Originally Posted by JavaBlack

This is assuming that the status a "one nation" will keep the ethnic groups from fighting and whatever regime rules from distributing resources by ethnic criteria.
A nation has more stake than a disenfranchised group within a very split country.
I think the "one state" vision really overlooks the difficulty in this level of ethnic conflict. In subsaharan Africa conflict at this level in "one nation" has led to failed states.

I like the "one state" ideally... a single secular nation where different people get along.
But it just isn't going to work in that region right now.
So we'll have to settle for having two ethno-nationalist states... It beats one ethno-nationalist state and one stateless ethnic group with daggers in its eyes.


If Palestine were a nation, there would be more protection for its resources.


If Palestine were a sovereign nation, they could not do that without paying.


Something they could not do if Palestine was a nation.

Originally Posted by i.beletesri

DOES ISRAEL USE 'PALESTINIAN' WATER?
April 2000

[......]

Thus, even in the 1950s Israel used 93% of the Western Aquifer's water, and 82% of the Northeastern Aquifer's water.
Today, Israel's share of these aquifers has Declined to 83% and 80%, respectively. That is, under Israeli administration the Palestinian share of these aquifers has actually Increased.

In addition, over 40 MCM (million cubic meters) of water per year from sources within Israel is piped over the Green Line for Palestinian use in the West Bank.
Ramallah, for example, receives over 5 MCM annually from Israeli sources. Israel sends another 4 MCM annually over its border for Palestinian use in the Gaza Strip.
Thus, it is the Palestinians who are using Israeli water.

And not just the Palestinians. Despite its own meager supply, Israel annually provides 600,000 CM of water to ten otherwise dry villages in South Lebanon, and, as a favor to the late King Hussein, more than 55 MCM annually to Jordan. Perhaps no other country, facing the severe shortages that Israel does, has shared so much water with so many of its neighbors.

A Factual Look at Middle East Water Issues

1. What are Israel's Water Sources?

Israel has 3 main water sources: the Sea of Galilee, the Coastal Aquifer, and the Western and Northern Aquifers of the so-called Mountain Aquifer. Together these sources have a safe annual yield of roughly 1350 MCM.

The Galilee and the Coastal Aquifer are both entirely Within the pre-1967 borders of Israel, and both were extensively developed and used by Jewish residents even during the period of the British Mandate (that is, well before 194. Therefore, charges that Israel is using "Palestinian water" usually center on the Western and Northern Aquifers, which straddle the border between pre-1967 Israel and the West Bank.

The Western Aquifer

The Western Aquifer, with a safe annual yield of roughly 360 MCM, is fed by rain falling on the western slopes of the West Bank's Judean and Samarian mountains. The water percolates through porous surface rock into the aquifer far below the surface, and then naturally flows downwards toward the Israeli coastline. Prevented from actually reaching the coast by natural hydrologic barriers, the water instead emerges in Natural springs which are almost Entirely in Israel.

As Early as the 1950s Israel used 95% of the Western Aquifer's Water

Most of the Western Aquifer's water is stored Under Israel, and the water is easily accessible only where the storage area approaches the surface. This accessible region is almost entirely within Israel. As a result, already by the 1950s Israel was using about 95% of the aquifer's water, the rest being used by Arab farmers in the West Bank towns of Qalqilya and Tulkarem, via springs and wells. Both towns are literally within meters of the border with pre-1967 Israel.

Assertions that gaining control of the West Bank in 1967 has allowed Israel to use "Palestinian water" from the Western Aquifer are therefore completely Specious.

The Northern Aquifer

2. How Much Water does Israel Consume?

Currently an average of 360 MCM are drawn from the Western Aquifer annually, with 340 MCM drawn within Israel, and 20 MCM drawn by Palestinians in the West Bank. However, not all the water drawn within Israel is used within Israel – more than 40 MCM are pumped over the Green Line for use by the Palestinians.
Israel's share of the Western Aquifer's water, which was 95% prior to 1967, has declined to 83%, while the Palestinian share of the aquifer's water has significantly increased.

Similarly, an average of 128 MCM are drawn from the Northern Aquifer annually, with 103 MCM used within Israel from Israeli sources, and 25 MCM used by Palestinians in the West Bank, mostly supplying the Jenin area. Israel's share of the Northern Aquifer's water, at 82% prior to 1967, has Declined to 80%.
In other words, since 1967 the proportion of the Northern Aquifer's waters used by Palestinians has increased.

3. What About Palestinian Consumption?

In the period from 1967 to 1995 West Bank Palestinians increased their domestic water use by 640%, from 5.4 MCM to 40 MCM. By way of comparison, in the same 28 year period Israeli domestic usage increased by just 142%.

This Huge jump in Palestinian consumption was possible only because Israel drilled or permitted the drilling of over 50 new wells for the Palestinian population, laid hundreds of kilometers of new water mains and connected hundreds of Palestinian villages and towns to the newly built water system.

Palestinian sources broadly confirm this picture. For example, Taher Nassereddin, Director General of the West Bank Water Department, has stated that:

[Palestinian] consumption for domestic purposes has Increased as a result of population growth and that there were no severe restrictions on drilling new wells for these purposes.

It is important to note, however, that for political reasons some Palestinian villages and towns refused to be hooked up to the new main water system, and may therefore not have a reliable water supply today....

4. Israel Supplies Water to the Palestinians, Jordan, and Lebanon

Contrary to charges that Israel uses Arab water, the reality is the Reverse: Israel has supplied, from its own sources, Large amounts of water to Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza, to the Kingdom of Jordan, and to a number of villages in South Lebanon.

Meanwhile, Jordan has not supplied the West Bank with any water since 1967, despite its obligation, under international legal guidelines, to supply 70-150 MCM annually.


Israeli Water TO the Palestinians

More than 40 MCM annually is pumped within Israel and piped over the Green Line for Palestinian use in the West Bank. The Ramallah area alone, through its independent Palestinian water utility, receives more than 5 MCM annually from Israeli sources.

In addition, Israel also supplies more than 4 MCM annually to the Gaza Strip through the Kissufim Line of the National Water Carrier, serving the Palestinian localities of El-Bureij, Moazi, Abason, Bani Suheila and Khan Yunis.


Israeli Water TO Jordan

Under their peace agreement Israel agreed to supply, or arrange for the supply of, an additional 55 MCM of water annually to Jordan. Until the development of new desalinization plants, all of the additional water is coming directly from Israeli sources. In recent years Israel has supplied Jordan with 75 MCM annually, or roughly 20 MCM more water than was agreed upon.


Israeli Water TO Lebanon

Ten otherwise dry Southern Lebanese villages receive 600,000 CM of water annually from wells within Israel. A ten-inch pipe, for example, runs from Israel to the Lebanese village of R'meish.

5. How does Israeli Water Use Compare to that of its Neighbors?

Many media reports have portrayed Israel as a profligate user of water. The July 27, 1999 NPR report claimed that "the average Israeli consumes about six times more water than the average Palestinian." NPR's claim is grossly incorrect. While Israelis, both Jewish and Arab, use more water per capita than Palestinians, the actual ratio is far less than six. In 1995, ie, Israel's annual per capita usage was 308 CM... while for West Bank Palestinians usage was 124 CM, a ratio of 2.5.
Moreover, among countries in the immediate area, Israel has the second Lowest annual per capita usage: Syria's is 1089 CM, Egypt's is 921, Lebanon's is 444, and Jordan's is 201.

It is also instructive to look at the trend of Israeli water use. In the ten year period from 1984/85 to 1995, for example, Israel's population grew by 32%, but its water use grew by just 3.3%, a sign of the country's great efforts at water conservation and efficiency...

In contrast, during the same period Jordan's population increased by 59%, but its water use increased by 113%. Similarly, in this period Syria's population grew by 38%, but use of drinking water grew by 43%.

6. Shared Water: Legal Guidelines

Many media reports have uncritically accepted false Palestinian charges that Israeli water policies violate international law.

The relevant legal norms are the Helsinki Rules (1966) as supplemented by the Seoul Rules (1986), which according to a leading authority state that the actual needs of communities take precedence over the natural properties of the water course, and that among the needs, priority is given to past and existing uses, at the expense of potential uses.

Thus, Israel's first and continuing use of downstream water resources which flow towards the country from the West Bank is justified by generally accepted legal guidelines. These same guidelines have been invoked, for example, by Egypt, regarding the Nile (Egypt is downstream from Ethiopia, Sudan and Kenya), and by Jordan regarding the Yarmuk (Jordan is downstream from Syria).

In light of the above, it is striking that Israel, chronically short of water, and suffering from a terrible drought, continues to generously share the precious resource with neighbors despite being falsely charged with profligate use of stolen water.

http://christianactionforisrael.org/...r00/water.html

Originally Posted by Lackluster

You can't be that ignorant of the traditional devices used to elicit resentment against Jews, can you? Yeah, like jewish "wealth" has never been used to stir up resentment against them.

Originally Posted by Lackluster

Also, do you REALLY think that when a Jew does move to Israel that the government just ups and evicts one of it's Arab residents to make way? .

Originally Posted by Lackluster

and again, you show zero ability at recognizing framing devices. Jews are portrayed as Rich, and Palestinians as poor and downtrodden.

Originally Posted by Lackluster

THis is an appeal to emotion rater than intellect because it creates an image crafted by the one framing the issue guaranteed to elicit sympathy for one at the expense of the other..

Originally Posted by Lackluster

That you so completely miss the manipulativeness of such a device does not speak well of your political acumen...

Originally Posted by Lackluster

THe original context involved much speciousness from Zoe in which she tried to portray Palestinians as so distinct from their fellow Arabs that about the only thing they had in common is language. The truth of the matter is that until the advent of the Zionist movement, there WERE no Palestinians as we know them today, as these Arabs simply referred to themselves as Arabs....

Originally Posted by Lackluster

When it comes to dispossession, MORE Jews fled Arab lands than Arabs fled land now considered Israel. Can you understand that, Java --MORE Jews than Arabs became refugees. Any attempt to obfuscate this fact is a product of propaganda and not reason and the fact that some of these Arabs decided to call themselves something else a few decades ago does not diminish this fact.

Originally Posted by Lackluster

What I have to say is based upon my being aware of the situation since it was piqued in 1967 due to the six day war and in 1968 when my presidential candidate was murdered. In addition, I have read 20-30 books on the rise of the National socialist movement and the Holocaust, and I have a good understanding of the rhetorical devices used by demagogues to stir up resentment as a political tool. Over the past 4 decades I have kept abreast of the situation in the region, and have come to my own understanding in ways quite beyond just the mere repetition of politically correct buzz terms and framing devices. .

Originally Posted by Lackluster

How about you? What kind of thought do you put in to your statements in this regard?

Originally Posted by HelloDollyLlama

The fact remains that people do have inalienable rights, independent of what the UN or any other governing body does.

Originally Posted by HelloDollyLlama

First you argue that the UN is the only body that can confer legitimacy, and then you say that the UN violated that legitimacy by creating Israel?

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

It was back before most people arguing on this forum were born.

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

But looking at the full context of the paragraph rather than getting gobsmacked by the demographic terms... the "wealth" had a purpose to the point rather than being a nonsequiter insult. And it was clearly an example created for context rather than a blanket remark.

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

No, but there are settlers moving into contested areas. I would think population growth is partially related.

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

Are you suggesting that there are wealthy Palestinians? Jews are generally well-off, not every single individual Jew obviously... but anyone living in America, minus a domestically abused homeless person in gang territory, is wealthy compared to a Palestinian.

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

Was it untrue? If I show you a starving kid in Africa will you accuse me of appealing to emotion rather than intellect? Maybe. But if it's that emotionally rousing AND true, perhaps there's a point.
But it seemed to me the difference in standard of living between n American Jew and a Palestinian anything was accurately portrayed... and there are some very empirical differences based in class and wealth differences, not just emotion.

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

And is overlooking the entire point over an accusation of antisemitism somehow less an appeal to emotion?

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

I guess it depends on where you're standing. That you saw it there appears to me to speak of obsessiveness.

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

And my point throughout in various places is... it's decades later. The Palestinians are different now, aren't they? And they have to live somewhere.


And how many Jews are still in refugee camps? I'm missing the point a bit.
I want to fix now, not yesterday.

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

And I've become rather familiar with how people generalize practically everything to the Nazis. It doesn't help much.

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

I'm generally thinking about the context of the people I am debating with TODAY about what is going on TODAY,

Originally Posted by Jellah

http://ilanpappe.com/?p=58

Here is a debate betwee Ilan Pappe and Uri Avnery about whether the solution is to become 2 states or should they go forward as one state with equal rights for all citizens.

It must be recognized that Palestinians have legitimate claim to live there as its been their home for thousands of years and that they are natives to the lands as well.

Its a very interesting debate between two Israelis who do seek a peaceful solution and have care for all those involved.

Ultimately, I think no matter what the WISH is for anyone....only a one state solution is now possible. I think Israel has already changed facts on the ground so much that it could not really be reversed. Too much land has been taken by Israel and there isnt enough left upon which to create a viable nation.

It seems to me peace would be achieved much faster if this is recognized and acted upon. Absorb all Palestinian territory and all have citizenship and equal rights and the state focuses on how to integrate the society into a cohesive nation that follows a democratic process and allows the citizens to vote and determine the direction of the nation. An end to "jewish only" roads and programs..and an end to ethnic cleansing of any sort.

Originally Posted by Nicholas the 8,358,353rd

Ok, humor aside, I like the one-state solution. The place could be a beacon for Muslim-Jew solidarity. And a lighthouse for the future, when religion and race are irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Ferris

They've expect to have more ground water in ten years...