Social Question

Boogabooga1's avatar

This week should Palestine be allowed to join the United Nations?

Asked by Boogabooga1 (900points) September 30th, 2011

Palestine has formally submitted a request to join the United Nations in both a bid for peace and to secure their land from further pillage.
United States and Israel are doing everything possible to defy them that opportunity.

My views are that Israeli Zionism is determined to not allow them any of their land between the Med and the Euphrates and that Israel is the tail that wags the dog (USA)
What do you think of Palestine’s bid to join the UN? relevant link

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

21 Answers

JLeslie's avatar

You should read @zensky’s response here. He is our resident Israeli Jelly.

Jaxk's avatar

It seems unlikely to create any kind of peace agreement. They want to be recognised without recognising the Israeli state. With Egypt becoming more hostile towards Israel, it seems the likelihood of a complete blow up in the region elevates. We better begin harvesting our own oil because dealing in the middle east is going to become much more difficult.

Boogabooga1's avatar

@Jaxk Where are you mentally?
Palestine as the weak underdog has offered peace terms many times. They are requesting to join the UN as a desperate bid for the leading nations to enforced peace and an end to loosing any more of their land. (and sons).to zionists.

And do you blame them for not knowing “which Israel ” to recognize? 1949 version of Israel? or every single other one promised by the zionists since then?

That Desert will be full of genocide until the end of time.

JLeslie's avatar

@Boogabooga1 Let’s see a link for these many times the Palestinians have offered peace?

Boogabooga1's avatar

@JLeslie You should read @zensky’s response here He is our resident Israeli Jelly.
Or listen to this

zensky's avatar

Uninspired trolling is droll, but still a troll.

Jaxk's avatar

I don’t see where Palestine has ever tried to negotiate peace, The statement from Nasser in ‘64 says it all:

“Israel and the imperialism around us, which confront us, are two separate things. There have been attempts to separate them, in order to break up the problems and present them in an imaginary light as if the problem of Israel is the problem of the refugees, by the solution of which the problem of Palestine will also be solved and no residue of the problem will remain. The danger of Israel lies in the very existence of Israel as it is in the present and in what she represents.”

It’s still the goal of the Palestinians to destroy or eradicate Israel. The UN will not ever act as a peace keeper in that region. To think they would is foolish.

Blackberry's avatar

I don’t know much about the Israeli-Palestine conflict, but why not just let both join? :/

zenvelo's avatar

@Boogabooga1 And do you blame them for not knowing “which Israel ” to recognize? 1949 version of Israel? or every single other one promised by the zionists since then?

Which version of Palestine would you admit to the U.N.? The PLO/Arafat wing? Hamas? The Palestinian Authority?

Qingu's avatar

So @Jaxk, what are you advocating, exactly? Permanent apartheid-style occupation of the Palestinian territories?

Or do you want to give Palestinians the right to vote in Israeli elections?

Jaxk's avatar


The Apartheid argument is disingenuous at best. Israeli Arabs have all the same property rights and voting rights as anybody else and they run for public office. The disputed territories are the question and if Palestine ever wants to negotiate, that issue can be resolved. If they want to be recognised as a sovereign State, they should recognise Israel as well. They’ll still hate each other but at least the lines will be stable. At least until the Arabs attack Israel again.

Qingu's avatar

I wasn’t talking about Israeli Arabs.

I was asking you what you think should be done about the “disputed” territories, i.e. the territories that are not sovereign and are currently under Israeli military occupation. Which is sort of the definition of apartheid, by the way.

Your only precondition to letting them become sovereign states is for them to recognize Israel? Okay, what borders of Israel? That’s the sticking issue, no?

And if no agreement can be reached (because netanyahu keeps ignoring any compromises on the borders), do you favor indefinitely prolonging the occupation?

flutherother's avatar

Peace talks would have resumed had Netanyahu not gone ahead with settlement building on the West Bank despite it being illegal under international law and despite Obama publicly stating it should stop. This made it impossible for the Palestinians to enter into negotiations.

Qingu's avatar

Netanyahu also unilaterally “started over” the negotiations with Abbas that were already well in progress when he came into office.

He did the same thing when he took office in the 90’s too.

I friggin hate that guy.

Jaxk's avatar


I think the Israeli’s have legitimate concerns and the Palestinians have legitimate concerns. They need to work those out through direct negotiations. The UN can’t dictate the borders for either one. The precondition for recognising them should be agreed borders, mutual recognition, and some sort of mutual agreement to enforce the peace. In other words, at least pretend you want to resolve this. I haven’t seen anything from the Palestinians that would indicate they want a peace. But plenty of indication they want to sustain hostilities.

Qingu's avatar

The problem with direct negotiations is that the Palestinians have no leverage, and Netanyahu has ignored their demands completely… because they have no leverage.

There are elements of both sides that don’t want to resolve this. Netanyahu has explicitly said he wants to indefinitely continue the occupation. You can argue Hamas is worse… and I’d agree with you. But the sticking point for me is that the Palestinians have justice on their side. The fact that one faction of the oppressed minority of an apartheid state acts like a bunch of savages doesn’t change the fact that it’s an apartheid state.

Jaxk's avatar

@Qingu What exactly are their demands and what are they willing to do get them? I know the Settlements are a big part of this but when Israel withdrew the settlements from Gaza, it only served as a firing point for the Palestinians. I can understand thier reluctance to ignore the problem. Of course I’ve never understood why an Israeli would want to locate into such a hostile territory to begin with.

Qingu's avatar

Settlements are a large part of it, the status of Jerusalem is a large part of it. And it’s important notto paint the Palestinians with a broad brush. It’s possible that this won’t be enough for Hamas because they are insane (though possibly not as insane as they are characterized; they seem to be pragmatic as well). Abbas, on the other hand, has made clear he’d accept a two-state solution with no more settlements and a shared Jerusalem… and Netanyahu scrapped the deal.

As for why Israelis want to settle? Because they are insane as well. The settlers are religious fanatics and many have just as warped morals as Islamists in Hamas. They literally believe that all of Palestinian belongs to the “chosen people” and will fight for it. And they form a powerful part of Netanyahu’s coalition. There are obviously many Israelis who are horrified by the settlers. So it’s important not to paint the Israelis with a broad brush either. There are factions on both sides that are enemies to peace and there are factions on both sides that are perfectly willing to negotiate a decent twostate solution.

Jaxk's avatar


For once we may not be too far apart. I may lean slightly towards the Israeli’s and you may not lean as far but overall, I would agree.

herculies's avatar

Why not? The UN needs another voice calling for the annihilation of a religion and a nation.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther