How much do you really know about the so-called Occupied Israeli Territories?

All I know is the geography: Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights, part of Jerusalem and a small strip of land on the Lebanese border. I am utterly ignorant of the politics surrounding each of these territories, other than the Israeli government considers some to be negotiable and others not. +GQ hope it doesn’t start a flame war

I am not about to wade into these political waters with people who are emotionally invested in them. I will say that I think the real reason why everybody wants the West Bank has nothing to do with history, religion, or politics and everything to do with geography. It should be pretty obvious, see if you can figure it out.

Well, these are my personal opinions on this issue, a subject which mostly comes down to view and opinion, what facts you chose to use in order to make your case. I am not pro- either one, and I judge it from how I see it.

First of all, I am not sure why you solely use the response to the statement of the High Representative from the Israeli government as a source of information. I think the article is more than biased. Not surprising since it is written by the deputy foreign minister of Israel and not a journalist. I think he has some reasonable arguments which holds up if you look at it from one angle and not if you look at it from another. That article comes down to his interpretation of documents, his personal opinions and agenda as a representative of one side in the conflict. I see it as an affirmation of Israel’s lack of peace effort and an attempt to call an orange an apple, and I leave it without much consideration.

However, if one has to conquer a piece of land whose inhabitants oppose it, I believe it has to be considered occupied. Word twisting and definition creep can’t change that these are conquered areas.

One could question the very existence of Israel with similar arguments. I don’t see how any of the sides have exclusive right to this tiny area of land, and no solution can be entirely just as these two ethnic groups both have all the right in the world to the same land. Personally I would prefer it to be a one country-two-peoples solution, but I don’t see it. If it is the wish of the palestinians to have their own nation, they should have it, just as Israel.

This kind of conflict is not unique in the world. They are all complex and often result in violence. Northern Ireland, The Kurdish situation, Ngorno-Karabach, the Tamils, The Basques, Chechnya and what goes on in many of the countries of sub-Sahara. This conflict is one of the few the west is really concerned about. We must be concerned, but I wish we would care about other conflicts as much. In any of the conflicts around the globe, worth-while solutions can only be found in negotiation and even then they will take generations to really settle.

The High representatives statement is missing from this article but one can look it up. If this is the official view of EU, it must be considered as such and the issue negotiated from that position. Israel has a problem, and if it’s ever going to be a change, Israel must play. I am not saying it’s easy or only Israel’s responsibility, but they have the ball. Palestinians and Israelis have been playing rock-paper-machine gun far too long.

The rest of the world can’t back of critisizing both sides of this and they both need to be pressured. I don’t disagree with Ashton’s statement.

Israel don’t bother with much criticism unless it comes from the USA. Settlements on the West bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights don’t help at all, and I think that Obama’s reaction recently was justified.

I think the primary goal and interest for both is a peace where both have to make sacrifices. Israel must be the one to reach out, otherwise nothing will change. I would personally want to see more political involvement of Iran and Syria other than supplying Hezbollah with weaponry.

As it is, it’s neither of a one state or two-state solution, and I don’t see a serious sign of a strive in either way. The whole conflict needs a big jolt and a push. The Palestinians live in misery and the Israelis are tired. Hopefully both sides will find a common level of good faith and peace effort.

One issue here is that this statement is all about official borders, who is a recognized state, and who is not. Part of the problem here is that recognized states in a European sense, are quite new in the middle east. The facts on the ground have to include the fact that civilians have been forced from lands and homes and replaced with new people based largely on ethnicity and religion. So is that occupation, or do the displace peoples have to have had an official state of which they were a part?

This book offers a cool perspective. I got it for Christmas.

@StupidGirl Um, is that New World Order conspiracy fantasies? And are you serious?

@Snarp maybe read it, research it and then decide for yourself.

I don’t read things with big New World Order graphics. I don’t have time to read every little thing, so for me to read something it has to pass an initial credibility test. This doesn’t.

Hah you have been programmed to be a good boy.
Did you even notice the article on WSJ was written by “the deputy foreign minister of Israel”? How’s that for “a conspiracy”? News is supposed to be objective—WSJ is clearly not.

Also, you don’t need dollars bills?
They clearly state “Novus Ordo Seclorum” meaning “New World Order” and feature lots of graphics related to that.

@StupidGirl And you have been programmed to be an idiot. Sorry to be so blunt, but I can only be so polite in the face of attempts to spread idiocy. Of course I noticed who wrote the WSJ article, of course it’s biased. It’s also clearly published in the opinion section. There’s no expectation of objectivity on the opinion page.

Novus Ordo Seclorum means New Order of the Ages, meaning the United States, not some shadow government.

@oratio You wrote: Well, these are my personal opinions on this issue, a subject which mostly comes down to view and opinion, what facts you chose to use in order to make your case. I am not pro- either one, and I judge it from how I see it.

I haven’t stated my case at all, I simply posted a link to an article. I also asked in the (very few) details to please read it first. So I have no idea what you mean by that. Even my topics show every single way of loking at the “Disputed or Occupied Territories, the Jordanian “West Bank” or “Judae and Samaria” – could I have been more diplomatic than that? I think not.

@StupidGirl Your name should be Stupid Anti-Semite girl and I have flagged you. Please don’t bother polluting my threads again. For those of you who don’t check links or couldn’t be bothered, let’s just read the first paragraph of her article: The Rothschilds have been in control of the world for a very long time, their tentacles reaching into many aspects of our daily lives, as is documented in the following timeline.

You and your tentacles, though ironically appropriate here in the fluther, sea are not welcome here anymore.

@patg – It’s sold-out at Amazon from your link – but have you read it? What’s it about – the wall? It is a serious issue and very controversial, not unlike the wall being continually erected between the States and Mexico.

@Zen_Again I know, chose is a spelling error. Supposed to be choose and a generic you. sorry

@oratio OK.

:-)

[mod says] Let’s try to keep cool heads, everyone. It’s a very sensitive and serious topic.

@augustlan so far so good. I noticed you left @StupidGirl‘s link – I’m all for free speech – but it is very anti-semitic. I will respect fluther’s decision, though.

I never read it. Now, I have. It is gone.

@augustlan Thank you. As a journalist, I am all for free speech – but that was just – well, you read it. Thanks!

Another interesting read on the subject can be found here.

@Zen_Again it is a book of graffiti art from an artist known as BIGSY. He claims that wall is the “Mecca” for graffiti artists. Only a small portion of the book is designated to that, but some very interesting imagery nonetheless.