Obama steps away from Israel

"although it took us a while to get here" winner of the Foofie Flippancy Award.
This is based on the fact that Israeli Arabs were citizens as soon as the dust cleared after the 1948 war, and the Arab armies had the cognitive dissonance of not vanquishing "timid Jews."

Is it time for a Univeralist Humanist meeting?

Not to mention that Neanderthals once roamed Europe, and coincidentally disappeared just around the time that the homosapien/Neanderthal hybrids domesticated dogs for all kinds of purposes. [What could Foofie be thinking?]

Foofie.

I didn't use the word genocide. I used the word "ethnic cleansing" and I very carefully defined it. It is a fact that there are Palestinians living in land now controlled by the modern state of Israel who descend from families that have been living their for generations.

Assuming there is no two state solution possible, Israel has three choices.

1) To allow these Palestinians to live in Israel as citizens.
2) To have an apartheid system where Palestinians are ruled by an Israeli government without citizenship and without rights like voting.
3) To expel the Palestinians.


Oralloy has made it clear that he wants to expel them (or "kill" them if they stand in the way... his words not mine).

What do you want to do?

The original idea was a two-state solution. The expanded settlements are making this impossible. You can go on with your nationalist mythology about 1948, but it isn't worth arguing because even if it were true (and it isn't) it doesn't change the reality.

Israel will have to live with the fact that they are an occupying power, ruling over an ethnic group with historic ties to the land that span centuries with no political power... or they will have to commit ethnic cleaning, expelling them by force.

Israel is not engaging in ethnic cleansing. Nor does Israel plan to engage in ethnic cleansing.



A two-state solution is very possible. It just isn't going to be based on 1967 borders. Most likely, Israel is going to annex everything west of the Security Fence, and the Palestinian State is going to be confined to Area A alone.



I clearly and repeatedly suggested a course of action that did not involve expelling anyone.

I did say the Palestinians deserve to be expelled and I'd love to see them get what they deserve, but it is far from the course of action that I am recommending.



Yes. When Nazis stand in the way of the good guys, the good guys should have their military kill said Nazis until resistance collapses. For a good example of this in action, see World War II.



Specifically you mean a two-state solution based on 1967 borders.

And no. Settlements are not even remotely what stands in the way of a two-state solution based on 1967 borders.

YOU (along with all the other people who share your support of evil) are what made a two-state solution based on 1967 borders impossible.

And now you are trying to blame Israeli settlers for the situation that YOU caused.



While I'm mostly interested in defending my own facts, I'd be very surprised if you could find any facts that Foofie is wrong about.



Not at all. Israel can finish building the Security Fence, including around Jerusalem and in other areas where they are currently being pressured not to finish it, declare it as their official international border, and annex all land west of the Fence. Meanwhile east of the Fence Israel can expand their military control over Areas B and C, so that when a Palestinian state is unilaterally declared, it will be composed of Area A alone.

There you go. No ethnic cleansing, and most Palestinians not under Israeli occupation. Problem solved to the satisfaction of everyone but the Palestinians and their demented supporters.

Oralloy is so adorable... but I am tired.

Even worse, I am factually correct, and you're unable to challenge any of my facts.

In a way it's a shame that you made it impossible to achieve a two-state solution based on 1967 borders.

But it'll be pretty cool to confine the Palestinian State to Area A alone.

No, you have it all wrong - obama stabbed Israel in the back.

0bama's legacy is drenched in the blood of innocents around the globe, he is the worst US president ever.

https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/12/rep-duncan-heres-why-the-israeli-border-expansion-complaints-are-bs

Even Jewish Dems Disgusted by Obama-Kerry War on Israel

Dear Israel,

I am America. Obama speaks for me. After all he is my president and we Americans elected him, pretty convincingly, two times. And, we still are giving him approval ratings that are relatively good for two term presidents.


Please stop building settlements on occupied territory and start working toward a peaceful democratic solution to this problem that accepts that both Jews and Palestinians are human beings worthy of respect, security and dignity.


Sincerely,

Most Americans (except for the right wingers who don't understand that they are a shrinking minority opinion in a democracy).

I don't consider myself to be on the left, and I have some right leaning beliefs but really don't fall right either. Some say I'm a moderate middlist but I do have some extreme beliefs that have liberal and conservative tones.

With that said I agree completely with you on this issue. It shouldnt be polarized as a left or right solution though. Its time humanity realized that the human condition is more important than religious dogma over who's acceptable and who is considered began or religiously wrong.

I find it funny that Judaism, Islam and Christianity are really the same religion at their core but they hate each other. Even within their respective religion they hate others who interpret their religious texts slightly different. Its clear to me that humanity is ready to shed the obsolete ideas of religious dogma. We have transcended for the better in progressing past the so called religious morality. On a whole we treat people better than we have in the past.

You are operating under a false assumption if you think the territory is 'occupied', the land is Israels.

The land has Palestinians living there who trace their roots to the land for centuries.

If this land belongs to Israel, Israel has two choices.

1) Forcibly expel these people (in spite of the fact that they have lived their for centuries).

2) Let them stay under an Apartheid system where they have no rights.

3) Let them stay under a Democratic system where they are citizens and given the same rights as Jews or any other inhabitants.

Oralloy has made it clear that he is comfortable with option #1. However, if Israel does this it causes some problems with their ideal of being a modern democracy.

Can you answer this problem honestly. Do you share Oralloys opinion that forcible removal is morally acceptable? I know for a fact that many Israelis aren't comfortable with this solution.

That's like saying North America belongs to the Europeans not the Native Americans. Its silly. The only reason Israel exists is to attempt to make happen a biblical prophecy so that Jesus will return. One final step is to rebuild the temple but holy **** theres a mosque in the way. Damn I guess that means we should go to war with Muslims since there's no way in hell they would just let us tear down their mosque to rebuild the temple. Let's reign in blood so that Jesus can return! Yay!

I have a New Years message for both of you - you are WRONG.

You are a silly person. Your arrogance is thick with stupidity. Dont you realize I can say the same thing to you? Oh but since you posted a meme I guess that legitimizes your claim? I can't argue that anymore you posted an image with text that is sold unrefutable. Silly.

You didn't answer my question. Israel has three options, which one do you think Israel should take.

I am not arguing whether you are right or wrong. I am just asking you to clarify your position.

So please, what do you think the final solution in Israel should look like? Instead of just telling me I am wrong, please tell me what the right answer is.

The Palestinians need to STFU!