So exactly how dumb are the Pals?

[Dowding]

My post was a response to Hortlund's assertion that the Palestinians are to blame for the mess.

To me, it looks like there is blame on both sides. Anyone who doesn't recognise that is biased in favour of one side or other.

Rude - Try harder Rude. To be nice I'll say I expect better from you. I'll ignore the usual trash and cut through the crap:

What about Camp David Dowding....whose fault was that farce?

Have you even read what was put on the table at Camp David? Let's hear what you understand by it.

"The Camp David Peace Deal... by Rude"

Please continue. Refer to yourself in the third person if you like.

[OIO]

Ra nailed it on the head and then some.

What you are seeing is not the palestinians, but probably some syrian, saudi,alqueida/etc led effort to keep the situation "fluid". As long as Israel is under siege with terrorrist attacks, as long as israel is shown on tv bulldozing over towns and yuppie activist foreigners, their image, and the USA's by association will keep being soiled. Not to mention it helps lots to have a scapegoat so your own uneducated, starving, ANGRY population ... helps to keep them angry not at your own islamic dictatorshipwhatchamacallit elitist government, but at the evil west and the zionist monsters who, being thousands and thousands of miles away, are 100% responsible for them not having water or books or freedom.

Pass me the hammer Ra!

[Rude]

Originally posted by Dowding
My post was a response to Hortlund's assertion that the Palestinians are to blame for the mess.

To me, it looks like there is blame on both sides. Anyone who doesn't recognise that is biased in favour of one side or other.

Rude - Try harder Rude. To be nice I'll say I expect better from you. I'll ignore the usual trash and cut through the crap:



Have you even read what was put on the table at Camp David? Let's hear what you understand by it.

"The Camp David Peace Deal... by Rude"

Please continue. Refer to yourself in the third person if you like.

Gee Dowding....guess little tidbits like these....ya know Rude still thinks your a putz....you would never apologize nor admit you were wrong. Rude says that when ya think you know it all, that's when ya stop learning.

Essentials of the Camp David II Proposals by Israel
1. Palestinian Statehood and Conditions
A Palestinian state would be established in most of the West Bank and all of the Gaza strip, with these conditions:

The state would not have an army with heavy weapons,
The state would not make alliances with other countries without Israeli approval and would not allow introduction of foreign forces west of the River Jordan.
Israel would be allowed deploy troops in the Jordan Valley if Israel were to be threatened by invasion from the east.
Israeli aircraft could overfly  Palestinian airspace.
Israeli would install early warning stations in the mountains overlooking the Jordan valley and other areas.
Palestinians would control border crossings with Jordan and Egypt along with Israeli security observation.
The Israelis would retain management over water sources in the West Bank while approving a limited quota to the Palestinians.
Israel would lease areas in the Jordan Valley or maintain temporary sovereignty over them for up to 25 years.
2. Refugees
The Palestine refugee problem would be solved in the following way:

Israel would not accept any legal or civilian responsibility for  their displacement.
Israel would allow the return of around 100,000 refugees under “humanitarian” grounds in the form of family reunions and considers such a step as compliance with UN Resolution 194.
According to one source, the Palestinian State would be limited in the number of refugees it could absorb to half a million refugees according to a fixed timetable. This is not confirmed by other sources and is problematic, since a much larger number of refugees, well over a million, already live in camps in Gaza and the West Bank.
An international fund would compensate refugees. Israel, the U.S. and Europe are to contribute. According to one source, this fund would also provide compensation to Jews who were forced to leave their possessions in Arab countries when they fled to Israel.
3. Jerusalem

Palestine would obtain sovereignty over suburbs in the north and the south of Jerusalem that would be annexed to the West Bank, including Abu Dees, Alezariye and eastern Sawahre.  

Within East Jerusalem, in  (Beit Hanina-Shuafat), there would be  a civilian administration affiliated with the Palestinian Authority with the possibility of linking it to West Jerusalem through a municipality covering both sectors. The Palestinians would run a branch municipality within the framework of the Israeli higher municipal council while depriving them from planning and construction jurisdictions.

The proposals allowed for Palestinian, Arab, Islamic and Christian administration of holy sites  in the old city of Jerusalem. The Palestinians would be allowed to hoist the Palestinian flag over the Islamic and Christian shrines along with a safe passage linking northern Jerusalem, which would be annexed to the West Bank, to those areas so that Palestinians and Muslims would not pass through lands under Israeli sovereignty.

4. Land Area of Palestine
The initial area of the Palestinian state would comprise about 73% of the land area of the West Bank and all of Gaza. The West Bank would be divided by the road from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea and a corridor on either side of it. This would form two relatively large Palestinian areas and one small enclave surrounding Jericho. The three areas would be joined by a free passage without checkpoints, but the safe passage could be closed by Israel in case of emergency. According to Palestinian sources, there would be another division between the area north of the Ariel and Shilo settlements along the trans-Shomron highway built by Israel.

In later stages (10-25 years) Israel would cede additional areas, particularly in the mountains overlooking the Jordan valley, to bring the total area to slightly under 90% of the area of the West Bank (94% excluding greater Jerusalem).

The major settlement blocks adjacent to Jerusalem and in the Jerusalem corridor would be annexed to Israel: Efrat, Gush Etzion, Ma'ale Edumim. The town of Ariel and the corridor along the trans-Samaria highway would be annexed to Israel. The Jewish settlement town of Qiriat Arba would remain under Israeli administration in the heart of Palestinian territory, with a single road through Palestinian territory reaching it from the south. Isolated Jewish settlements including the settlement in Hebron, would come under Palestinian jurisdiction and would probably be abandoned.

[Rude]

Rude says....90% is not a serious enough beginning to end the suffering of the Pals. Rude says killing all of those dirty Jews would make Dowding a happier putz.

PLUMMETING POPULARITY, AILING AUTOCRAT, MISSING MONARCH...
But since then, several key supports have fallen out of place. In the mid-1990s, as the popularity of Arafat's corrupt and undemocratic rule began to suffer and the prominence of the Hamas Islamist terror organization grew, the Palestinian leader sought to bolster himself by taking a harder stand on Jerusalem, particularly on the Temple Mount. The Tunnel battles and the fight over the Israeli "Har Homa" project, which Arafat sought to connect with Christian sites in nearby Bethlehem, threw gasoline on the fire.

Then, earlier this year, Syrian leader Hafez Asad finally refused any territorial compromise with Israel, terminating Syrian participation in peace negotiations. When he died shortly afterward, the ailing autocrat placed the weight of his prestige permanently on the rejectionist side of the ledger.

Even more significant was the death of King Hussein the previous year. The Jordanian monarch not only had sponsored the Palestinian presence at Madrid, he signed a peace treaty with Israel in 1994, and repeatedly threw his support to the peace process at crucial moments. Only by coming along himself was he able to persuade Arafat to attend an emergency summit in Washington after the Tunnel battles, which restored high-level contacts after the apparent demise of the peace process. During the negotiation of the Hebron Accords in 1996, and at the talks at the Wye Plantation in 1998, when he was deathly ill, Hussein again showed up to persuade Arafat to cease holding out and sign, endorsing the outcomes with his personal presence.

King Hussein offered crucial cover when the Palestinian leader might not have acted otherwise; now that he is gone, no one has the stature and the inclination to do the same. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who could certainly play the same role, has instead sought to stiffen Arafat's spine.

... A PERIPATETIC PRESIDENT ...
Neither was President Clinton's approach to mediation ideally suited to producing a deal. Departing the scene all too often, staying fully engaged in national and international politics, the President allowed himself to be excessively distracted. By not clearing his schedule, Clinton essentially declined to take the time to hold the parties' feet to the fire until a deal emerged. The summit nearly broke apart when the President departed for the G-8 summit in Okinawa, an occasion that history will soon forget. Finally, at his insistence, negotiations were pushed to a conclusion on Monday night.

At the first Camp David summit, President Carter famously stood in the door to prevent Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin from walking out. President Clinton, by contrast, walked out. This eventuality was painfully foreseen at the outset by former U.S. Ambassador to Israel Sam Lewis during a National Public Radio interview:

"I've never seen in Clinton the sort of single-minded dedication and almost obsession with carrying an issue through to an endgame that Carter showed at Camp David... Now Clinton gets restless in between meetings and he's talking about coming back and forth. So it's hard for me to see that he's going to be as single-minded as I think you need to be in this situation to get over what are really tough, tough issues."

...WEAK WILL
But to understand Yasser Arafat's situation is not necessarily to forgive his decision. Despite all these complications, what Bill Clinton offered and Ehud Barak accepted did give Arafat grounds for loudly proclaiming victory, and going home in triumph. After all, "formal custodial status" on the Temple Mount, recognized by all parties, smacks of control by right, not by suffrage. Arafat could have taken the risk. Failing that, he could have made a counter-offer, insisting on more explicit forms of sovereignty in more parts of Jerusalem. But rather than negotiate, Arafat stood on his opening position. After the last difficult late-night session with Clinton, he dispatched a note stating his firm objection to the American proposal. There was nothing left to say.

WHAT NEXT?
Despite the brief statement issued Tuesday affirming the parties' recognition of the need to avoid taking unilateral steps, Yasser Arafat has returned home without retreating from his insistence that he will declare a Palestinian state on September 13, the anniversary of the 1993 Declaration of Principles and, in his view, the expiration date of the Oslo process. The outcome of this step would be unpredictable, and potentially catastrophic for the Palestinians. Clearly enough, Arafat senses that time remains to do a deal. He may even believe that no deal should be done before the last moment, with maximum concessions extracted.

There are considerable risks to this approach. As Prime Minister Barak seeks to rebuild his shattered coalition, no guarantees exist that the reconstituted Israeli government will be as free to negotiate as the last. The possibility also exists that new elections will soon be forced upon the Prime Minister, terminating the negotiating process for the time being, perhaps closing the window of opportunity for some time. Whatever the form of the next Israeli government to negotiate with the Palestinians, it is unlikely to offer the same flexibility and daring that Ehud Barak brought to Camp David this July. (Rude says this was the mother of all understatements)

Should that prove the case, Palestinians would be well advised to recall that the American proposal at Camp David represented at least the third proposal for the partition of the former Palestine Mandate over the course of the century, each of them accepted by the Jews and rejected by the Arabs. Each version, in turn, has left the Arab side with progressively less land. The next offer, whenever it comes, is not especially likely to deviate from this pattern. If the present Palestinian leadership is not prepared to accept the best offer going for territory, self-determination, and control of important symbolic areas, perhaps new leadership is needed.

[Rude]

BTW Dowding...would you please remind us all of the most recent independent Palestinian peace proposal to be brought forward to either Isreal or the US by the PLO itself?

My post was a response to Hortlund's assertion that the Palestinians are to blame for the mess.

As to this, who is accountable on the Palestinian side for these little bombs going off, which kill those awful Jewish people?

Or do they get a free ride for what they say and do like you?

Rude thinks a straight and honest answer is not to be forthcoming.

[Dowding]

That's better. A little self-satisfied conceit goes a long way.

Wrong about what exactly? My opinion is my opinion. You can't have a 'wrong' opinion. That's an oxymoron.

Here's one of the biggest sticking points:

"The Israelis would retain management over water sources in the West Bank while approving a limited quota to the Palestinians."

So basically the Palestinians would have no say in the provision of a resource fundamental to life in so many ways. "Do what we say Pals, or we cut it off!" How else could that be interpreted?How can that be acceptable? How is it an improvement?

"The three areas would be joined by a free passage without checkpoints, but the safe passage could be closed by Israel in case of emergency.

Basically Israel can, at will, control movement within the Palestinian State. The 'emergency' part is a sweetner; the pill is still bitter. I ask again, how can that be acceptable? How is it an improvement?

They are the two major sticking points IMO.

[Dowding]

BTW Dowding...would you please remind us all of the most recent independent Palestinian peace proposal to be brought forward to either Isreal or the US by the PLO itself?

Where's the reciprocal one from Israel? Exactly, there isn't one yet. If it weren't for US pressure there wouldn't even be a road-map to one. Sharon would happily continue to run that hamster-wheel.

As to this, who is accountable on the Palestinian side for these little bombs going off, which kill those awful Jewish people?

Why? Are you going to ask your congressman to send this person a letter? Good on ya, mate. These are extremist nut-cases. You might say that Arafat holds the ultimate responsibility - but like I said, he should take a long walk of a short plank as far as I'm concerned.

Condemning terrorists, and particularly these types of terrorists, is a given in my book. Israel, OTOH, is a supposedly civilised state. I would hold them up to higher scrutiny because of that claim. However, the blame game would be a dead heat in my eyes.

You can do what you like.

BTW - Putz? Oh my. Name calling doesn't win arguments Rude. Neither will making out that I'm a Nazi.

[Rude]

You're right....the suffering of the innocent majority of Palestinians should continue while Arafat and you seek the perfect solution....no starting point could possibly benefit either party.

I was talking with Rude and he said "tell Dowding thanks for the cheap entertainment on an otherwise serious Monday morning"

[OIO]

well, do remember israel is literally being asked to give away its land to a people hell bent on killing them. Not to mention they are surrounded by before mentioned people's "big brothers"
 
there was never a state of palestine, so the palestinians are going now something akin to what the Israeli went through for thousands of years: a people with no land.

You dont see Jordan or Egypt being asked to give away their territory eh?

The pill is bitter for both sides.

[Dowding]

And with those scathing, hurtful remarks, you bid me adieu?

Arafat is going. Soon he will be gone. With a little luck, I'll be able to say the same about Sharon. It's a shame the bad blood flowing between them isn't their own.

[Rude]

Where's the reciprocal one from Israel? Exactly, there isn't one yet. If it weren't for US pressure there wouldn't even be a road-map to one. Sharon would happily continue to run that hamster-wheel.

Nice dodge....just as Rude expected, no honest reply offered.

BTW...are you really a Nazi or an anti-semite...there's a difference ya know, or at least Rude tells me there is.

[Dowding]

The third person thing is more than creepy. Funny though.

I'm actually a Nazi and a jew hater. Hitler is my hero and your KKK my brothers-in-arms.

Nice dodge....just as Rude expected, no honest reply offered.

How is it a dodge? I'm pointing out that it's an intractable issue - both sides are unwilling to concede anything, nevermind make a move.

[Rude]

Originally posted by Dowding
The third person thing is more than creepy. Funny though.

I'm actually a Nazi and a jew hater. Hitler is my hero and your KKK my brothers-in-arms.



How is it a dodge? I'm pointing out that it's an intractable issue - both sides are unwilling to concede anything, nevermind make a move.

I asked you a simple question which you apparently refuse to answer....when did the PLO ever offer up a plan for peace to the Isrealis....in other words, please tell us of what the PLO has done to promote any peace in that region?

[Drunky]

It will be a scary day when the Isrealis decided to remove the safety.

Remember in the 60's (I think) when Isreal was attacked.  Remember that they not only fought a 3 front war but also started to invade and occupy at least one of the attacking countries.

Scary, indeed.

The Palestinians are lucky up to this point.

[Saurdaukar]

I had a freind in college that used to talk in the third person when he was angry... when you started to hear it, it was time to run.

Mazz thinks Rude is right...