to not understand how you can fire missiles targeting civilians and it not be a war crime

[Itsaboatjack]

now I'm not especially knowledgable about the problems in the middle east but surely firing missiles into a city intentionally killing civilians is some kind of war crime?

America and the UN have got plenty of missile bases, they don't need Israel.

The official Palestinian position is now that Israel has the right to exist within the 1967 borders. Yes, there are some who deny this, but then there are also Israelis who believe in a Greater Israel. But the conventional wisdom is now that there will be an Israel and a Palestine.

The question really is over the territories seized in 1967, Gaza and the West Bank, which are supposed to be the future state of Palestine. That looks increasingly unlikely every year, not only because Israel keeps expanding its settlements, but because of intra-Palestinian feuds.

So I think most people have moved beyond the question of, does Israel get to exist. The question now is, how can Israel and Palestine co-exist. And really, time is on the side of the Palestinians, both because of the demographics and because in 15-20 years I don't think the US will still be supporting Israel as they are now. It's very worrisome.

I get frustrated by both sides and can understand why both sides act as they do even if it means that there is no peace and possible solution. It does bug me when people sitting all safe in the UK with no real experience of living there and what that really entails can easily condemn one side or the other. Both sides have and are making mistakes. People just brush off the constant rocket attacks that have been going on in southern Israel for years, there might be little casualties but you think this has no impact on everyday life? You let your kids out to play, you send them off to school with this constant threat? Everyday life, schooling etc constantly under threat of disruption.

By that logic, the UK should just have sucked up the IRA bombings and threats, should just shrug off the 7/7 bombings and attempts since then.

There is a lot of routing for the underdog here when if you had to live your life there on one side or the other - I wonder truthfully what side you would choose to live with.

I really don't know what would have to be done to secure any kind of peace however grudging, it was much better for Palestinians in the past before Israel closed the Borders. I'd like to see Bibi go and the settlements bulldozed to start with but I wonder what the Palestinians are willing to bring to the table.

And the 1967 Borders does seem a fair place to start. Israel should never allowed the expansion of settlements and I'd have no problem seeing these people forcibly removed.

Seized by Israel? They didn't just roll up there - before 1948 that land was owned by BRITAIN (who won it from the French after the fall of the Ottomans who won it from the Crusaders after the fall of Rome, who were the ones to name it Palestine after they kicked out the Jews from Jerusalem). Britain planned to create a Jewish state well before WW2 [as did the French if they had won], They carved up the borders for various countries back in the 1920s (with semi-borders agreed in the 1900s as the Ottoman went into decline). The Brits wanted to divide the Muslims into then Transjordan and the Jews/others into Israel, did a piss poor job of managing and dividing communities that had lived together for generations (WTF is up with Britain and dividing communities rather than getting people to talk?) ran off with the job undone in the hand off to Israel which led to the 1948 war between Israel and its' neighbours which changed the original borders which have been in flux ever since. The 1967 border standard to me basically says that the land gained/lossed by nations in the first war is fine but the changes in the Six Day War and later conflicts aren't. Why not the original borders? Why not just make new borders? Why not right to return for Palestinians to Jordan as was the original plan? All options should be considered. Egypt is trying to get them to consider all options and being ignored. The UN is all but useless there now (but then, it's also useless in dealing America and it's conflicts with drone bombs and the double tap war crime as well as dealing with the US and giving land for its indigenous populations back).

And the innocent people who just want to get on with life suffer, regardless of the side they were born on. .

Grrr - thank you for putting this into historical context, which I find really helpful. I agree all options should be considered and an independent mediator would be helpful; positions are so entrenched (even on MN) that it seems inevitable that the conflict will just go on indefinitely unless there are some kind of talks/discussions/attempt to move things forward. And yes, it wasn't a great idea to place Israel in its current position, surrounded by its enemies - not sure where else it could have been put though.

It wasn't just placed or plopped there - Jewish people have always lived there- it is their promised land. The idea that it should have been founded in the heart of Europe, crescent moons suggestion, is bizarre not least because of what happened in the heart of Europe to the Jewish people.
I feel desperately sorry for the Palestinian people - they have been let down massively - especially by those who suggested they fought, first in 1947 when land sharing was a real possibility and from then on and now by Hamas.

I'm sorry but I don't believe in the "it's the promised land" rhetoric. I am an atheist but believe everybody has the right to believe in the sky pixie of their choosing. Or not,if that is what they choose. Palestine was divided up on the say so of an old book. Written by man,not God/Yahweh.

If the French found an old book stating all of Wales except the North is "theirs" and made Welsh people move to the North...would people react well? No,no they would not.

Thank 8nights for the potted history! And thanks Dreaming for the clarity.

Crescentmoon, if you had seen your family and all your friends' families destroyed in the holocaust it is highly unlikely you would want to return to your homeland. There are no jews in Germany because they were all murdered, by the million. It is inconceivable to think that anyone would want to call it their home again.

And regarding media manipulation - we are as manipulated as we choose to be.

I think the UK demonstrates a lot of guilt by the endless media coverage of what is really, none of their business any more.

I was going to say in my previous post that this is a matter that cannot be solved with violence, only with debate and conversation - both sides are fighting about different things. I do wish they'd stop behaving like little boys and be a bit more grown up about this.

"I'm sorry but I don't believe in the "it's the promised land" rhetoric."

OK, do you believe in "they were there first"?

Achillea - I see your point completely about Jewish people not wanting to remain in Europe and especially not Germany,following WW2. An entire culture was wiped out.

My OH is a historian,specilising in WW2. The true level of destruction caused by the Nazis is utterly breathtaking,in the most terrible way.

But this isn't an argument about where Jewish people should live. They have Israel,which is in my opinion safe in it's existence,no Western nation would stand by and do nothing to help in the face of all out war. And of course other than Israel,Jewish people can and do,live wherever they choose to. As is right.

The big question now is how Israel and Palestine can co-exist in peace. Which is all the normal civilians in both countries want.

PoppyAmex - yes I believe Jewish people have live in that area for thousands of years.

History clearly states it.

What I meant was it is irrelevant whether a book says it was the promised land or not. Because for me "where should the Jews live and why" style questions are utterly outdated and irrelevant to current the current issues.

Jewish people "should" live wherever they choose to. For me it is as strange that people argue that Israel shouldn't exist (not on this thread) is as odd to me as saying Spain shouldn't. It is a country,it exists,people live there.

But some kind of agreement needs to be reached between Israel and Palestine. A return to the 1967 borders? I really don't know. But wrongs have been and are being committed on both sides and this has been on going since 1948.

Yes indeed that is the big question Alis.

They don't seem to want to get on, a bit like the catholics and the protestants.

And like the women of Northern Ireland, the women of Israel and Palestine are fairly downtrodden, ignored, and relegated to the background. But it was women that got the men to stop fighting in Northern Ireland (and Dame Shirley Williams) - remember when they marched? It may be that the women of the middle east hold the key to peace there.

You can't reasonably use 'they were there first' as a decider of land claims in the modern world.

The last Jewish kingdom in Palestine was destroyed by the Roman Empire -- that's how long ago it was. The Arabs first took control of Palestine in the 600s. Regardless of who was there first, it's all ancient history at this point. We need to focus on the entities that exist today and accept they both have a right to live there. That's pretty much the foundation of the current international order.

This thread only serves as a reminder of the hopelessness of this situation.

The Israelis didn't just rock up after the war, but similarly, just because the land was British, it doesn't mean there weren't Palestinian people living there (don't lets start on the legitimacy of the British rule).

Assigning blame is not the way that things will move forward. We could go round and round in this thread and never get anywhere.

I agree they have to compromise and Israel should pull back. Whether they will do so while still being attacked is up to them.

Peace came to n. Ireland tho - so why not?

I mentioned the history to counter the 'thieved land' and why it's there not Europe earlier in the thread. Most of Europe, Africa and middle east are artificial states formed after war or colonisation, but still people question Israels existence. That is clearly something Israel can't compromise on.

It was always just a British mandate. To be fair to the British, they never had any intention of staying in Palestine and just wanted to get out.

Cresecentmoon - I do actually have sympathy for the one state idea. Despite being part Israeli, I'm not sure I really like the idea of a state which identifies itself around religion. But we're nowhere near a point where that idea would be accepted by eithter the Palestinians or the Israelis. This isn't East and West Germany reunifying!

The two state solution is the most viable and even that seems to be getting further beyond reach. Many of my Israeli friends who would like to see a Palestinian state in principle are now terrified of the idea of the Palestinians ruling the West Bank the way they do Gaza with all the most densely populated regions of Israel within easy range of any missiles. And I completely understand them. I would love there to be a Palestinian state living peacefully with Israel and while Israel has often not helped, I've no signs of the kinds of institutions which would lead to a democratic and peaceful state emerging among the Palestinians - there would be complete anarchy.

Just for historical clarity - the Palestinians were offered ALL of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in 1967.

They said no.

In fact they said no three times: no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it.

These are the 3 no's of Khartoum.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution

Just for further clarity -- after the 1967 war Israel offered to return Sinai, the Golan and parts of the West Bank, but not Gaza or East Jerusalem.

And it was not the Palestinians who said 'no' at Khartoum, it was the Arab heads of state (Egypt, Jordan, etc.)

Sorry to be pedantic but the thread is turning into a history lesson a bit...

Israel will never agree to a one-state solution. The combination of demographics and democracy mean that it would cease to be a Jewish state in the not too distant future.

It's a shame because it's probably the most fair solution really.

It was the Arab League which included the Arab heads of state who represented the Palestinians living within their borders who did not have a state then either (the Egyptians and Jordanians could have given them one, although arguably, Jordan IS a Palestinian state) but was also a body in which the Palestinians participated, albeit they didn't yet have any real political organization as Palestinians at that point. I never heard of any Palestianians OPPOSING the decision of the Arab League in 1967!

And then there was the Peel partition plan AND the UN partition plan, both of which the Palestinians turned down.

They are just as much responsible for their plight as Israel is. It didn't have to be like this.

On the Palestinian side, I saw nothing but peaceful smiles and welcomes and EVEN gratitude that we were there as tourists pumping money into the system. I got no sense of that on the Israeli side. They didn't give a flying 4x that we were there. And neither should they be that bothered. But my goodness - what a difference between the two sides.

I have come away knowing exactly which side I sympathise with.

I've watched footage of Palestinians abusing Israelis. I've even been abused myself, albeit not badly, thankfully. There are arsehole civilians on both sides. They don't need your sympathy anyway. It's easy to wear rose tinted glasses when it's not your home country. I lived in Israel and consider it my home.

The official Palestinian position is now that Israel has the right to exist within the 1967 borders.

That's the moderate position. Very kind of the Palestinians to recognize that Israel has a right to exist and to realize that try as they might, that Israel is here to stay. But I do see that it does leave a way forward (and indeed there are many extremists in Israel).

However, Hamas doesn't think like that. Hamas's charter calls for the destruction of Israel. And the Gazans voted for them.