Skip to main content

View Diary: Uncomfortable Question: Is Gaza the West Bank's Future? (29 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Perhaps redraw the border completely. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    debedb

    Trade West Bank for equivalent sized land in southern Israel, making both Palestine and Israel two continuous block of land that's relatively "compact".

    •  The Negev? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Timaeus, InAntalya, IndieGuy

      Lovely.

      … the NSA takes significant care to prevent any abuses and that there is a substantial oversight system in place,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-California), said August 23.

      by mosesfreeman on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 09:28:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  as the West Bank is the only real estate in region (0+ / 0-)

      with a surfeit of water (with the exception of southern Lebanon) relative to population, not sure how that's anyone's idea of a good idea.

      Now, if the trade comes with the Negev, PLUS reparations for lands and waters seized over the past 70 years, adjusted for net damages to life and property, plus technical assistance, perhaps there's a deal out there.

      One imagines there's a wee bit of two-way distrust in the way of that conversation even happening.

      •  I hate it (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        JayFarquharson, wu ming

        when you guys entertain these ideas.

        Even the best intentioned "fantasy" plans are, to say the least, insulting.
        That part of the ME is a cruel place to live and only the people who have lived there for mant centuries appreciate the special bond that the inhabitants have created with that barren, hot and at places unwelcoming land.
        A piece of property with no more than a dozen citrus trees and maybe 30 olive trees is enough for those people to survive, generation after generation, and nourish a special relationship with the place of their ancestors, a place they call home.

        Now, calling for them to be treated as bushels of corn to be moved from barn to barn is depriving of their dignity. It's the same thing the Israelis don't get.

        An apt analogy would be to accept the premise that slavery was ok but it would have been better for slaves and masters if they were taken to the Northeast where they would have been treated much better than the South.

        •  Not emotionally prepared to take scolding (0+ / 0-)

          from someone whose handle suggests they are European on the partitioning of other people's countries.

          Also, look up the term "throwaway bid". It might clue you in on what I might actually be up to in the post that you so thoughtfully scolded. :)

          •  so I'm european (0+ / 0-)

            and I'm responsible for dividing countries?

            I'd rather you said "fuck you asshole... you are wrong and I don't agree with you" which would have been a much more acceptable ad hominem attack.

            thanks anyway.

            •  Re: Me, wanting your respect (0+ / 0-)

              I don't exactly have the impression that seeking your approval and regard is a high-percentage gambit.

              Thanks for the counsel on how to address you going forward but if it's okay I probably won't do that. :)

      •  Given that... (0+ / 0-)

        Perhaps trade Gaza to Israel instead?
        Extend West Bank down all the way to the Gulf of Alqaba, so that Israel and Palestine are essentially two long strip of land next to each other.
        Both side gets water access (I think it's around the Golan Height region). Israel get sea access to Mediterranean, and Palestine get sea access toward the Indian ocean.

        •  In truth I think land-swaps stink (0+ / 0-)

          That it is utterly impractical, would be rejected out of hand by both camps and I posted what I did to underscore just how out of depth the land swap proposal is.

          And the idea of horse-trading about Gaza is particularly ineffective as an opening proposal.

          The Middle East quarrel has never been about land, but water.

          The good news, as I discussed in the diary you posted at earlier today, is either water negotiations will take place and there will be peace, or the gradual weardown of the local water table will render the so-called Holy Land uninhabitable for everyone.

          Either way, there will be peace.

          And, as I said last night, I think cooperation is more likely than not.

          BTW, I very definitely said nothing to indicate a preference for war and clearing out the entire region through violence.

          One, I don't think any level of violence would do that.

          Two, I don't think anyone else in the region but Israel and Palestine care to get involved in I/P issues because they all have bigger problems to deal with at the moment, starting with maintaining control over their own populations, ending with an new episode Sunni-Shia violence that actually could spark a region-wide war.

          Three, at the end of the day, people want to wake up the next day. At some point it will occur to the local combatants in the latest Gaza War that suffering each other's continued existence is much cheaper than warfare for all parties concerned.

          If not, see: gradual attrition of values, all of them, especially of water supply, in the entire so-called Holy Land.

          This is a dilemma that solves itself through lack of habitability...or can be solved much more quickly, and positively, through cooperation based on mutual investment and maintenance of water works so that everyone gets something concrete out of the deal.

          That is what I was saying last night.

    •  Just go Back to the partition plan (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      wu ming

      The UNGA 181 boundaries.  

      •  Not gonna work - nobody followed the "plan" (0+ / 0-)

        I think it was predicated on "who was living where" at the time, and took absolutely no account of practicalities like defensible borders (absolutely essential if you have hostile neighbors), arable land, water rights, etc.

        It was the Palestinians and the "hostile neighbors" who threw the "plan" out the window and went for as much more land as they could grab. Then when they were pushed back and back and back, they whined and howled until they were allowed to keep SOME land and not be shoved all the way across the Jordan.

        That "plan" has just been waste paper from the get-go, and it is completely impossible to go back to it. Ever.

        What might work, if everybody could be persuaded to abide by it (never a safe and rarely a valid assumption), is building a "Palestinian state" around the northern West Bank, and if they insist on having a historic capital, let them have Jericho - it was a great city when Jerusalem was just a few adobe huts.

        If it's
        Not your body,
        Then it's
        Not your choice
        And it's
        None of your damn business!

        by TheOtherMaven on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 10:22:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I've come to the regrettable conclusion... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eparrot

      ...that Two State died over a decade ago.

      I wanted to believe otherwise, but I had no idea that settlements were so widespread in the West Bank. This Israeli Government (and the Governments formed for the foreseeable future) is not going to force the Settlers to abandon one square nanometer of territory they have claimed to this point and will continue chipping away at the West Bank until it is a handful of "mini Gazas."

      Change does not roll in on the wheels of inevitability, but comes through continuous struggle. --Martin Luther King Jr.

      by Egalitare on Mon Aug 04, 2014 at 10:11:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  so the ottoman strategy on armenia, then? n/t (0+ / 0-)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site