, nothing. NAFTA, the worst deal ever made by the U.S., renegotiated with minor tweaks (I guess it is now the second worst deal ever). And that will be torpedoed by his rash and irrational tariffs on Mexico.
So much winning!
Is it really true that the article gave absolutely no hint as to details of the peace plan?
I guess this is what passed for news today. And I'm supposed to react, based on what?
That Most-Liked comment is interesting. "What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem? Why did they think prior presidents didn't do that?" Don't know. I doubt you know either. Whatever prior presidents thought, it obviously didn't work very well. Maybe Shaking the Box is a good thing to try.
Birches said...
Any deal would be dead. This has nothing to do with the embassy. The Palestinians want no negotiations beyond NO ISRAEL. WaPo commentersare beyond dumb.
It's hard to work out an agreement with someone who wants you dead and gone.
Another Trump hit piece but slant question post by Ann. Hmm
Symploce
Other Presidents achieved what from not having the embassy in Jerusalem?
Every other plan in the Middle East has been such a success! Who would mess with success?
Better for Son In Law to waste his time on this hobby than have any influence on US policy. Maybe he can be appointed ambassador to Israel.
Pompeo doesn’t care about the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians (neither does Saudi Arabia or Egypt) and it’s a low priority for the US. He might have leaked this to make Jared look like the moron he is. Probably doesn’t like the guy.
The conflict is too intractable and the US has wasted way too much time and money on it over the years. Pompeo knows this. He knows it’s also a low priority.
"Any deal would be dead. This has nothing to do with the embassy. The Palestinians want no negotiations beyond NO ISRAEL."
Or, the Israelis want no negotiations beyond NO PALESTINE.
"Long ago I gave up the notion that 'leaks' were 'accidents'.
Yes. It is a given that no government leaks are ever accidents.
So, like every other "Middle East peace plan", ever.
It's what this country did, it's what Australia did and much of Canada all settler states,
I noted David reabois evisceration of David Kirkpatrick's big bad narrative of prince zayed, who is in favor of this deal
Israel and the Palestinians are too far apart for any peace plan to work? Everyone knows that. But did you know you can save 15% on your car insurance by switching to Geico?
"What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem? "
Dang it!! That has to be the reason that the Palestinians don't want peace!! Because they have known for the past 50 years that in 2018 the embassy was going to be moved to Jerusalem!!
Kirkpatrick leaves out Qatar, which has bought into Turkish military and cooperates with Iran, it is the qumar from west wing.
What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem?
The person who wrote this and everyone who upvoted it thought there would be riots throughout the Middle East.
People who supported the move did it for principled reasons and didn't think much tangible would change one way or the other. And they were right.
As is normal at the WaPo, the true morons are the people shouting "Moron!"
Qatar supports militias from Iraq to north Africa, prince zayed is the counter to that. Richard Clarke gets his first negative press bin 15 years.
Having visited Israel once (not making me an expert) I cannot conceive how a two state solution will work. So instead of being citizens of a democracy with a thriving economy, the Palestinians, out of national pride, will live in a failed, corrupt autocracy. “He may be a sonofabith but he’s OUR sonofabitch”.
Remembers the posts recent hire had been keen on Hamas and Islamic state:
https://jewishjournal.com/cover_story/298975/qatar-shows-two-faces-to-the-world/
As others have referenced, this is just part of the epic goalpost-moving when it comes to the Trump Administration. They all predicted disaster and so they now have to pretend disasters are happening.
Mike
How many peace plans have been proposed and either failed or rejected? The Trump administration is so far perfectly aligned with the results of all previous American administrations. If it were easy - and the Palestinians wanted peace - then it would have happened already.
"Peace will come to the Middle East when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us." - Golda Meir
There was a Reagan peace plan that phillip Habib was shopping around in the 80s. We ask Israel to be merciful than we were.
Yesterdays explainer:
https://mobile.twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1135205271515652097
What a bunch of morons. Seriously. What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem? Why did they think prior presidents didn't do that?
If "prior presidents" had brought peace to the region, we wouldn't still be talking about "peace plans". If Trump fails, he'll just be failing in a new way.
The company's clever move was to hire The son of the lead aide to the grand mufti, and the architect of Munich as their contact, his protege was mughniyah who directed the death of the recruiter of fellow above.
Re: Freder Frederson:
And what does that mean? No matter how much you want to ignore the Palestinians, they are still there. What is your solution? Ethnic cleansing? Annex all the occupied territories and Gaza and make the Palestinians full citizens? That is the end of the Jewish State. You probably like the idea of Apartheid, which means the end of Israeli democracy.
Grinding it out is basically what they're doing right now -- Hamas lobs some rockets over, and Israel strikes back. If Hamas's support routes can be completely blocked with cooperation from the neighbouring principalities -- I know Iran supports them, but material physically has to be moved in -- they can eventually neutralise the threat from Gaza.
And practically speaking, I think the threat to Israel comes almost entirely from Gaza these days. While there are occasionally protests in the West Bank, and Muslims occasionally riot because Jews are allowed onto their turf, protests and the occasional riot aren't acts of war. Long term, that relationship is manageable.
The reason the embassy move is such a stumbling block is because one of the three pillars of a negotiated solution is the status of East Jerusalem, which pretty much any Palestinian would expect to be the capital of a Palestinian. The Palestinians are not likely to accept an undivided East Jerusalem, just as the Israelis are not likely to accept the right of return. This is primarily why the negotiating process has been vexed.
Putting Jared Kushner in charge of this was an absurdity, but as I've said, I think the US should stay out of trying to mediate any kind of peace process. Encourage both sides to negotiate differences, take a neutral stance between the two sides, and end financial aid to both sides.
Talk about moving the goalposts! Trump assured us that all the other presidents were idiots. That he was such a stable genius that he would solve all the problems in the world. It was easy, just be tough and the Mexicans will pay for the wall. Cuba and Venezuela would become thriving capitalist states. North Korea and Iran would give up their nuclear programs. And the Israel-Palestinian issue, even my idiot son-in-law can figure that one out.
And now you are making excuses. "No one else could figure it out". But isn't that why you elected a man with zero political experience, because he was a businessman and would get things done?
• Trump has this framed deceptively well: it is not a process, it is a deal. Take it or leave it. No deal = no 'process'. The proverbial 'pound sand' to the UN grifters, he has other deals to make. Palestinians: you're fired, so to speak.
Agreed. The "Palestinians" turned down the best offer they could ever get because Bill Clinton wanted a Peace Prize and pressured Barak so hard he lost the next election, left politics and moved to the US.
Freder and Cookie show us how useless it is to try to accommodate the left and Farmer shows the same in the Pat Buchanan right.
The Palestinians are a historical absurdity. Their grandfathers started a war and lost it. The Germans and Japanese did the same and have moved on. It's as if we had a small colony of Neanderthals still living somewhere and everybody seemed to want their opinion.
When the players don't want peace, you don't get peace.
America should support it's allies, fellow democracies, and states that share our values.
There's only one side in that conflict that checks those boxes.
As is normal at the WaPo, the true morons are the people shouting "Moron!"
tim maguire nails it. But don’t worry, tim, the paper may have stupid opinions written for morons, but at least the writing’s good.
I thought Bill Clinton negotiated peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. Oh yeah, the Palestinians walked away from the deal. Its like any kind of negotiation with them has a good chance at failure.
Freder and Cookie show us how useless it is to try to accommodate the left and Farmer shows the same in the Pat Buchanan right.
I assume that your solution involves genocide. That is your idea of not accommodating the left.
Palestinian leadership, both Hamas and PLO, sees no upside to them with a peace agreement. Downside is being killed.
The Palestinian leadership is doing well off the current situation / corruption.
And the radicalization of the Palestinians, and associated dehumanization of Jews continues.
Israel is threatened mostly from Lebanon, Gaza, and Syria. Iran and Qatar are major funders.
Encourage both sides to negotiate differences, take a neutral stance between the two sides, and end financial aid to both sides.
Nuts! I don’t see any point in refusing to express open one-sided support for Israel. The Palestinians in charge remind me of NGO rent-seekers whose sole purpose is to stir discontent among the natives and demand the triple damages necessary to get them to move on to the next red-lining bank or slumlord. But they never really move on. Like the Black Hand, they slide by weekly to wet their beaks.
Peace offers them no sustainable future as long as UN enablers and international lefties are willing to keep the filthy lucre flowing as payoffs to keep the ‘process’ going. If Trump knows how to do only ONE thing, it’s dealing with corrupt local ward bosses, zoning commissioners, building inspectors, community organizers, and union road agents. He must feel right at home in the Gaza and the West Bank.
- Krumhorn
the paper may have stupid opinions written for morons, but at least the writing’s good.
Hahahaha...I deeply admire our hostess, but good burn!
- Krumhorn
I assume that your solution involves genocide. That is your idea of not accommodating the left.
No, that is the Palestinian solution. I think they might call it "The Final Solution." You lefties are getting more and more comfortable with that, as illustrated by your Congressional mouthpieces.
Who are these "Jewish Leaders"? Are they Americans?
I assume that your solution involves genocide.
The only people proposing genocide as a solution are Palestinian.
I thought Bill Clinton negotiated peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. Oh yeah, the Palestinians walked away from the deal.
That was when I realized that the Palestinian leadership doesn't want a deal. I used to be very pro-Palestinian. I'm now quite the Zionist. (My friends from high school would be shocked by my current position)
And what does that mean? No matter how much you want to ignore the Israelis, they are still there. What is your solution? Ethnic cleansing? Wipe Israel off the map and kill all the Jews? That is the stated goals of all of the Palestinian leaders. You probably like the idea of genocide, which means the end of Israeli democracy.
I assume that your solution involves genocide. That is your idea of not accommodating the left.
Rabid foam-flecked lefties would have no argument at all if they couldn’t call normal folks Nazis, racists, homophobes, misogynists, white supremacists, or just plain genocidal haters. But they support abortion on demand without a flicker of self-awareness of their willingness to dismember massive numbers of inconvenient or otherwise defective innocent human beings.
Contrary to how the Fredors like to see themselves, they are the very evil heart of darkness.
- Krumhorn
"Any deal would be dead. This has nothing to do with the embassy. The Palestinians want no negotiations beyond NO ISRAEL."
Or, the Israelis want no negotiations beyond NO PALESTINE.
The Palestinians have been offered a two state solution and they walked away.
Talk about moving the goalposts! Trump assured us that all the other presidents were idiots. That he was such a stable genius that he would solve all the problems in the world." etc.
Man. I didn't know that there was anyone who took every word that leaves Donald Trump's mouth so seriously. Have you ever heard of hyperbole? It was obvious to everyone that this was his initial ask, and that a good outcome would be progress in any or all of these areas.
As far as the top WAPO comment is concerned:
"What a bunch of morons. Seriously. What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem? Why did they think prior presidents didn't do that? And now they think they can slide in with a peace plan.
Was never a big fan of the Three Stooges."
Why wouldn't he be a fan of the Three Stooges? Sounds a lot like Shemp actually. So, the movement of the embassy is an impediment to peace. Who knew? About as clueless as you can get but the fact that it is the top comment says all you need to know about the paper's readers.
And appealing to the authority of all of those previous presidents who didn't move the embassy? Comedy gold.
If it weren’t for Middle Eastern Muslim intractability and worldwide anti-Semitism this issue would be a non-issue. “Palestine” is a festering sore contributing nothing to the world beyond hatred and chaos, peddling a “right of return” for people who are not returners. It’s inhabitants do not, and never have, wanted a peaceful solution. They want Israeli Jews dead or gone, preferably dead.
The only non-political explanations for continuing the pretext that a negotiated settlement is possible in the face of Palestinian recalcitrance are monumental ignorance of the geopolitical and historical background of the conflict and/or anti-Semitism.
It is likely that Trump, Pompey and Kushner are aware of that even if Freder and the student snowflakes are not. Trump should say so and go all in for Israel. Palestine appeasers oppose him on most fronts anyway.
Is there any Soviet or Palestinian trope that you dont buy farmer, honestly now the Brits put haj Amin over his brother in charge in 1919, the next year was the first of seven intifada 1929, 1936, 1947, 1987 2000 and probably 2014.
Freder: "I assume that your solution involves genocide. That is your idea of not accommodating the left."
Tell me, Freder, what word do you use to describe the disappearance of the large Jewish and Christian populations that *used* to exist in the vastly larger remainder of the Middle East?
The word is farjud or itijihad in Turkish, the first roughly translates to pogrom to the second what was done to the Armenians
I wonder what word Freder uses to describe what's being done to Coptic Christians in Egypt right now, and for decades.
I wonder why Freder doesn't ever *actually* use that "G" word in that context, or in the context of the disappearance of any other Jewish or Christian populations, and *only* uses that "G" word when the much much smaller Palestinian population is involved.
Yep, it's a mystery.
@Michael K:
The Palestinians are a historical absurdity. Their grandfathers started a war and lost it.
It makes no sense to say that it was the "grandfathers" of the Palestinians who started the war. Even accepting the conventional view of the Six Day War, it was Nasser who triggered the war. But nonetheless, after the war the Israelis acceded to international agreements that specifically forbade the acquisition of territory by war and required the parties to enter into negotiations to dispose of the territories inhabited by the Arabs but occupied by the Israelis. Israel has violated this agreement by its annexation of pieces of the territory into the Israeli state. If you want to argue that Israel acquired the Gaza and the West Bank in the Six Day War, then its inhabitants would then become Israeli citizens. Instead, the Palestinians are kept in a state of limbo. The Israelis exert a great deal of control over their lives, and yet they have no capacity to involve themselves in Israeli politics, as they are not citizens of Israel. They are ultimately denied a right to self-determination, the basic right of nationalism. This is the ultimate source of the conflict. And as I've said, I think the conflict is vexed. I doubt there is a tenable solution in the short-term, and thus there is no reason to expel US international political capital on such a quixotic adventure.
There actually were some Palestinians who wanted some sort of reasonable solution. They called Arafat "The Tunisian" when he was brought back by Clinton from Tunisia where he had gone after the Palestinians were largely driven out of the Arab countries after they sided with Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War. Clinton's desire for a "peace plan" that would bring him a Nobel led to the Oslo Accords and the end of a peaceful solution.
The reason we moved the embassy is that no peace will ever be possible that does not accept the perpetuity of Israel as a Jewish state with Jerusalem as its capital. If the Arabs (of Palestine and elsewhere) wish to continue to fight and lose, they are free to do that. If they desire a better life for their people, they have to accept reality. Rightly or wrongly, some things have happened and are not going to unhappen.
It makes no sense to say that it was the "grandfathers" of the Palestinians who started the war. Even accepting the conventional view of the Six Day War, it was Nasser who triggered the war.<
I thought you knew some history. Ever heard of 1948 ?
Good grief !
@narciso:
Is there any Soviet or Palestinian trope that you dont buy farmer,
What have I written that is incorrect?
@ Frederson - YES! I think ethnic cleansing is an EXCELLENT idea! Fully annex Gaza and the West Bank and pay other countries to take the Palestinians. Either that, or wait for an American Democratic Administration to have Disney build a full-scale working model of the Holy Land in a desert somewhere, replete with fake Jews for the Palestinians to jeer, riot against, and have their excess children blow up as martyrs. Think "West World".
At the time of the 67 war Nasser held control of Gaza, like Jordan held the west bank.
There will never be peace in the Middle East until both sides want peace. That may happen some day, but not today and not in the foreseeable future.
Blogger Qwinn said...
“I wonder what word Freder uses to describe what's being done to Coptic Christians in Egypt right now, and for decades.”
“Imaginary.”
The most obvious explanation for lefties’ ongoing tolerance for the atrocities wrought by Islamists, particular ME and African Islamists is ignorance. Of course, it would be foolhardy to rule out malevolence as is the case with a couple of newly elected Congresswomen.
Actually, I like The Three Stooges.
Peace plans in the Middle East are a waste of time but it seems every US President has to roll one out. For the record.
@Michael K:
I thought you knew some history. Ever heard of 1948 ?
Good grief !
The "grandfathers" of the Palestinians would not have been alive in the 1940s. Perhaps the great-great-grandfathers. Also, the 1948 war is largely irrelevant to the current conflict. At the end of 48, Israel did not control the West Bank or the Gaza, and it is the disposition of those people that is at issue. The current conflict arose after 1967, when control of the Gazans and those in the West Bank was transferred from Egypt and Jordan to Israel.
PS: I like Oso Negro's plan.
The current conflict arose after 1967, when control of the Gazans and those in the West Bank was transferred from Egypt and Jordan to Israel.
No, the "current conflict" arose when the Arabs tried to kill all the Jews in what is now Israel. They started that war and lost it. The Muslims living in that area were told to leave and they could return as soon as the Jews were all dead. All of the history is related to that event. There are Palestinian families living in refugee camps that still have house keys allegedly to the houses they expected to return to. This is all connected to 1948. The 1967 war was another attempt to do what failed in 1948 and in 20 years of terrorist attacks.
Meanwhile all Jews living in the Middle East were driven out and ended up in Israel.
If it was closed doors, how would the press know what was discussed?
I've long felt that, it's in own way, the WaPo comment section is an even more rancid cesspool than twitter.
The “grandfathers” of the Palestinians would not have been alive in the 1940s. Perhaps the great-great-grandfathers.
Farmer thereby shows us his extraordinary innumeracy as to how long it's been since then, not to speak of how long people live. Lol!
(Or else he's just trolling us….)
FYI, a 30-year-old in 1950 (who might have fought in the '48 war), fathering a child in that year — who, in turn, turned 30 in 1980, fathering (or mothering) their dad's grandchild that year — that grandchild will then still be only 39 (!) this year (2019). “Perhaps the great-great-grandfathers,” indeed — not. (I think you're a troll, not that dumb.)
@Michael McNeil:
Farmer thereby shows us his extraordinary innumeracy as to how long it's been since then, not to speak of how long people live. Lol!
I won't cop to innumeracy, but I will admit to a poorly made point. Yes, obviously the grandchildren of some of the people who fought in the 48 war are alive and well. But they are actually a pretty small percentage of the population. The median age in the Gaza is around 17; it's 21 in the West Bank.
From haj Amin to Arafat to mazen, the path has been clear,
@Michael K:
This is all connected to 1948. The 1967 war was another attempt to do what failed in 1948 and in 20 years of terrorist attacks.
If we are going to wind back the clock, there is no need to stop at 1948. The origins of the problem are deeper than that, beginning with the Zionist movement in the late 19th century. The plan to move en masse to an area and that make it a state of your own was sure to spark a backlash from natives no matter where it was attempted. And that is precisely what it did.
And to the point of 1967, in what way are the Palestinians responsible for what Nasser did? The strategic value of the Gaza and the West Bank to Israel was strategic depth against Egypt, Syria, and Jordan. Israel has since signed peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, and the Syrian claims over the Golan Heights are a relatively small part of the conflict.
Nasser was their sponsor, another guest of his otto skorzeny helped train the fedayeen,
The reason the embassy move is such a stumbling block is because one of the three pillars of a negotiated solution is the status of East Jerusalem, which pretty much any Palestinian would expect to be the capital of a Palestinian. The Palestinians are not likely to accept an undivided East Jerusalem, just as the Israelis are not likely to accept the right of return. This is primarily why the negotiating process has been vexed.
No it isn't. The Israelis already offered East Jerusalem to the Palestinians — during Bill Clinton's administration and under his direct sponsorship (excepting the traditional Jewish Quarter of the Old City). Arafat on the Palestinian side flatly rejected the offer (which also included all of Gaza and 90% of the West Bank — notably, not fragmented) — thereupon launching his murderous Intifada.
The origins of the problem are deeper than that, beginning with the Zionist movement in the late 19th century. The plan to move en masse to an area and that make it a state of your own was sure to spark a backlash from natives no matter where it was attempted. And that is precisely what it did.
Well, if we want to get into heavy duty history, what about the Romans ?
In 66 AD, the First Jewish–Roman War began. The revolt was put down by the future Roman emperors Vespasian and Titus. In the Siege of Jerusalem in 70 AD, the Romans destroyed much of the Temple in Jerusalem and, according to some accounts, plundered artifacts from the Temple, such as the Menorah. Jews continued to live in their land in significant numbers, the Kitos War of 115-117 notwithstanding, until Julius Severus ravaged Judea while putting down the Bar Kokhba revolt of 132–136. 985 villages were destroyed and most of the Jewish population of central Judaea was essentially wiped out – killed, sold into slavery, or forced to flee.[8] Banished from Jerusalem, which was renamed Aelia Capitolina, the Jewish population now centered on Galilee,[9] initially at Yavneh.
@Michael McNeil:
No it isn't. The Israelis already offered East Jerusalem to the Palestinians — during Bill Clinton's administration and under his direct sponsorship (excepting the traditional Jewish Quarter of the Old City).
The Israelis never "offered East Jerusalem to the Palestinians." What was offered was a certain kind of custodianship over certain areas and civil administration of certain neighborhoods. Israel would maintain sovereignty. Both sides agreed that the status of East Jerusalem became a major stumbling block during negotiations at Camp David. Ehud Barak himself said that any sovereignty over East Jerusalem by the Palestinians would have to be "symbolic."
@Michael K:
Well, if we want to get into heavy duty history, what about the Romans ?
Are there are any other relevant dates you would like to cite between 136AD and the start of the first Aliyah in 1882 (one thousand, seven hundred and forty-six years later)?
"I wonder what word Freder uses to describe what's being done to Coptic Christians in Egypt right now, and for decades.”
I would call it ethnic cleansing or genocide. I don't know why you think I am enamored of the autocracies of the middle east. Also, I am not the one constantly calling for ethnic cleansing in this country or calling for summary execution of "traitors" or eliminating my political opponents. That is you guys.
And for all your bitching about the Muslims, you seem to forget that the only reason the UK reluctantly ceded Palestine to the Jews is that Hitler tried to exterminate European Jewry and Damn near succeeded
Palestinians want the Jewish people driven into the sea. Or killed. Either outcome is acceptable to them.
The Jewish people wish to live in Israel in peace.
There is no actual room for compromise there.
What Michael K said is correct: "Meanwhile all Jews living in the Middle East were driven out and ended up in Israel." Well, not all in Israel, some here, some there. Looks like once again the only safe place for Jews to live is the United States. And in some areas here that's problematical. What he left out- Christians have also been driven out from most of the Middle East.
There can be no peace plan that works if one side really doesn't desire peace. And that's the situation in Israel. It was that way when I was born, and will still be that when my grandchildren die. Anyone who thinks there is a mideast solution that doesn't involve completely killing off one side or the other is deluding themselves.
So, a a guy with no prior political experience fails JUST LIKE the multitude of guys with lots of political experience did. This is my shocked face. Trump started something by following the LAW and moving the embassy. It's up to the Israelis to move forward from that by continuing unilateral moves based on the obvious premise that Arabs in Gaza and Samaria and Judea (call them by their proper names) don't want peace.
No that wasnt the reason, they were broke that's why they handed over jurisdiction over grece Turkey to us and partitioned india.
you seem to forget that the only reason the UK reluctantly ceded Palestine to the Jews is that Hitler tried to exterminate European Jewry
Amateur historian Freder shows us once again why nobody pays attention to him. Does the name "Balfour" remind you of anything?
Of course not. The left wakes up every day to the first day of history,
Also it was the attlee regime which held ashamed of their history a little like Macron in france.
Freder: "I assume that your solution involves genocide.“
Two thoughts. First, hardline Arabs of the Omar-Tlaib-ISIS-Boko Haram-Muslim Brotherhood ilk are already killing Christians by the score in the Middle Eastvso turnabout is only fair. Second, people who run around saying “Death to Jews” deserve basically the same fate as the Nazis at the end of World War II. Call it genocide if it makes you feel good, but it seems like simple justice to me.
Question for you Freder. Do you think the Palestinians will stop murdering people until they face their own mortality?
@Big Mike:
Question for you Freder. Do you think the Palestinians will stop murdering people until they face their own mortality?
Granted this question was not directed at me, but it's worth responding to nonetheless. It demonstrates very well what an absurd notion you have what the actual conflict entails. A large number of Palestinians in the west Bank interact with Israeli Jews all the time in all sorts of contexts. You are proposing a cruel collective punishment in which all Palestinians are guilty of what some Palestinians do. The most perverse thing about the conflict is that both sides actually, Israel, and the corrupt Palestinian Authority benefit from its continuance. But nonetheless, a violent resistance movement is a fairly predictable response to occupation.
I long for an administration that doesn't try to solve the Palestinian problem- there isn't a solution, and that has been obvious for at least two decades now.
What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem?
Yeah. I mean, the Middle East is nothing but lollipops and unicorn farts.
Moving an embassy is just a bridge too far, I guess.
Idiots.
That he was such a stable genius that he would solve all the problems in the world.
You got a link to that quote, Freder?
Debating Farmer and Freder is an exercise in futility.
"‘It Is Useless To Attempt To Reason A Man Out Of A Thing He Was Never Reasoned Into"
Jonathan Swift.
"Amateur historian Freder shows us once again why nobody pays attention to him. Does the name "Balfour" remind you of anything?"
Well, yes it does. It reminds me th litany of lies and false promises the brits told to get people to help them defeat the Ottoman Empire.
Gee, my knowledge of history isn't very good. Tell me Michael K, did anything happen in the intervening 31 years that may have nudged th brits into actually implementing the balfour declaration.
@Farmer, who is better positioned to square around the extremist Palestinians than the moderate Palestinians who have learned to accommodate Israel? Group punishment works. Square them around or die alongside them.
ah yes, hamas lets trust them, they stem from the more islamist current in Palestinian politics, that goes back to 1936, the izz al qudim, (sic) yes they put the Palestinian leadership to a vote in gaza, and guess what happened, they put hamas in power and have kept it so for nearly 15 years now,
btw, the dead north Korean official, might be alive, although the chosun ibo says otherwise,
"Occupation". Good grief.
The most perverse thing about the conflict is that both sides actually, Israel, and the corrupt Palestinian Authority benefit from its continuance. But nonetheless, a violent resistance movement is a fairly predictable response to occupation.
What areas are occupied?
Tell me Michael K, did anything happen in the intervening 31 years that may have nudged th brits into actually implementing the balfour declaration.
So, you had actually heard of it ! You might follow up with a history of Churchill.
Blogger Freder Frederson said...
Israel just has to grind it out.
And what does that mean? No matter how much you want to ignore the Palestinians, they are still there. What is your solution? Ethnic cleansing?
Ending Palestinian terrorism is my idea:
Every time a Palestinian makes a terrorist attack on Israel or an Israeli, Israel should set off a mid sized fuel-air explosive over his family's home.
Every 10 attacks, double the size of the FAE set off.
Keep on doing this until there are no more Palestinians, or else the ones who are left desire peace more than they desire murdering Jews.
What do You desire Freder? A "right of return" that ends Israel? Something else that leads to all the Jews getting murdered?
Tell us exactly what you want, and why you think it can be accomplished.
Because without that, your posts aren't worth the electrons needed to view them
J. Farmer said...
@Big Mike:
Question for you Freder. Do you think the Palestinians will stop murdering people until they face their own mortality?
Granted this question was not directed at me, but it's worth responding to nonetheless. It demonstrates very well what an absurd notion you have what the actual conflict entails. A large number of Palestinians in the west Bank interact with Israeli Jews all the time in all sorts of contexts. You are proposing a cruel collective punishment in which all Palestinians are guilty of what some Palestinians do.
No, we are proposing that all Palestinians are responsible for what all Palestinians do.
The Palestinian "governments" give money to the families of terrorists who attack / kill Jews.
The Palestinians go out in the streets and celebrate when jews get murdered by terrorists.
Until the Palestinian "moderates" are willing to stop those things, they are guilty of them, and should be punished for them.
Oh, and there is no "Isreali occupation." The Jews pulled out, and left the Palestinians to run themselves. For which their reward is people like you still pretending they are "occupying" the Palestinians.
Freder Frederson said...
And for all your bitching about the Muslims, you seem to forget that the only reason the UK reluctantly ceded Palestine to the Jews is that Hitler tried to exterminate European Jewry and Damn near succeeded
And it still breaks your heart that he failed to kill them all, doesn't it.
Ending Palestinian terrorism is my idea:
So your solution is, indeed, genocide.
I'll remind you that this was indeed what the Germans did in Eastern Europe. Killed a lot of innocent people, but did not solve the problem of partisans.
And it still breaks your heart that he failed to kill them all, doesn't it.
This is rich! Someone literally suggesting a solution out of the Nazi playbook is calling me a Nazi.
I long for an administration that doesn't try to solve the Palestinian problem- there isn't a solution, and that has been obvious for at least two decades now.
I agree, but would go back much further than two decades.
The Palestinians have had the misfortune of having crime syndicate bosses as their leaders. The Arafat and Abbas families are multi-billionaires thanks to the generosity of the Gulf State and the UN whose "aid" they have skimmed for decades. It is not in the business interests of the leadership to solve the Palestinian problem.
Follow the money.
You could ask lord moyne and count Bernadette what changed, it may take a while for an answer.
What is your solution? Ethnic cleansing? Annex all the occupied territories and Gaza and make the Palestinians full citizens? That is the end of the Jewish State. You probably like the idea of Apartheid, which means the end of Israeli democracy.
Transfer is the answer. Either all of them, or you separate the sheep from the goats, and all the goats get gentle handling onto first class transport, with all their stuff, and sent somewhere else. Syria, Jordan, the Empty Quarter, Malaysia, wherever they can be comfortable among their co-religionists in an Islamic society.
If then they make their hosts uncomfortable and get slaughtered, well, we tried.
It also could be done less nicely if they don't cooperate.
Freder Frederson said...
Ending Palestinian terrorism is my idea:
So your solution is, indeed, genocide.
Freder Frederson said...
And it still breaks your heart that he failed to kill them all, doesn't it.
This is rich! Someone literally suggesting a solution out of the Nazi playbook is calling me a Nazi.
Bzzt.
It's is the Palestinians who want the "kill all the Jews" solution out of the Nazi playbook, and YOU who want them to get it.
My solution is only "genocide" if the Palestinians refuse to accept peace with Israel, which is to say, it's only "genocide" if the Palestinians will not stop until they've murdered all the Jews.
Your surety that my solution is "genocide" therefore states that you, personally, believe the Palestinians are all in on "murder all the Jews".
Yet you're still on their side.
Which must mean that YOU are all in on "murder all the Jews"
Which must mean that YOU are all in on "murder all the Jews"
Freder is a hard leftist with no original ideas. An original idea and a drink of cold water might kill him.
The political left has chosen the Muslims as the next victim group. The Muslims sometimes fail to cooperate by killing large numbers of infidels but the left is equal to this. They don't care. They consider killing Jew as very late term abortions and you know how they live abortions,
Secular Jews, just as in 1935 Germany, consider this talk distasteful.
I wonder if Freder knows about al Husseini ?
Do I have to teach this idiot history ?
His opposition to the British peaked during the 1936–1939 Arab revolt in Palestine. In 1937, evading an arrest warrant, he fled Palestine and took refuge successively in the French Mandate of Lebanon and the Kingdom of Iraq, until he established himself in Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. During World War II he collaborated with both Italy and Germany by making propagandistic radio broadcasts and by helping the Nazis recruit Bosnian Muslims for the Waffen-SS (on the ground that they shared four principles: family, order, the leader and faith). Also, as he told the recruits, Germany had not colonized any Arab country while Russia and England had.[15] On meeting Adolf Hitler he requested backing for Arab independence and support in opposing the establishment in Palestine of a Jewish national home. At the end of the war he came under French protection, and then sought refuge in Cairo to avoid prosecution for war crimes.
Jeeeez !
What do You desire Freder? A "right of return" that ends Israel? Something else that leads to all the Jews getting murdered?
The "Right of Return" resembles AMLO's plans for US open borders. The Palestinians are unskilled in anything but bomb making and not too skilled at that. If they could not steal what the Israelis have built in the desert, they would starve. Only the UN keeps them alive, plus of course payments to families of suicide bombers.
I noted years old when I read 'agents of influence' ramlawi, aka ali Salameh, had a conversation, about an Elder Palestinian, who said he admired Israel for it's religious faith, since Arafat was maybe forty five, at the time of the events, I realized he was referring to Haj Amin Husseini, who lived till about 80,
People keep talking about a "two-state solution" as if it hasn't already been tried for the last 13 years and failed.
The response of the Palestinians to the end of Israeli occupation of Gaza and the opportunity to run their own state has been to empower Hamas and engage in repeated wars against Israel. Only an utter idiot would respond to that by ending the occupation of the West Bank, and the Israelis aren't utter idiots.
Unfortunately, nobody on the international stage is willing to tolerate the only possible path to actual peace, which is to copy the model used in Europe after World War II -- the forced resettlement of hostile populations beyond defensible frontiers.
Gaza should become as Jewish as Königsberg is Russian. Ramallah should become as Jewish as Danzig is Polish. The Palestinian Arabs can go make new lives in Jordan or Syria or Egypt just as the Sudeten Germans made new lives in Germany and Austria.
The response of the Palestinians to the end of Israeli occupation of Gaza and the opportunity to run their own state has been to empower Hamas and engage in repeated wars against Israel.
Yes, they cannot be allowed into civilized society. They are savages.
Hopefully they have better sources than curveball:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1135900/Iran-news-World-War-3-nuclear-weapon-German-intelligence-conflict-Middle-East-latest
@Greg P:
Oh, and there is no "Isreali occupation." The Jews pulled out, and left the Palestinians to run themselves. For which their reward is people like you still pretending they are "occupying" the Palestinians.
No, the occupation has never ended. Responsibility for certain civil administration functions were handed over to the PA, but Israel maintains control over the sovereignty of the West Bank and the Gaza. Israel maintains control over land border crossings, the maritime border, and the airspace. In addition, the Palestinians who live within or near settlements are subject to limitations on their movements and IDF administrative rules. \
@Michael K:
Yes, they cannot be allowed into civilized society. They are savages.
Israel has every right to defend its internationally recognized borders and not permit anyone into them it does not wish to. That is the essence of nationalisn. What Israel does not have the right to do is rule over a stateless people in territory outside its borders. That is imperialism and is antithetical to nationalism.
Gaza was always a scrap heap, but the qataris don't fund it out of the goodness of their hearts it's a power projection site against Israel
@narciso:
Israel undoubtedly finds itself in a neighborhood with less than ideal neighbors. It is not an uncommon condition in the Middle East. But it still does not give Israel the right to rule over foreign populations. Syria had to deal with the Saudis and the Turks funding Sunni terror groups in its country. However, no one would accept Syria's right to permanently occupy Saudi and Turkish territory.
It has enough reclaiming Idlib against rurkish Saudi and qatari proxies, the irony of course is the allies allow sanctuary for the army of conquest the al queda umbrella in Syria, that makes no sense.
What Israel does not have the right to do is rule over a stateless people in territory outside its borders.
Unless they are constantly attacking you, This is the essence of national borders.
That goes back a thousand years. Maybe four thousand.
Speaking of George W. Bush’s “religion of peace,” I see that a bunch of them got together and decapitated a Catholic nun.
. Farmer said...
@Greg P:
Oh, and there is no "Israeli occupation." The Jews pulled out, and left the Palestinians to run themselves. For which their reward is people like you still pretending they are "occupying" the Palestinians.
No, the occupation has never ended. Responsibility for certain civil administration functions were handed over to the PA, but Israel maintains control over the sovereignty of the West Bank and the Gaza. Israel maintains control over land border crossings, the maritime border, and the airspace. In addition, the Palestinians who live within or near settlements are subject to limitations on their movements and IDF administrative rules.
Ok, so:
1: We're in agreement that the definition of a "sovereign country" is one that controls it's own borders. Which means you agree it's right and proper for Trump to want to build a wall to keep foreigners out, that Brexit is the right thing for the UK to do, and that people pushing "open borders" are essentially engaging in war against the US. Cool! So glad we can agree on that!
2: I didn't say the PA was a real nation. If they want to become a real nation, they first have to agree to actual peace with Israel. What I said was that Israel isn't "occupying" Palestine. And we're both in agreement on that: "Responsibility for civil administration functions were handed over to the PA" (sorry, but the "certain" qualifier is BS. The PA and Hamas run the show inside the areas. They don't control their borders, because they're both still at war with Israel, and the Israelis aren't suicidal).
3: All the Palestinians need in order to get control of their borders is to stop being terrorist scum waging war against the most decent and worthwhile country in the Middle East. I am continually amazed at what monsters people like you are, embracing terrorists who eagerly murder small children, over hard working and productive people who just want to be left alone to live their own lives.
What is the depravity in your soul, such that you instinctively side with the baby killers?
Tell me Michael K, did anything happen in the intervening 31 years that may have nudged th brits into actually implementing the balfour declaration.
Certainly something happened. In 1947 the recently constituted (and then at its maximum prestige), incipient “World Government” (as many then thought), United Nations — via its General Assembly body — set up the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP), asking it to report back on “the question of Palestine.”
The majority report of the committee when it came out recommended terminating the U.K.'s old (UN predecessor the) League of Nations' “mandate” that it administer Palestine — proposing setting up in place of the former “Mandatory Palestine” two side-by-side states, one Jewish, one Arab — with Jerusalem to be left as an internationally administered neutral city.
On 1947-11-29 the UN General Assembly, via Resolution 181(II) adopted the UNSCOP committee's majority report. Subsequently, however, the U.K. did nothing to implement the UN decision — showing just how committed they were to the idea.
Everyone is still busy creating new facts on the ground. The time for negotiations isn't there yet.
Post a Comment