Okay let's ruffle some feathers.

Fuck no.

^^^^THIS!!!! Was done in the FB Lifer and got ugly quick.

^^ This. Come on Geoff, at least you could've waited until the religious one ended , dont want me another arab/israeli debate for sure lol.

Oh come on guys this debate is much more interesting than the retarded religious one.

Check this out, I'm interested to debate this. Benjamin Netanyahu recently said Israel will not negotiate with the Palestinians unless they recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1116650.html

Should recognition be a precondition for withdrawal?

son_ov_hades wrote:

Oh come on guys this debate is much more interesting than the retarded religious one.

Check this out, I'm interested to debate this. Benjamin Netanyahu recently said Israel will not negotiate with the Palestinians unless they recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1116650.html

Should recognition be a precondition for withdrawal?

I'll tell you what, I'll have a (read:light) discussion with you about this , without resolving to the past or origins, lets more talk of the present.

Recognizing Israel is simple, I mean, they go on national tv and say it ffs, is that seriously the reason for them staying to this day ? nah, even if they did, Israel wont withdraw, I say.

I all it takes is recognizing them for peace. Then why not? But saying things like, "Even if they did they would leave." is the problem in a nut shell. What would it cost the Arab people by simply doing it? Pride is second only to religion(for both sides) in getting in the way of peace.



This is all I am going to say about this and will not post again in this thread.

*braces for epic shitstorm*

Neither, if people are too stubborn and retarded to not share land that is apparently 'holy' then neither of them should own it. It should be seperately owned until the idiots realise that perhaps killing each other is wrong. There are atrocities on both sides, neither are innocent or even worthy of owning the land. Why can't people just have their land and live in it, why fight over it.

Oh wait yes I know....

Spoiler:

Monkzum wrote:

Neither, if people are too stubborn and retarded to not share land that is apparently 'holy' then neither of them should own it. It should be seperately owned until the idiots realise that perhaps killing each other is wrong. There are atrocities on both sides, neither are innocent or even worthy of owning the land. Why can't people just have their land and live in it, why fight over it.

Oh wait yes I know....

Spoiler:

People put too much emphasis on religion, sure it's a big part but not the whole thing. If Theodore Herzel got the British government to give him Uganda like he originally wanted, I think there would be just as much conflict there.

son_ov_hades wrote:

Monkzum wrote:

Neither, if people are too stubborn and retarded to not share land that is apparently 'holy' then neither of them should own it. It should be seperately owned until the idiots realise that perhaps killing each other is wrong. There are atrocities on both sides, neither are innocent or even worthy of owning the land. Why can't people just have their land and live in it, why fight over it.

Oh wait yes I know....

Spoiler:

People put too much emphasis on religion, sure it's a big part but not the whole thing. If Theodore Herzel got the British government to give him Uganda like he originally wanted, I think there would be just as much conflict there.

This. Everyone talking about religion, would think otherwise if their country was the one occupied. And why would you think the Palestinians would prolong their suffering, for god ? hell no. They're sure god would punish whoever is wrong in this situation, but it's because they cant find a decent deal with Israel that would still gurantee their rights.

Okay time to bump this.

I'm very troubled by a recent Knesset bill that seems to make peace with Syria and Palestinians very difficult. This bill would make it so that any territorial cessions would have to pass a majority vote in the Knesset. Israel has so many whack job right wing parties that I highly doubt any vote like this would get a majority. If this law was in place in the 1970s I don't think Israel would have ever given back the Sinai to Egypt for example. I really hope this doesn't become law.

They should just make another version of Vatican City, It probably would work but that's what I would try to do.

The problem is who would control it though. The original UN plan in 1947 would have made Jerusalem a UN administered city, which I think could work.

Thatt's actually what I had in mind, although I feel like fighting would break out once, then hopefully the UN would step up and set an example to not start fighting again.

I just finished a class on Middle Eastern politics, we watched a lot of videos, this may have started out as a religuos issue, but I think religion takes a back seat when you are looking down at caskets with your family and friends in them. Not to negate the religous fanatics, but its an important part of the mix. Really if you come from a western country it is hard to wrap your head around how different the middle east is.