Netanyahu promises to annex Jordan Valley

Snickers Man

The BBC is reporting that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu is promising to annex the Jordan valley in the occupied West Bank if returned to power in the forthcoming Israeli general election.

If my knowledge and geography is correct, this would mean that Israel would completely surround the entire West Bank area, installing a buffer zone between West Bank/Palestine and the Jordan river. It would then be a matter of time before Israel picked off the rest of the territory controlled but not strictly ruled by them.

Suppose he's being consistent. He said before the last general election that he would no longer support a "two-state solution" to the Israel-Palestine problem.

Ethnic cleansing would seem to be his preferred option. Squeeze the Palestinians into emigration by making their lives unbearable.

<snip - Snickers Man does not approve of Netanyahu in the strongest but politest terms>

Irish Praetorian

I don't think anyone can really doubt my credibility when it comes to defending Israel on these forums. Yet even I'm taken aback by this decision, if for no other reason than it's sheer short sightedness. Fundamentally, Israel needs to be able to establish a modus vivendi with its neighbouring states, and essential to that is the ability to reconcile the Palestinian population (inside and outside Israel proper) with the current situation.

At the most basic level, this means the Palestinians having themselves a state to be able to conduct their lives unmolested by foreign soldiers and under their own rule. I'm not wedded to the idea that such a state must be entirely congruent with 67 borders or some other arbitrary historical measure, but they need enough to be able to live on, not such a grand request I might have thought.

Anyway, I guess we're back to seeing how things develop, not that I'm terribly hopeful about a positive outcome.

James Brown

At this stage troops should be moved in to stop the Israelis. It's the slow erasion of a people.

Gatling

Matt Barrett wrote: »

At this stage troops should be moved in to stop the Israelis. It's the slow erasion of a people.

What or who's troops should be deployed ,

Considering even the arab state's have had little or nothing to say about it suggests it's no big deal as it stands

Odhinn

Gatling wrote: »

What or who's troops should be deployed ,

Considering even the arab state's have had little or nothing to say about it suggests it's no big deal as it stands

Doesn't read that way to me. You may have missed the following

"The Arab League regards these statements as undermining the chances of any progress in the peace process and will torpedo all its foundations."


In a series of separate statements, Qatar criticised "Israel's continued contempt of international law"; Turkey slammed the annexation pledge as "racist"; Jordan called Netanyahu's plan a "serious escalation"; and Saudi Arabia called for an emergency meeting of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
The United Nations, meanwhile, warned that Netanyahu's plan would have "no international legal effect".

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/09/netanyahu-annexation-pledge-denounced-dangerous-racist-190911080929932.html

James Brown

Gatling wrote: »

What or who's troops should be deployed ,

Considering even the arab state's have had little or nothing to say about it suggests it's no big deal as it stands

The same we would to any area were tyrants are engaging in illegal and immoral activity. Regardless, it's moving beyond the stage were intervention is needed IMO.

Not so.
Also, if it looks like Israeli behavior will infringe on their interests, you'll see a change more swiftly, but the Israeli's will be careful not to harass the relationship between the US and Arab nations. Basically once the right people are making money they may turn a blind eye to the slow eradication and land theft in the interim.
Netenyahu is willing to forgo any chance of peace to court the right wing voters. Despicable man.

Odhinn

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I don't think anyone can really doubt my credibility when it comes to defending Israel on these forums. Yet even I'm taken aback by this decision, if for no other reason than it's sheer short sightedness. Fundamentally, Israel needs to be able to establish a modus vivendi with its neighbouring states, and essential to that is the ability to reconcile the Palestinian population (inside and outside Israel proper) with the current situation.

At the most basic level, this means the Palestinians having themselves a state to be able to conduct their lives unmolested by foreign soldiers and under their own rule. I'm not wedded to the idea that such a state must be entirely congruent with 67 borders or some other arbitrary historical measure, but they need enough to be able to live on, not such a grand request I might have thought.

Anyway, I guess we're back to seeing how things develop, not that I'm terribly hopeful about a positive outcome.

One of the most probable scenarios proffered over the years is that areas unannexed by Israel will become pockets of "self governing" palestinians - geographically seperate from each other, dispersed amongst the annexed tracts. Effectively these will be like the old bantustans in apartheid south africa, a source of cheap labour for the annexed areas, and, as non citizens, not threatening the Israeli majority.

Irish Praetorian

Odhinn wrote: »

One of the most probable scenarios proffered over the years is that areas unannexed by Israel will become pockets of "self governing" palestinians - geographically seperate from each other, dispersed amongst the annexed tracts. Effectively these will be like the old bantustans in apartheid south africa, a source of cheap labour for the annexed areas, and, as non citizens, not threatening the Israeli majority.

To be honest I suspect a more likely scenario is the continuation of the long decline in Palestinian prospects both politically as well as economically and (arguably) demographically. If the present trends continue Palestine becomes less and less liveable, there is more pressure to emigrate, more violent flare ups with retaliation and ultimately, more settlements. Any Bantustan like situation is more than likely going to be a transitory phase, but a particularly ugly one at that.

hamsin

Snickers Man wrote: »

Ethnic cleansing

Expected.

hamsin

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

I don't think anyone can really doubt my credibility when it comes to defending Israel on these forums. Yet even I'm taken aback by this decision, if for no other reason than it's sheer short sightedness. Fundamentally, Israel needs to be able to establish a modus vivendi with its neighbouring states, and essential to that is the ability to reconcile the Palestinian population (inside and outside Israel proper) with the current situation.

At the most basic level, this means the Palestinians having themselves a state to be able to conduct their lives unmolested by foreign soldiers and under their own rule. I'm not wedded to the idea that such a state must be entirely congruent with 67 borders or some other arbitrary historical measure, but they need enough to be able to live on, not such a grand request I might have thought.

Anyway, I guess we're back to seeing how things develop, not that I'm terribly hopeful about a positive outcome.

Who asked you to defend Israel? Anyway, I as an Israeli don't need it. Thanks.
Now, Israel is an independent state and it knows what it needs or doesn't need to do according to its national and security interests. That's why the Jewish state was created. Thanks for advise.

hamsin

hamsin wrote: »

Who asked you to defend Israel? Anyway, I as an Israeli don't need it. Thanks.
Now, Israel is an independent state and it knows what it needs or doesn't need to do according to its national and security interests. That's why the Jewish state was created. Thanks for advise.

The two state solution is dead. The future will be an ever growing Palestinian population within Israel. How are you going to deal with that?

banie01

hamsin wrote: »

That's why the Jewish state was created. Thanks for advise.

For the sake of polite discourse and the avoidance of the discussion descending into accusations of anti-Semitism, please don't invoke the Jewishness of the Israeli state as a justification.

Nethanyahu's aims in the annexation of the Jordan valley are abhorrent and affront to the norms of international relations that Democracies proclaim to uphold.

It would be wrong Ireland did it, it would be wrong if Canada did it and it is certainly wrong if Israel do it.

Its a rise of the right amongst a nation that has traditionally been quite socially progressive and that it is sabre rattling by the most militaristic nation in the M.E is a worry.

I think we are far beyond the days of an Arab League declaring war on Israel, but if one was to try an provoke a pan-Arab reaction?
How would you think Israel might be most successful at that?

hamsin

Deleted User wrote: »

The two state solution is dead.

I hope.

The future will be an ever growing Palestinian population within Israel. How are you going to deal with that?

1. There is no "Palestinian population" in Israel. There are Israeli Arabs in Israel.
2. Jews and Arabs have the same birth rate in Israel. Plus constant Jewish immigration.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Odhinn wrote: »

One of the most probable scenarios proffered over the years is that areas unannexed by Israel will become pockets of "self governing" palestinians - geographically seperate from each other, dispersed amongst the annexed tracts. Effectively these will be like the old bantustans in apartheid south africa, a source of cheap labour for the annexed areas, and, as non citizens, not threatening the Israeli majority.

That’s seems to be the aim. That said this could be just election gimmcrackery.

bunderoon

hamsin wrote: »

I hope.

1. There is no "Palestinian population" in Israel. There are Israeli Arabs in Israel.
2. Jews and Arabs have the same birth rate in Israel. Plus constant Jewish immigration.

Is there an Israeli (Arab / Jewish) population in Palestine?

golfball37

Putin has criticised this move. That may invite Trump to do the same.

James Brown

hamsin wrote: »

Who asked you to defend Israel? Anyway, I as an Israeli don't need it. Thanks.
Now, Israel is an independent state and it knows what it needs or doesn't need to do according to its national and security interests. That's why the Jewish state was created. Thanks for advise.

[W]ithout consideration of "traditions" and prejudices, it [Germany] must find the courage to gather our people and their strength for an advance along the road that will lead this people from its present restricted living space to new land and soil, and hence also free it from the danger of vanishing from the earth or of serving others as a slave nation.
— Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf 1

Nobody buys the security lie. That excuse can be used for continued land theft and killing. Where's the safe point? It's self importance and putting the Israeli state, (as yet to be defined) above all others. If a state could be racist, Israel would be it.

hamsin wrote: »

I hope.

1. There is no "Palestinian population" in Israel. There are Israeli Arabs in Israel.
2. Jews and Arabs have the same birth rate in Israel. Plus constant Jewish immigration.

Denying their existence. Do you not see the hypocrisy? Israel under Netenyahu is a criminal state.

hamsin

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Nobody buys the security lie. That excuse can be used for continued land theft and killing. Where's the safe point? It's self importance and putting the Israeli state, (as yet to be defined) above all others. If a state could be racist, Israel would be it.



Denying their existence. Do you not see the hypocrisy? Israel under Netenyahu is a criminal state.

I don't discuss with antisemitic idiots.

James Brown

hamsin wrote: »

I don't discuss with antisemitic idiots.

You shouldn't. Fair play.
Now back to Israel...you know Israel isn't the people of the Jewish faith right? Don't insult Jewish people by linking them to Israeli policy and actions.

Odhinn

hamsin wrote: »

I hope.

1. There is no "Palestinian population" in Israel. There are Israeli Arabs in Israel.
.......

There are Palestinian-Israeli arabs in Israel, that make up about 20% of the population overall (afaik).

rapul

hamsin wrote: »

I don't discuss with antisemitic idiots.

You have no credibility now, pathetic post

hamsin

Odhinn wrote: »

There are Palestinian-Israeli arabs in Israel, that make up about 20% of the population overall (afaik).

Your opinion is irrelevant.

bunderoon

hamsin wrote: »

Your opinion is irrelevant.

It's AS relevant as yours.

Odhinn

hamsin wrote: »

Your opinion is irrelevant.

That's not my opinion, it's a factual observation based on existing data

Ethnic Groups

Jewish 74.4% (of which Israel-born 76.9%, Europe/America/Oceania-born 15.9%, Africa-born 4.6%, Asia-born 2.6%), Arab 20.9%, other 4.7% (2018 est.)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/is.html

hamsin

rapul wrote: »

You have no credibility now, pathetic post

I don't care.

cameramonkey

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/12/israel-planted-spying-devices-near-white-house-says-report

Israel has been caught spying on the White house. Nice.

hamsin

Odhinn wrote: »

That's not my opinion, it's a factual observation based on existing data

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/is.html

"Arab", not "Palestinian".
So, what did you prove? Stupid post.

Odhinn

hamsin wrote: »

"Arab", not "Palestinian".
So, what did you prove? Stupid post.

The vast majority of that 20% are Palestinian Arabs.

hamsin

Odhinn wrote: »

The vast majority of that 20% are Palestinian Arabs.

Now go to my initial reply.

Odhinn

hamsin wrote: »

Now go to my initial reply.

The fact is that 20% of the Israeli population is composed of Palestinian Arabs.




Back to the topic - What's your opinion on the planned annexation?

hamsin

Odhinn wrote: »

The fact

And now I stop discussion with you.

cameramonkey

Bibi is a bit like the DUP, his hatred for the Palestinians and his myopic views will do more damage to Israel in the long run than the PLO or Hamas. could ever hope to. It is interesting watching him implode.

Odhinn

hamsin wrote: »

And now I stop discussion with you.

Again - What's your opinion on the planned annexation?

cameramonkey

The stealing of Palestinian land is nothing new, the Israelis will never stop their robbery until the world takes action against them. They are so messed up that they still see themselves as victims despite the carnage, murder and mayhem they have created in the region.

Odhinn

cameramonkey wrote: »

The stealing of Palestinian land is nothing new, the Israelis will never stop their robbery until the world takes action against them. They are so messed up that they still see themselves as victims despite the carnage, murder and mayhem they have created in the region.

Actually they only need to keep on the good side of the US. The current government in washington has basically left them free to do what they will, so Netanyahu is quite right in saying this is a great opportunity to grab more land.

hamsin

cameramonkey wrote: »

his myopic views will do more damage to Israel

It's not your country, not your people, it's not your buisness.

Dr Turk Turkelton

hamsin wrote: »

It's not your country, not your people, it's not your buisness.

It's not exactly your country either mate.

uck51js9zml2yt

Israel has made one mistake in its treatment of "foreigners" in it's land.

It's forgotten that they were once foreigners and slaves as well and have forgotten to how they were told to treat them.

You just have to read the law and the prophets to see Israel is wrong in its treatment of the Arabs.

cameramonkey

hamsin wrote: »

It's not your country, not your people, it's not your buisness.

Thanks for that , I understand that you may have issues . I should also remind you that Palestine is not your country either and you are not welcome there but deep down you already know that.



In the deepest reassess of your soul somewhere you understand that killing men, women and children and stealing their land is not the basis for a happy and fruitful life. I can see from your posts that the situation has had a bad effect on you but if you accept that you can be wrong all is not lost for you.

hamsin

Dr Turk Turkelton wrote: »

It's not exactly your country either mate.

It's exactly my country and it's exactly not your business.

Odhinn

hamsin wrote: »

It's exactly my country and it's exactly not your business.

Then you might give us your opinion of the proposed annexation?

cameramonkey

hamsin wrote: »

It's exactly my country and it's exactly not your business.

What part of Palestine are you from?

hamsin

Odhinn wrote: »

Then you might give us your opinion of the proposed annexation?

If you "know facts" (and you know nothing), you don't need my opinion.
Do you understand my simple English? I stopped useless discussion with you.

Odhinn

hamsin wrote: »

If you "know facts" (and you know nothing), you don't need my opinion.
Do you understand my simple English? I stopped useless discussion with you.

Why can't you comment on the subject of the thread?

banie01

hamsin wrote: »

That's why the Jewish state was created. Thanks for advise.

banie01 wrote: »

For the sake of polite discourse and the avoidance of the discussion descending into accusations of anti-Semitism, please don't invoke the Jewishness of the Israeli state as a justification.

hamsin wrote: »

I don't discuss with antisemitic idiots.

It didn't take you long to revert to the anti Semite card did it?

The illegal actions of Israel are not actions of the Jewish people.
Why do you persist upon making disagreeing with Israeli policy a matter of Religion?

Is the congruence of Nationalism, Zionism and religion the only defence left to Israeli right wingers?
Where calling a nation state out for its evident wrongs, needs to be portrayed as being anti-Semitism?
Really?
You do know that BiBi's or indeed any Israeli persons religion isn't the issue here?

The issue is National aggression and posturing, the marginalisation of a whole segment of a nations society based on their being not "Palestinian" but Israeli Arab?
That outright sectarianism is a pillar of what Israel calls its domestic policy, but that others would reasonably call international policy?

But its Israel that's the victim?
How does that work?
We have a few politicians to the North of us who would love to learn that trick.

Irish Praetorian

hamsin wrote: »

Who asked you to defend Israel? Anyway, I as an Israeli don't need it. Thanks.
Now, Israel is an independent state and it knows what it needs or doesn't need to do according to its national and security interests. That's why the Jewish state was created. Thanks for advise.

I asked myself, and I don't particularly care if others request my intervention or not on this forum, unless that person has a bolded username or is quoting the rules.

Now, as to why I ended up defending Israel, well simply put I found myself quite irritated with a lot of pretty obvious hypocrisy that surrounded the topic of Israel. I would see people losing their minds in rage whenever there was a violent outburst involving the Israelis and have little to say when yet another Syrian massacre was announced. I was perturbed to hear people list UN GA Resolutions as some kind of final word on the issue, and have nothing to say when I noted the UNHCR had passed more resolutions condemning Israel than the rest of the world combined. I also found myself darkly amused when people tried to stir up the urgency of Israel's 'colonization' of the Palestinians, at the same time as about a million Rohingya ended up extirpated from Myanmar with hardly a word of protest. I see what I see and I observe accordingly. I observed the follow of some those standards then as I observe some of the follies of Israeli foreign policy now - there is no mutual exclusiveness between the two.

As for what will become of Israel and my 'advice' - firstly I don't think anyone here is deluded enough to imagine the Israeli government is consulting the Politics forum of boards when it comes to informing its policy choices. You might have observed quite a few discussions about foreign policy issues on this forum and I suspect they will continue whether they are invited or not. It may benefit you as I dare say it has benefit me, to observe these discussions not simply to reinforce your own views, but to try and challenge them as well. Listening to ones opponents has quite a bit of use, it helps you improve your own arguments and allows you to see which views one holds which cannot be sustained.

James Brown

hamsin wrote: »

And now I stop discussion with you.

Bulldoze his house!

James Brown

hamsin wrote: »

It's not your country, not your people, it's not your buisness.

Pot, kettle?

rapul

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Pot, kettle?

Yeah bang on, and we're anti semetic in his eyes for having an opinion

hamsin

banie01 wrote: »

Why do you persist upon making disagreeing with Israeli policy a matter of Religion?

I even didn't mention religion. You are just another troll.

Odhinn

hamsin wrote: »

I even didn't mention religion. You are just another troll.

Whats your assesment of Netanyahus plan to annex the areas in the Jordan valley?