Why this Intifada matters even more then any before.

This isn't the first time that Israel and Hamas have gone head to head against each other, resulting in the deaths of hundreds. This thread is not about whether or not Hamas' and Israel's actions are good or bad, it's to point out something that I don't see many people talking about. This is nothing more then my chance to highlight something that the news or even ourselves haven't realized yet.

Back in 2012, Palestine became a country, technically an Observer state but, it's still a sovereign country. Sovereign countries have all sorts of powers. The ability to tax its citizens, to raise a military, to pass laws, and important to this thread, punish its civilians when they break laws. It goes back to the notion that states control what happens in their borders.

So why does this matter? Remember, Hamas and Gaza are part of Palestine, which is now a sovereign country. So when Gaza does something, say launches rockets into Israel, the question becomes; who has the right to stop the rockets?

To answer this question, I'm going to pose a simple question. Let's say there was a group of Americans that didn't like Canada, and so attacked them. Who, from an American point of view, would you rather resolve the issue? Canada's military, or the US military? Even though Canada is the injured party, the American would want the US military to resolve the issue. Why? It goes back to the notion of sovereignty. The US controls the territory, so the US should respond to problems like this. To be fair towards Canada, they could attack. It wouldn't be the first time that a country invades another to protect it's own sovereignty. The Boxer Rebellion in China is a good example of this. But it still undermines the notion that the US should be ruling that piece of territory, as it disgraces the government, and the notion of American sovereignty.

When Hamas attacks Israel, and Israel is the one that responds, it's undermining Palestinian sovereignty. It's weakening the notion that Palestinians can rule themselves. If Palestine has sovereignty, then they should be able to;
1.Raise an army.
2.Have taxes to support the army.
3. Stop Hamas from attacking by using the army.



Because Israel hasn't given them chance to respond, Israel's answer is clear. Palestine is not a country, unless we say it is. Giving the fact that Netanyahu doesn't care,(""This is a meaningless decision that will not change anything on the ground. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made it clear that there will be no establishment of a Palestinian state without a settlement that ensures the security of Israel's citizens,"")http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...homicides-compare-with-the-rest-of-the-world/

this really becomes a question over whether or not Israel still has the right to use military force in a sovereign country. Like I said earlier, historical evidence to say they can, but the fact remains that every time an Israeli rocket kills a Palestinian, it's a slap in the face to Abbas and the notion of a free Palestine. That's why this Intifada matters. It's not a question of Hamas or Israel trying to stop each other, it's a question as to whether or not Palestine can be a real country, when another is purposefully trying to undermine the power of the PLA has over Palestine.

 

I'm not pushing any agenda here on this point, I just want to know, if Israel used to be palestine proper, and Jordan used to be the transjordan/eastern palestine under the british mandate, why would the refugees choose the name palestine? Especially since Gaza was previously Egyptian and the West Bank was previously Jordanian. Maybe there would be less confusion if perhaps a state for the refugees had a different name. What name that would be, I don't know. But I'm serious about this Ariel Sharon was born in Kfar Malal, Palestine (again not an official nation, but a region.) He was a palestinian jew (with recent ancestors from europe of course, but still having ancient ties to palestine, and a palestinian in the pre 48 sense nonetheless), but with the establishment of the modern state of Israel, he became an Israeli Jew.

I understand somewhat the idea of the refugees of gaza and the west bank wanting a state of their own that is not jewish or hebrew speaking (regardless of which nations started the 48 war). And I'm not against this. The refugees are now here and are suffering in poor conditions, they obviously will not be absorbed into Israel or neighboring arab states, and want their independence (its nearly a whole new generation of arab youth....who wouldn't want independence from military occupation whatever the reasons?) But its the name 'palestine' that strikes me as odd and that might be a big part of the resistance of many people to idea of a palestinian state.

I would be for a state for the refugees, but could there ever be a discussion on perhaps a better name, rather than a now defunct ottoman province (and later british territory) that was already divided into two states? Any ideas?

I don't want the refugees to suffer, and its fair for the good ones to have their own identity, separate from that of the Israeli arabs. Also, do you think the israeli arabs would leave israel and become citizens of this new state for the territories? Or would they prefer life as Israeli arabs and the living conditions in Israel and keep their current nationality? Anyone is free to give feedback. This question has troubled me for some time.

 

You have given a wonderful description of the situation prevailing now.
There will never be a 'Palestine State' in the heart of the Jewish Patrimony... I am for Arab Self-Determination in their towns and villages... that is all... they like it fine with me... they do not... well there are still 21 Arab States created for this purpose and the choice is theirs.

 

There are not 21 "created Arab states".. Arabs have always lived there.. They didn't migrate from Europe or Russia.

Some serious study might help you overcome this horrid sense of entitlement.. The Jews were a late invention.

There was no grand kingdom of David or Solomon.. There were just Canaanites living there.

 

Arabs have not always lived there. Most migrated and took over canaan/israel/palestine/ during the islamic conquests after the 6th century AD. Jesus was not an arab, although of course some pre-islamic arabians who were nomadic lived throughout the ancient near east. And yes the modern arab states are just as much modern creations as Israel. Many were formed out of french mandates and british mandates around the same time. Iraq itself is a modern state. It is governed by arabs, even though much of the iraqi population isn't arab, but kurdish, jewish, turkmen, assyrian, etc. Jordan, Syria, Saudi Arabia are all modern creations.

Most of the Israeli Jewish population didn't come from Europe or Russia but rather from north africa, the middle east, and central asia. And a sizeable community of jews always lived in Israel. My family migrated to Israel from Iraq. I also have family that lived in Israel for centuries.

And no, jews are not a late invention, we have existed for thousands of years. We aren't canaanites. We came from mesopotamia, modern iraq, originally.

 

Not true.. We know 4 Arab tribes were settled in Samaria in 700 BC by Sargon2.. If you believe in the Bible fiction, you know that Arabs were in Palestine at the time of Abraham and they were in Jerusalem at the time of Ezra on the return from the Babylonian exile.

You mean they came from Ur.. That's Basra which was settled by Marsh Arabs from Eastern Saudi Arabia 6,000 years ago.

 

I just said some pre-islamic arabs were scattered about the ancient near east.

As far as Ur, thats in mesopotamia, in Sumer specifically. The Chaldeans also settled there later. The Chaldeans (Bit-Iakin) were an aramaic speaking tribe who later formed the neo-babylonian dynasty under Nabopolassar.

Saudi Arabia didn't exist as a country until modern times, meaning in the past century.

 

The only situation that will bring peace and quite to the Middle East is when Jordan becomes Palestine.

 

My dear,

You seem to be a misinformed Arab raised on the knees of a historical delusion. It is also apparent now that you are towing the Arab Propaganda line (this fallacious wishful thinking) propagated from father to son... It is also obvious that you and yours have swallowed this line hook and sinker... All your generous misinformation is based on MYTHS...

One of the myths connected to the Arab Israeli conflict, is that Israel and the whole of "Mandatory Palestine" before it, was stolen from the Arabs as a result of "Imperialist Machinations," and was settled by Alien Jews.

When one reads, contentious statements, i.e. quote: "Israel sits on land of Palestine, inhabited mostly by émigré Jews who had never set a foot in Palestine" the reader is under the impression that such an assertion is correct in every aspect, and, has received blessings and approbation from the enlightened communities of the world.

Nothing is further than the truth! Jews are not Aliens to their land Archeology proves that! "Jesus the Jewish prophet" (accepted as such by the Muslim religion), was born there whilst Judea and Israel (two Jewish Kingdoms) were under the yoke of the Roman Empire.

The Arabs speak ARABIC the foreign Language of the Arab Peninsula... [Arab = Arabia] does it ring any bells? The Arab practice the Religion of Mohammed [now called Islam...] that was supposedly instilled in him by an Angel [IT WAS STARTED IN ARABIA] now called ‘Saudi Arabia’ on the name of the “SAUDI FAMILY” Dynasty...

The Jews claim Israel through History and Archeology... on the other hand, the Arabs claiming Palestine have not left any neither historical nor archeological remnants/artifacts to illustrate and substantiate their (fatuous/illusory nonsense) their claim to the ‘Land of the Jews’ for they came mostly from the surrounding conquered countries and were nomads and polytheists… It is obvious now; that the only vestige they left is the droppings of their sheep and camels.

So where is the contention that the ‘Land of the Jews’ was stolen from the Arabs?

21 x Arab countries www.4arabs.com

Algeria,
Bahrain
Comoros
Djibouti
Egypt
Iraq
Jordan
Kuwait
Lebanon
Libya
Mauritania
Morocco
Oman
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Somalia
Sudan
Syria
Tunisia
UAE
Yemen

Why don't you try finding out the history of the above named countries and how they were created?

 

First, Sargon II was the king of Assyria between the years 721-705 BC- 5 years before he settled in Samaria 4 Arab tribes, as you said.

Second, if the 4 Arabs tribes been settled in Samaria by a king, it means that they really didnt have any conacction to the land, they just came there for probably to build things to the king and all that.
It is like when 10 Italian men, for exemple, will go to Franch to get more work opportunities there, does it means that those 10 Italians belong to Franch? no, same with those 4 Arab tribes.
BUT the decendens of those 4 tribes that stayed in Samaria and now they live in the West Bank can rule themselves on their Arab cities however they like- like they did and still doing!

The book of Ezra refering to the period of the Returning of Zion, which occourd in the 6th century BC-, and also is refering to Yehud Mdinta, a Jewish rule in Judea, his second name was Province of Judea- the Arabs came to the Land of Israel in the 7th century AD.
In this book wrote also the desire of buildingand the actual building of the second Tample- for that period you have planty od Archiological finds!

The Israeli village Basra was founded in 1946 for vaterans from the British army.
The Iraqi town, Basra, and in this town were a lot of Jews until the establishment of the State of Israel, the time that the Jews of Basra left it to come to Israel. BUT there is no need to discuss over it because it is under Iraqi rule.

 

Hamas is not a country, it is a DEN OF TERRORISTS that created a charter that states that the aim of Hamas is the annihilation of Israel...

This is the Land of the Jews from the time of the Bible and no Arab squatters are going to dictate how and when Israel has the right to be RECONSTITUTED... and besides <Stowaways have no right to steer the Ship>

 

Kinda ignoring the fact that it's been home to a lot of people, not just Jews.

 

I am not <ignoring anything> I am trying to attract your attention to your revised unbalanced views putting the Democratic State of Israel on the same level of Hamas which is a <terrorist> organization.

 

Then you don't understand my thread. This isn't about Hamas. This is about Palestine being a Country, and being able to exercise the rights a country has.

 

Palestine is not a country their representatives are passing their time snoring while the UN is debating.

 

Say what you will, Palestine is recongized as a country by the UN. That's more then enough in my book to be called a country.

 

Your book apparently is a book of fiction that contains fallacies that you have swallowed line, hook and sinker.
So called Palestinians were given the opportunity to be observers at the UN, that does not make their status as a state.

First Palestine is not a State but rather the name of a <Region> called south Syria.
The nomenclature <Palestinian> was opted by Yasser Arafat (the Egyptian) in 1964.
Sorry but apparently you have not a solid base to stand on by keeping repeating nonsensical lies from the PLO syllabus.

 

the op apparently does not understand what sovereignty is.

Imho Palestine should be a nation, but it does not have sovereignty over its territory. In fact it is under belligerent military occupation.

that goes for both the WB and Gaza, since the PA/Hamas does not exercise control over its borders, its taxation, its energy, its water, its airspace, its seaports, the free movement of its people, et.al.

 

I have the UN saying it is a state. That's more then enough in my book to say that Palestine is a state.

 

I understand that much. Palestine for all intents and purposes is still under Israel's thumb. The fact that Israel can send cell phone calls to Palestinians right before rocket strikes come in is a bad sign for the economic development of Palestine. But the fact is that it is happening. Palestine, within my generation will become a state, independent of Israel. It's only a matter of time. But like Spain in the Netherlands, it's going to be a long process before Palestine becomes able to govern themselves without Israel taking over or telling them what to do.

That being said, I still feel that what's happening now in Gaza is a sign that Israel won't let go, and is taking steps to make sure that they have hegemony over Palestine for years to come. Every time this happens, it's only going to slow it down and remind Palestine that they can't even rule themselves because Israel won't let them have a chance.

 

Here educate yourself. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=274361282747857

 

That was literally fear mongering at its finest. It was insulting, never explaining what was happening in a way that another person could think clearly and without a sense of bias.

 

I agree. this is fundamentally the problem.

Israel does occupy the palestinians territories. In order for them to withdraw they require certain security guarantees. But regrettably, the Palestinians are completely incapable of providing such security guarantees at this time, there isn't nearly enough trust amongst the players to take a gamble, and Israel is not about to hand over their national security to any third party.

I think Israel would be more than willing to give the palestinians the opportunity to rule themselves. But the last time it didn't turn out all that well and their shaky democracy and its few national institutions have continued to suffer the consequences of their self destructive fractiousness.

As long as Hamas remains true to its MB/Islamist roots and remains in power, there isn't a way to express how long the the odds of Israel making peace with them are.

 

I agree. Israel is scared of Palestinian reprisals, or even what other countries would do to them.

I doubt it. Israel is for all intents and purposes doing what Rome did thousands of years ago. Build colonies in key areas, and you can control the land for generations to come. They want to make sure that they get the water, fertile land, and the security that they need from the Palestinian territories. It won't end until they agree to stop building settlements in Palestine.

 

I think that Israel has a detailed playbook when it comes to dealing with palestinians reprisals and I severely doubt that the fear the Israelis feel about such reprisals is tempered by the fact that the only thing such reprisals will produce, is even more palestiniant misery, destruction and death.

I don't think Israel is particularly scared about what other countries might do about palestinian reprisals.

Yes, a clear open strategy that apparently is completely lost on the palestinians.

Facts on the ground do and will matter.