Skip to main content

Originally published in Tikkun Daily |

Speaking at the Aspen Institute, General James Mattis warned that if the current peace efforts led by John Kerry fail, Israel will have two paths: bi-nationalism or apartheid.

Mattis, the 11th commander of CENTCOM, retired on June 1 after a 45-year military career. His comments at Aspen were uncharacteristically blunt and relatively unfiltered, revealing U.S. military frustrations and perspectives rarely heard from such high-ranking officials.

I'll tell you, the current situation is unsustainable ... We've got to find a way to make work the two-state solution that both Democrat and Republican administrations have supported, and the chances are starting to ebb because of the settlements. For example, if I'm Jerusalem and I put 500 Jewish settlers to the east and there's ten-thousand Arabs already there, and if we draw the border to include them, either [Israel] ceases to be a Jewish state or you say the Arabs don't get to vote -- apartheid. That didn't work too well the last time I saw that practiced in a country.
Mattis also expressed his frustration for the price U.S. military efforts have paid for Washington's inability to function as an unbiased arbiter in the conflict:
So we've got to work on [peace talks] with a sense of urgency. I paid a military security price every day as a commander of CENTCOM because the Americans were seen as biased in support of Israel, and [because of this] moderate Arabs couldn't be with us because they couldn't publicly support those who don't show respect for Arab Palestinians.
Mattis's words are looking to be particularly prescient as Kerry attempts what many see as a last-ditch effort for the United States to broker a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians.

Why? The Associated Press reported that Palestinian leaders received, in writing, assurances that proposed peace talks would be based upon pre-1967 borders with land swaps, which is the longstanding U.S. position.

However, that same AP article reported that Western officials have denied such is the case: that '67 lines would form the basis of negotiations on borders for a future Palestinian state.

We will soon learn whether or not the U.S. government will heed Mattis's warning, or whether Washington will continue to waffle in sticking to its own stated policy with regard to Israel/Palestine, a waffling that has always worked against U.S.-led peace efforts.


Originally posted to David Harris-Gershon (The Troubadour) on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:08 AM PDT.

Also republished by Writing by David Harris Gershon and Adalah — A Just Middle East.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Let's hope for peace. (13+ / 0-)

    Isreal needs another Rabin.

    Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

    by TomP on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:14:26 AM PDT

    •  My problem is that (5+ / 0-)

      I keep thinking of Israel's Barak. His peace offer went too far for a majority of Israelis and not far enough for a majority of Palestinians. I'm not sure how anyone can square that circle.

      (I also wonder, though this is pretty off-topic, how many 'apartheid' states currently exist.)

      "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

      by GussieFN on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:21:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Why do you think (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FG, GussieFN, Don midwest, Meteor Blades

        Barak went too far for a majority of Israelis? Public opinion polling consistently and robustly shows  a significant majority of Israelis supporting a two-state peace settlement. Ehud Barak's problem was Yasir Arafat and the second intifada, which together persuaded even more Israelis that the Palestinians were not seriously interested in a lasting peace with a secure Israel.

        Nor should we get hung up on the desirability of Barak's offer at Camp David. First, Arafat's failure was not rejecting it but rather failing to make a counter-offer. Second, and more important, the story didn't end at Camp David. In December 2000, President Clinton proposed the peace parameters--accepted by the Israeli government but rejected by the Palestinians--that have informed all serious peace-making efforts to this day.

        Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

        by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:50:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I read polls at the time, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          waterstreet2013

          not about a two-state peace settlement in general, but about Barak's offer in particular. It's possible that I'm mis-remembering, but I doubt it. They made a big impression on me at the time: if the most the Israelis could offer was less than the Palestinians could accept, it was hard for me to see any way forward.

          As for the Dec. 2000 proposal, that only rings a distant bell, and I'm not particularly interested in blamestorming. Plenty of that to go around.

          "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

          by GussieFN on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:09:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not blame-mongering but understanding, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            GussieFN

            lest we be condemned to repeating history.

            For a (relatively) brief refresher, I suggest reading The Myth of the "Myth of the Generous Offer".

            Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

            by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:30:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  That's a strong diary, and (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Quicklund

              pretty much makes the point I was trying to make. If two parties are in disagreement, and the best offer from one side is not acceptable to the other side, there will be no agreement.

              And the comment go to what I meant about 'blamestorming.' People on all sides of the issue very much want to assert what is really happening, and who is really at fault, as if that's a) possible or b) helpful.

              Taking facts to an emotion-fight.

              "Gussie, a glutton for punishment, stared at himself in the mirror."

              by GussieFN on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 12:11:48 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  Discussion of this in "The Gatekeepers" (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            another American, Dogs are fuzzy

            interviews with the heads of Shin Bet does not reach any assertion that the Israeli public was unwilling overall to go with Rabin's deal.

            What happened was that the no-military-service religious fanatics campaigned relentlessly to have Rabin killed. They gave public speeches where their leaders called for his assassination.

            Shin Bet failed.

            It was not the general public who made the mess. It was the fanatics. The moral midgets who continue to inflame the situation.

        •  Ah yes. (0+ / 0-)

          It's all the fault of those pesky Palestinians.

      •  Apartheid-states today. Excellent question... (0+ / 0-)

        Lot of countries deny citizenship even if your born on the soil.
        I googled the question of citizenship by birth.
        Appears that the U.S. and Mexico are exceptions to the rule.

        Most of Europe - Forget about it.

        Amazing
         

    •  A Rabin on one side and a Mandela on the other (0+ / 0-)

      n/t

      Freedom isn't free. Patriots pay taxes.

      by Dogs are fuzzy on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:09:53 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Mandela . . . let's see . . . (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, poco, Meteor Blades, Aunt Martha

        flirted with terrorism in his younger years, became an advocate of nonviolence, preached from prison . . .

        I believe you just named Marwan Barghouti.

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:16:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Both sides could use another Rabin. n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      poco, JNEREBEL
  •  Quite apart from the merits of the comments... (6+ / 0-)

    ...I'm not comfortable with our generals speaking about stuff like this except where they have no choice, which would be when they're before Congress. I don't want to see them in Aspen.

    You know, I sometimes think if I could see, I'd be kicking a lot of ass. -Stevie Wonder at the Glastonbury Festival, 2010

    by Rich in PA on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:16:02 AM PDT

  •  He's got a fair point (9+ / 0-)

    Although Rich in PA's point about this being an unseemly address coming from a military general is a good one.

    At some point, Palestinians are going to cease seeking an independent state and will instead pursue full rights in a greater Israel that includes the occupied territories. If Israel continues down its existing path, she will ultimately lose the demographic battle, if you look at birth rates, and will then be forced to choose between being a democracy, being a Jewish state, or conducting a massive pogrom. It's not an appealing set of choices for anyone.

    Unapologetic Obama supporter.

    by Red Sox on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:20:22 AM PDT

  •  It has been this way for generations (7+ / 0-)

    Literally millions of human beings have had no say in their political outcome, because Israel has been unable to decide the status of the occupied territories.

    Of course there are many complexities to settling that question, but the state of disenfranchisement has existed non the less.

  •  IMHO the 2nd blockquote is the strong one. (17+ / 0-)

    The General's statement on settlers, apartheid, etc., is boilerplate Western chatter on an issue without showing any particular insight.

    OTOH, as CENTCOM commander he has firsthand experience of having "paid a military security price every day", because practically all potential Arab allies see (correctly) the US as sponsor and enablers of those very same policies which the General now says are leading to apartheid (and in fact, have long ago created an apartheid-like reality on the ground).

    At this point, it is hard to be optimistic about the Kerry-led talks. The talks' announcement comes suspiciously close after the EU decision to ban collaboration with settlements. It seems the PLO side bore the brunt of more US pressure to go in. And to boot, it is now known that Marin Indyk, former ambassador to Israel and long-time AIPAC hack, will represent the US side. "Honest Broker" his ass.

    In short, barring a major surprise this shapes up to be another Potemkin display of "Peace Talks", that will nicely serve the interests of the de-facto apartheid on the ground while the US will continue to pay a military and political price for sponsoring this charade, its predecessors, and the Occupation itself.

    (Make no mistake, I will be happy to witness that major surprise if it materializes)

  •  This conflict is getting to be a refrain. (12+ / 0-)

    As long as the US continues to occupy other nations, dictate their elections and randomly kill folks who we THINK are a threat, we really don't have any moral standing on the issue.

    Beam in our own eye and all that.

    I don't blame Christians. I blame Stupid. Which sadly is a much more popular religion these days.

    by detroitmechworks on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:33:21 AM PDT

    •  Moral standing perhaps not; serving long-term.... (5+ / 0-)

      ....US interests - while hopefully improving that very same moral standing - certainly YES.

      And I think that was the gist of the retired General's message.

    •  Name a single human nation which does (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JNEREBEL

      This line of complaint gets a little tiresome. It's not exactly news human beings are flawed, therefor so too are the nations they populate. If the world waits for the One Pure Nation to mediate the world's issues we'll all be sitting on our thumbs for a long long time.

      •  Lichtenstein! (5+ / 0-)

        But seriously, the idea that the US is suppose to be some sort of non-partisan in this conflict when we clearly and openly favor Israel at virtually every step is getting absurd.

        I mean, he says we're "seen as biased" when we are in fact biased. That's more of an issue to me than the fact that we invade countries. Although our invasions of Muslim countries doesn't do much good to the sense of bias either.

        If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

        by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:46:04 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We're biased but we're also the 800lb gorilla (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          JNEREBEL

          There's nothing for us to do but try. Certainly we must offer to try.

          •  We *are* "trying." That's the problem. n/t (0+ / 0-)

            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

            by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:17:22 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yeah. THAT's the root cause (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JNEREBEL
              •  It's not the root cause (0+ / 0-)

                but it won't lead to a solution.

                Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:20:11 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  I prefer Sen Warren's philosophy on these matters (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL

                  The odds are better with trying than with not trying.

                  In the video from the 8:35 mark or so going forward.

                  •  Yes, but trying to do what? (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT, poco

                    Right now the USA is trying to force Palestine to accept what amounts to a near-unconditional surrender.  

                    "Trying" would be good, but only with an honest broker playing middleman.  That ain't us.

                    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                    by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:41:27 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Why is it "a near-unconditional surrender" (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      JNEREBEL

                      for either the Palestinians or the Israelis to agree to participate in negotiations intended to produce a peace agreement leading to a Palestinian state alongside Israel?

                      Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

                      by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:48:49 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Every supposedly "reasonable" proposal (4+ / 0-)

                        or offer that has been put forward makes demands of Palestine that require an unconditional surrender on the part of Palestine. And most don't include any sovereignty except internally. It seems like an attempt to normalize the current situation through international intervention.

                        If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                        by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:52:41 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Please document this. AFAIK, (2+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Quicklund, JNEREBEL

                          American policy, at least since the end of the Clinton administration, has supported a two-states-for-two-peoples peace settlement. At any rate, this is my understanding of President Obama's policy and of Secretary Kerry's current efforts.

                          If you consider Palestinian agreement to such a settlement an "unconditional surrender," then we're in disagreement, because I agree with President Obama and Secretary Kerry. If you do not think that way, however, then I confess to not being able to understand you.

                          Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

                          by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:00:32 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  With absolutely no military for Palestine (4+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Code Monkey, poco, Flyswatterbanjo, corvo

                            That's an unconditional surrender. A state that has it military affairs determined by an until recent belligerent neighbor is not sovereign by any stretch of the imagination. Unless you know of a proposal that allowed the Palestinians to protect their border.

                            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                            by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:11:39 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                        •  Please list the items that have been surrendered. (0+ / 0-)

                          And where is Israel's signature on the surrender documents?

                          •  The surrender documents (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            are the product of what we're calling "peace negotiations."  Of course they don't exist yet.

                            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                            by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:13:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  There has been no surrender (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            corvo

                            Re-reading what I said I realize I should have said "Two State proposal" and not just every proposal. Surrendering complete control of one's defense to one's enemy is as close to an unconditional surrender as I can think. In exchange they would get promises from Israel.

                            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                            by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:13:33 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                      •  Hardly matters. (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        AoT

                        Recent reports suggest that Kerry's soapbubble has collapsed anyway.  And small wonder: The Palestinians (Abbas excepted) aren't ready to surrender; and the Israelis (Livni possibly excepted) aren't ready to let the Palestinians surrender conditionally.

                        That's the way it is.

                        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                        by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:59:47 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  meh. (0+ / 0-)

                      I don't believe the term 'near-unconditional surrender' means what you believe it does.

                      •  So what terms would Israel be held to? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        corvo

                        What do the Palestinians get from Israel other than a cessation of attacks and blockade?

                        If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                        by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:21:51 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Their own state with a signed peace treaty. n/t (0+ / 0-)
                          •  A state isn't a state if it lacks sovereignty (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Flyswatterbanjo, corvo, PrahaPartizan

                            And a Palestinian state would be half run by Israel, and that solution is an unconditional surrender. Israel will have it's expanded borders and face no attacks and Palestinians have gotten nothing except a smaller land to live in. And Israel keep their side of the treaty until the right wing is in power again and a settler group decides to start a new settlement, and without an army the Palestinians can do nothing.

                            That isn't a solution. It's disarmament by an overwhelmingly powerful enemy. Surrender.

                            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                            by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:32:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Around the issue of sovereignty (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            there will be a build up of the armed forces over time. As our own experiences in Afghanistan and Iraq can attest it takes time to make an effective army.

                            Not an unreasonable path then to my eyes.

                            Which is also in part why some have proposed a peacekeeping force for an interim.

                            I would expect Palestine to have full control over its sovereignty and this would be implemented along with many other critical issues within the framework of an agreement.  

                          •  I think that a peace keeping force (0+ / 0-)

                            under international control securing the border would probably deal with the issue of a secure border, but the issue was that an agreement would bar Palestine from having armed forces. Relying on international troops is also a lack of sovereignty.

                            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                            by AoT on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 09:13:20 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I do not believe a final agreement will contain (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            AoT

                            such a prohibition against having armed forces.

                            Relying on international troops will be necessary in the beginning as it is highly unlikely that a future state will have a formal military ready before statehood.  There will need to be time to build such a force and an international peacekeepers will fill that void as the state puts together its infrastructures including armed forces.

                          •  I guess I've just seen people here (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            JNEREBEL

                            often act as if that's some sort of inevitable part of an agreement. It's good to hear that it isn't necessarily.

                            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                            by AoT on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 11:38:58 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  Mediate an agreement. n/t (0+ / 0-)
          •  But we keep pretending that we aren't (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            poco, corvo, PrahaPartizan

            biased. Literally every single government official that talks about Israel and Palestine talks about us needing to appear unbiased or neutral. And it's absolute bullshit. We are clearly pro-Israel and yet we keep trying to pretend otherwise. We're trying to protect Israel, not bring about a solution. Sure, every once in a while we sit down and pretend otherwise, but we've never made a real effort. And that's because we support Israel over the Palestinians. It's mostly racism that leads to that support here in the US, imho. Not that everyone who support Israel is racist, but the right wing is racist and because it's brown Muslims that are the enemy of Israel they support Israel.

            If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

            by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:50:17 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  America makes no secret of our (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JNEREBEL

              support for Israel. But that support need not--indeed, should not--be inconsistent with good-faith efforts to achieve a two-states-for-two peoples peace settlement between the existing State of Israel and the nascent State of Palestine. For sure, a country that does not support Israel will be unable to foster such an agreement.

              Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

              by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:06:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  neither will a country that doesn't support (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                poco

                Palestine.

                You must admit we've been frankly hostile to Palestine's statehood aspirations in various world bodies.

                Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:12:02 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  We keep saying that such and such (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo

                makes us "appear biased" as the general in this article says. That's bullshit. What makes us appear unbiased is that be are in fact unbiased. The fact that our government keeps feeling the need to say that we want to appear unbiased despite the fact that we obviously are biased speaks volumes to me in regards to how serious we actually are about bringing about peace.

                If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:17:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

  •  "become"? n/t (6+ / 0-)

    "Religion is to spirituality what a Big Mac is to food." - Huffington Post commenter "Wolf 123"

    by Jaxpagan on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:36:55 AM PDT

    •  Well, strictly speaking, (5+ / 0-)

      on the Israeli side of the Green Line, Arabs do have the franchise.  However, I regard the question of "'become'?" to be increasingly licit and justified, as Israel continues to annex lands beyond the Green Line without confessing to any border changes . . . or, indeed, to any borders at all.  Borders being so . . . limiting, you know.

      Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

      by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:03:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not true (0+ / 0-)

        The only areas Israel has annexed beyond the Green Line are East Jerusalem (de jure) and the Golan (de facto).

        The Oslo Accords gave Israel full control over Area C. That isn't the same as annexation. And no new settlements have been initiated by the Israel government in 20 years (Rabin really did shut off the Settlement Enterprise).

        That said, the status quo really isn't maintainable indefinitely. Israel needs to either accept a Palestinian State or Annex all of Areas A, B, and C giving the Arabs there the same status as Arabs within the Green Line, or agree to a Palestinian State consisting of most of Areas A, B, and C. And the Palestinians have to accept that they will not get all of Area C and that there will be no "right of return" to Israel, only to a Palestinian State.

        Everybody knows this; the question is whether it is politically possible.

        •  Whether or not (4+ / 0-)

          no new settlement have been initiated by the Israeli government, a claim I'm unable to check and that even if technically correct is weakened by Israeli governments' providing infrastructure support for new settlements established without "official" governmental support, it's even more significant to note the extent of government-supported construction of new settlement housing east of the separation barrier, that is, outside the so-called settlement blocks. The Peace Now report, Settlements & the Netanyahu Government:A Deliberate Policy of Undermining the Two-State Solution (pdf), documents the fact that

          under the Netanyahu government almost 40% of new construction starts were in isolated settlements, located east of the approved route of Israel’s separation barrier – as opposed to in “settlement blocs.” This is in stark contrast to previous years, when only 20% of construction in the settlements took place in settlements east of the barrier.
          (original emphasis)

          This construction does not mean that a two-states-for-two-peoples peace settlement is impossible. What one Israeli government sponsored or tolerated, another Israeli government can undo. But it makes achieving a peace settlement more difficult. For example it makes it more difficult for Palestinians to credit Israelis as a partner for peace, just as Palestinian terrorism, BDS directed at Israel (rather than the occupation), etc., send a similarly-dispiriting message to Israelis.

          Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

          by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:21:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Pretty much agree (0+ / 0-)

            I don't support ANY construction in the settlements. And I don't support BDS, either. (Most BDS people seem to be Onestaters and I don't see that happening.) And of course anyone who supports terrorism doesn't belong on this site.

      •  Let's not kid ourselves about franchise. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AoT, corvo

        The only vote a Palestinian that is an Israeli citizen has is against their own interests.  Their vote is tossed into the trash bin if they vote for their interests since no non-zionist coalition will ever form in that state.

        Palestinian citizens and non-citizens of Israel will never really get what most people in real democracies think of as a real political power.  It's the nature of the state of Israel.

  •  What does he mean by "become"? (13+ / 0-)

    The Isreali government is down a cul-de-sac, and has been treating the Arab population in ways that defy belief. Fortunately, there are forces in Israel who oppose this, with Haaretz expressing their voices - but the place is run by extremists, and their solutions are one continuous human rights violation.

    "If you don't use your majorities, you lose your majorities."

    by SteinL on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:36:59 AM PDT

    •  Sheesh - that should be Israeli n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo

      "If you don't use your majorities, you lose your majorities."

      by SteinL on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:37:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I was heartened by the Israeli F-16 pilots who (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo, AoT

      went to jail rather than carry out what they saw as unlawful orders that targeted civilians. That takes guts but it was years ago now. Ten or more I think.

      Reaganomics noun pl: belief that government is bad, that it can increase revenue by decreasing revenue, and unregulated capitalism can provide unlimited goods for unlimited people on a planet with finite resources.

      by FrY10cK on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:07:45 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  In my view, the US long ago gave up any (6+ / 0-)

    brokering power concerning Israel because we continued to prop them up both verbally and financially despite them spying on us and thumbing their noses at us when we asked that the settlement expansion be stopped.  Israel knows we're an easy mark. We will never take them to the woodshed and give them the spanking they truly deserve. And Netanyahu is just the kind of ruthless leader to take full advantage of that.

    I like John Kerry and hope he succeeds with this newest effort, but I'd be willing to bet that behind his back there is a lot of snickering going on in Bibi's offices.

    And by the way, Jimmy Carter saw the handwriting on the wall way before this retired general, but I'm glad to see someone bucking AIPAC. They have had their thumbs on the screws with our government for far too long.

    •  bucking AIPAC.... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo, Fishtroller01

      Few have the courage to actually buck AIPAC.

      They have had their thumbs on the screws with our government for far too long.

      "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

      by allenjo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:58:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I know, and that is puzzling to me since only (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo, allenjo

        a little more than 2% of the population of the US is Jewish.

        •  The US public supports Israel (5+ / 0-)

          and it's security by a wide margin from the last polls I saw. AIPAC is effective because people support Israel, not because of the percentage of the population that is Jewish.

          If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

          by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:12:02 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I was a strong supporter at one time, but not (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Fishtroller01, corvo

            for the Israel of today.

            AIPAC is effective because people support Israel
            Considering some of the careers destroyed by AIPAC, (if you care to do a little research), there must a certain fear factor in DC for those daring to cross AIPAC.

            "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

            by allenjo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:23:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Who are the donors to the PAC? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            corvo
            •  You, too, can donate and yield tangible results, (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              corvo

              says AIPAC.......

              There are many ways you can help secure and strengthen the U.S.-Israel relationship. Whether you want to become an AIPAC member or ensure AIPAC's future by putting AIPAC in your will, your generous contribution to America's pro-Israel lobby will yield tangible results.
              http://www.aipac.org/...

              "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

              by allenjo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:28:42 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  some info here, Fishtroller (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              corvo
              As a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) organization (a category intended for civic leagues, social welfare organizations, and local associations of employees) AIPAC files an IRS Form 990. AIPAC has long structured its fiscal year end in such a way that it languidly files 2-year-old data while other nonprofits are rushing to report their previous year. Therefore, the AIPAC Form 990 listed as “year 2010″ at Guidestar.org, the officially designated website to consult such data, is actually year 2009 data [.pdf]. It also lacks the most important data in Form 990 — donor contributions.

              Unlike the far more numerous nonprofit 501(c)(3) organizations, which have to continually “means test” that they have a wide public funding base in order for contributor donations to be tax-deductible, contributions to 501(c)(4) organizations such as AIPAC (which actively lobbies Congress, the executive, and numerous government agencies) are not tax-deductible. There are no contribution limits to 501 (c)(4) nonprofit groups. Individuals, foreign nationals, partnerships, associations, and other organizations may contribute whatever amount they like to a 501(c)(4).

              Given AIPAC’s oversize clout in U.S. Middle East policy, it’s always informative to see just how many people are giving — and how much

              http://original.antiwar.com/...

              "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

              by allenjo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:32:43 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  It's not a PAC, as in Political (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Fishtroller01, AoT

              Action Committee.

              AIPAC (the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee) long antedates the campaign finance system of which PACs are an egregious part.

              Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

              by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:54:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  remember just a few months back, when 13000 (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          corvo

          AIPAC "lobbyists" went to sent to congress, 13,000!

          "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

          by allenjo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:25:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Geez. Why so many? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            corvo
            •  Don’t Touch Israel Aid...... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              corvo, AoT

              AIPAC Lobbyists to Congress: Despite Sequester, Don’t Touch Israel Aid

              Douglas Bloomfield at The Jewish Week informs us that 13,000 lobbyists from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) will descend upon Capitol Hill this weekend for their annual conference to order members of Congress not to cut $3 billion-plus in aid to Israel, even as automatic budget cuts are set to take place in a matter of days.

              At a time when sequestration is about to take a big bite out of the Pentagon budget, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) will be sending thousands of its citizen lobbyists to Capitol Hill next week to make sure Israel is exempted from any spending cuts.

              This could prove a very risky strategy at a time when millions of Americans will be feeling the bite of the sequestration debacle, from the defense budget to the school lunch program.

              But not aid to Israel, which will be untouched if AIPAC gets its way.

              http://antiwar.com/...

              "Who are these men who really run this land? And why do they run it with such a thoughtless hand?" David Crosby

              by allenjo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:38:08 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  General Mattis forgets a third option, (6+ / 0-)

    known euphemistically among the Israeli majority as "transfer."

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:56:42 AM PDT

    •  Also known as (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      merrywidow, Anastasia Castro

      Ethnic cleansing.   That is not an option.  Frankly treated the settlements as valid under international law isn't so hot either

      Touch all that arises with a spirit of compassion. An activist seeks to change opinion.

      by Mindful Nature on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:09:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not an option (0+ / 0-)

      and not something that has significant support within Israel.

      •  Yes, it's a mere 47% (6+ / 0-)

        of Israeli Jews that want Israeli Arabs transferred out as part of a "settlement."

        And those are Israeli Arabs -- fellow citizens!  One can only imagine how charitably they will behave regarding the residence rights of annexed Arab noncitizens.

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:47:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not reflected in election returns (0+ / 0-)

          There are a few Likud and HaBayitHaYehudi MKs who would support that, but neither party had it as part of its platform last election. There are probably more MKs who don't want there to be a Jewish State at all!

          •  "not reported in election returns" (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Hunter Acosta

            is cute.  That assumes that Israeli Jews are one-issue voters, and transfer is the one issue.

            A majority of Americans support meaningful (if modest) gun control measures, and Medicare for all . . . you certainly can't tell that from our elected officials, now, can you?

            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

            by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:34:24 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Didn't the Germans try that, tranferring whole (0+ / 0-)

      populations east to 'unsettled' lands?  Where are the train cars when you need them?

      There are three kinds of stupid: 'Stupid', 'Really Stupid', and 'Stupid-Like-a-Republican'. With sincere apologies to Benjamin Disraeli.

      by MARTinNJ on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 08:06:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The whole idea of settlements (10+ / 0-)

    ...was to turn Greater Israel into an aparthed state.  That was clear at Camp David and the compromise was to kick that issue down the road.  Well, 36 years down the road and we have the doors almost shut on any alternatives.  Well there is more ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from the territories and more destruction of houses in Gaza.

    The cruel hypocrisy of history.

    50 states, 210 media market, 435 Congressional Districts, 3080 counties, 192,480 precincts

    by TarheelDem on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 09:58:15 AM PDT

  •  I wish I could feel even a little optimistic (7+ / 0-)

    But I can't.
    What are the odds that if these talks even get started, that they will last more than a few days before either Israel decides to announce further settlements, or Hamas launches a rocket attack, and they come to a screeching halt?
    How many sets of peace talks have there been in the last 20, 30, 40 years? Is there a single solid accomplishment that can be pointed to from any of them?
    It seems to be an agenda item that every president has to check off his list, as if having the talks themselves is some sort of worthy achievement, even if it's clear that we'll do nothing substantial to see that they succeed.  
    I hope these will be different, but I've seen nothing to make me believe they will be.

  •  The general obviously does not know how (11+ / 0-)

    ...the game is played. He should ask Mr. Netanyahu for an explanation. See, you place 500 settlers where there are 10000 Arabs, and then start intimitading, threatening, disadvantaging the Arabs who eventually will have to leave to save themselves. And little by little, repeating the same pattern, the land will become free of Arabs. No?

    For this to happen, you must continue on what you are doing for years, decades if necessary. Peace? Get out of here! ...(sarcasm)

    Seriously considering...Netanyahu, Likud and their supporters worldwide, have put Israel on an accelerating destruction path and I strongly doubt if general's timely warning will be heard.

    "Corruptio Optimi Pessima" (Corruption of the best is the worst)

    by zenox on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:09:09 AM PDT

    •  Arabs have increased on the West Bank. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo, zenox

      Population increases, which gives leverage when finally they outnumber the Israeli Jews.

      The trouble is that these problems echo. They sound the same decade after decade. They echo without fading.

      If anything, the Netanyahu crowd are the ones who need to hear the echoes. They amp up their claims, year after year using the same language.

      This problem of echo pollution goes to any number of political situations. Same for economics -- we are seeing moral pollution from the Mortgage Massacre spread out to other sectors.

      Over at Occupy and FDL:

      Today’s Car Dealerships Echo the Mortgage Massacre

      or

      Capitalist Corruption

      And while NSA steals every piece of communication from every person on the planet, their RWNJ hackers have gotten in to the Occupy site and trashed much of the comment function. Echo after echo....

  •  he is correct (9+ / 0-)

    All ethnic, religious or race-based states eventually fail and collapse, precisely because they cannot keep the "correct" group in power without at the same time keeping the "incorrect" group away from power.

    Israel will either cease being an ethnic or religious based state and become a real democracy, or it will become the new South Africa, trying to keep the privileged group in power and prevent the non-privileged group from gaining power.

    •  Most of Europe consists of ethnic based states (0+ / 0-)
      •  However, they do not usually have laws that (5+ / 0-)

        strongly advantage a member of a specific ethnicity or a person belonging to a specific religion. Unlike Israel.

        •  They do for immigration. (0+ / 0-)

          As does Israel.

          Regarding religious freedom, it is better to NOT be Jewish in Israel as you get out from under the thumb of a powerful Rabbinate. (Two new Chief Rabbis are being selected this Wednesday and in many respects they are more important than the government in terms of their impact on the daily lives of Israeli Jews.)

          •  they allow those immigrants to vote (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            corvo, merrywidow, poco

            If Israel, on the other hand, wants to be a Jewish state, they cannot allow Palestinians to vote.  Period. And that road leads to apartheid and collapse.  (shrug)

            PS--Palestinians live there too.  They are not immigrants.

          •  Yeah, on immigration every country picks and (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            poco

            chooses whom they want. But in other areas Israel is more restrictive than most imho.

          •  Which european nation has overtly racist (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            corvo, Anastasia Castro

            immigration laws like Israel?

            •  The basic principle of Israel's (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              JNEREBEL, charliehall2

              immigration law is that, if you would have been subject to murder at the hands of the Nazis as a Jew, then, unless you actively dissociate yourself from the Jewish people by converting to another religion, you're entitled to immigrate into Israel. I have difficulty denouncing that as "racist," overtly or otherwise. Meanwhile, if you strike the inappropriate characterization of Israel's immigration laws, I think you'll find democratic, European countries with analogous laws.

              Let's consider, for example, the Republic of Ireland (pdf). Its constitution begins:

              In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity, from Whom is all authority and to Whom, as our final end, all actions both of men and States must be referred
              Article 2 provides:
              It is the entitlement and birthright of every person born in the island of Ireland, which includes its islands and seas, to be part of the Irish Nation. That is also the entitlement of all persons otherwise qualified in accordance with law to be citizens of Ireland. Furthermore, the Irish nation cherishes its special affinity with people of Irish ancestry living abroad who share its cultural identity and heritage.
              On this basis, Irish citizenship may be available to the great-grandchild of someone born in Ireland, even though the grandparents, parents, and the great-grandchild herself were not born in Ireland.

              Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

              by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 01:01:48 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  that's great. the Palestinians live there. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                corvo, poco

                They are not immigrants. They are residents.

                Residents should be able to vote.

                •  And they should have citizenship (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  JNEREBEL

                  in their own state alongside Israel. I speak, of course, of the residents of the West Bank, east Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Palestinian Israelis already are citizens of Israel with the right to vote, etc.

                  The issue under discussion, here, is immigration to Israel. Palestinians living outside the State of Israel are, by definition, not residents of Israel.

                  Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

                  by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:28:12 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  alas, by illegally occupying Palestinian land, (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    corvo

                    Israel has already rejected the two-state solution, and embraced a "Greater Israel" single-state solution.

                    So they will have a choice----apartheid for Palestinians in their Bantu Homelands, or citizenship for Palestinians within the secular state of Israel.

                    Which will it be?

                    •  Please document (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      charliehall2

                      statements by the Israeli government that have "already rejected the two-state solution."

                      For sure, the government acts in ways that make its willingness to agree to such a peace settlement questionable. So, too, does the Palestinian Authority. And Hamas, of course, has enshrined in its charter a genocidal desire to eradicate both Israel and its Jewish citizens.

                      And yet, public opinion polling shows majority support among both Israelis and Palestinians for a two-states peace settlement. And that is what President Obama and Secretary Kerry are after.

                      If you think that to be pro-Palestinian you have to be anti-Israel, then you're part of the problem, not the solution.l

                      Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

                      by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:14:08 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  it is occupying Palestine (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        corvo

                        That is, by definition, a one-state solution. And Israel has no plans whatever to change that situation.

                        If you think that to be pro-Palestinian you have to be anti-Israel, then you're part of the problem, not the solution
                        You are putting words in my mouth that are not mine---so you can have them back.  (shrug)

                        I am neither pro-Israel nor pro-Palestine---I think BOTH are equally doomed to failure and collapse.  NO state that is based on ethnicity, religion or race, is sustainable.  That includes a Jewish state and a Muslim state. Neither will survive.

                        The ONLY viable longterm solution is a single secular state in which both cultures can co-exist together, just as people of every race, religion and culture live peaceably together in the Western democracies. Alas, neither side wants that.

                •  They do vote (0+ / 0-)

                  if they live within the legal boundaries of the State of Israel.

              •  You are carefully avoiding the big elephant (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT, corvo

                in the room. Yes, Ireland allows anyone with Irish ancestry to claim citizenship. Just like Israel. So far so good. BUT, Israel does NOT allow Palestinians who were born inside what is modern day Israel, to return.  Ireland has no such equivalent discrimination.

                •  The Czech Republic? Slovakia? (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  charliehall2

                  Poland? Do these, and other countries whence Germans fled at the end of World War II, allow those Germans and their descendants automatic citizenship?

                  If the Palestinians are to achieve a state--as I fervently hope they do--it will be alongside, not in place of, Israel. If that's not good enough for you, if you require Israel's destruction, please take those views elsewhere. Getting rid of Israel is not on Daily Kos's agenda.

                  If, on the other hand, you support a two-states-for-two-peoples peace settlement, then I suggest you keep your eyes on the prize.

                  Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

                  by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:19:55 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  umm, the Benes decree (0+ / 0-)

                    is not considered to be one of the Great Moments in Human Rights.  Citing it as a precedent (let alone as a justification) would be unwise.

                    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                    by corvo on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:16:08 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Benes was a tremendous liberal (0+ / 0-)

                      and tried to save Democracy for Czechoslovakia.

                      Unfortunately he failed, twice, once against the Nazis and once against the Communists.

                      •  All true but (0+ / 0-)

                        irrelevant to the merits or lack thereof of the Benes Decree.  And you know it.

                        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                        by corvo on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 05:56:43 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  'require Israel's destruction' is hyperbole (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    AoT, Anastasia Castro, corvo

                    I am merely pointing out the racism in Israel's immigration (AKA 'return') policy.

                  •  Comparing Palestinians to Germans? (3+ / 1-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Anastasia Castro, corvo, whizdom
                    Hidden by:
                    charliehall2

                    Are you fucking kidding? After Nazi Germany was expelled from those countries the Germans that lived there were also expelled. If patently offensive to compare that to a situation where Palestinians are consistently pushed off their land.

                    If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                    by AoT on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 04:28:25 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  No we are not kidding (0+ / 0-)

                      Palestinians who live within the borders of the State of Israel vote.

                      Palestinians who do not, don't. There is no real interest in them becoming Israeli.

                    •  And I was wondering how long it would take (0+ / 0-)

                      to compare the Israelis to the Nazis.

                      Have a donut.

                      •  Disingenuous. (0+ / 0-)

                        AoT was responding to another American, who brought up the issue of forced transfer of populations in the wake of a war started by . . . what regime again?

                        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                        by corvo on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 06:02:56 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  He brought up Nazi Germany (0+ / 0-)

                        and compared the expulsion of the Germans to the Palestinians, not me.

                        I am not comparing anyone in the conflict with Nazi Germany or Nazis at all.

                        Your HR is completely unwarranted.

                        If debt were a moral issue then, lacking morals, corporations could never be in debt.

                        by AoT on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 09:13:48 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

            •  Germany, Ireland, United Kingdom (0+ / 0-)

              to name just three. People with ancestors in those countries can reclaim citizenship.

              •  Once again- you are avoiding the central issue (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                AoT

                It's good and fine that people with german, irish, and UK ancestry can claim citizenship. But which of those nations PREVENTS say, a Gypsy with german, irish, or british ancestry to reclaim their ancestry? That is the central issue. Israel is the only nation that has an overtly racist immigration policy, whereby a Palestinian who is born in Israel proper is not allowed to return, while a jew who has never set foot in Israel, and does not have any known ancestor who had been to Israel, is allowed to 'return'.

              •  I think even Italy allows anyone with one (0+ / 0-)

                Italian grandparent to claim citizenship.

                There are three kinds of stupid: 'Stupid', 'Really Stupid', and 'Stupid-Like-a-Republican'. With sincere apologies to Benjamin Disraeli.

                by MARTinNJ on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 08:13:16 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Israel isn't racist (0+ / 0-)

              Its Jewish immigrants are of every race on the planet.

            •  Serbia? Oh wait, Serbia is not a good example of (0+ / 0-)

              a tolerant democracy.

              There are three kinds of stupid: 'Stupid', 'Really Stupid', and 'Stupid-Like-a-Republican'. With sincere apologies to Benjamin Disraeli.

              by MARTinNJ on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 08:11:54 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  none of them prevent any ethnic group from voting (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        corvo
    •  ALL states eventually fail and collapse (0+ / 0-)

      No need for adjectives.

      •  true that. but the ethnic/religious/racial ones (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Quicklund, corvo

        do it far more devestatingly to everyone around them.

        •  They are built on an inherent instability (0+ / 0-)

          That much is certain. At some point that instability is going to rear its head. So one likes 2nd-class citizenship - or worse.

          But look at South Africa. They emerged from that period with far less trauma than most anyone would have predicted 20 years prior.

          If you'd told me on my 21st birthday that the USSR would expire about ten years hence and in doing so only three people would die in the process it would have sounded like a pipe dream.

          So what the hell? Aim for optimism.

  •  This is a worldview that is of a majority IMO. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Words In Action

    The "holocaust dividend" seems to have played out in the court of world opinion it might seem.

    •  What, pray tell, is (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hey338Too, Keone Michaels, JNEREBEL, poco

      "the holocaust dividend"? Did European Jewry buy long into their murder by Germany and Germany's abettors in eastern Europe?

      Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

      by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:04:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  not a phrase of my making but ... (0+ / 0-)

        My understanding of it in it's most benign interpretation is: that the present State of Israel was created at least in part because of the guilt of murderers and murderers abettors and the rest of the world politic.  I was a youngster then, but I remember how it was presented from the newsreels and the piggy-bank next to my bed with the "pennies for Israel banner."  It sold really well then.  Now, not so much.

        My opinion is that one can't be selective about politics and change so as to discount these seasonal forces of time.  It is what it is.  We are the human monkey tribe.  This is the way we do business on this planet.

        Call it what you will.

  •  The Likuds already decided - apartheid (4+ / 0-)

    Fully supported by the Far right ultra-Orthodox, who dream of a Super-Israel the same way the Fundamentalist cretins in this country pray for the Second Coming, to wipe out all the queerz and negroes and commies (and Jews) and leave the land purified for God's chosen (Christian) people.

  •  Israel can be Jewish, Historic or Democratic (3+ / 0-)

    but it can't be all three and it's trending to
    not even two.

  •  In the approximately 150 minutes (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DrTerwilliker, livosh1

    this diary has been up, the diarist has not once commented. Hit-and-run diaries, however otherwise worthy, are, in general, to be regretted.

    Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

    by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 11:40:11 AM PDT

  •  Israel is looking for a one state by attrition (0+ / 0-)

    solution, they will keep the status quo until the other side gives up or is forced out to sea....and if they have another policy, tell me what it is?

  •  The sooner Israelis decide what they really want (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    corvo, Words In Action

    the better for everyone in the region.  If Israel truly wants to remain a Jewish state, they have to make a separate Palestinian state viable.  That means preventing further settlements, and indeed removing many existing settlements, which serve to disconnect Palestinian areas from each other (like the Bantustans of old).  It means granting Gaza control of its airspace, port, electricity, water, etc. so that viable, independent governance can be established. It means allowing Palestinians access to roadways that connect the West Bank to Gaza to East Jerusalem and other population centers (no more Jewish only roads, no more separation walls).  It means returning stolen farms.

    If, on the other hand, Israel (or at least the faction of Israel that has real power) does not want a real, healthy, successful Palestinian state, then they should be hard at work coming up with a strong constitution/political dispensation that will protect Jewish citizens in the single state that will inevitably emerge.  With no viable Palestinian state, there will be a single state in which Palestinians outnumber Israeli Jews.  Neither the Palestinians nor the rest of the world will allow the status quo to continue.  The current situation is too unjust, too violent, too disruptive to the interests of many states, and too unpopular the world over, to continue forever.

    Rather than playing games to establish "facts on the ground" which advantage Israel, and which Bibi hopes will survive, Israeli leadership should be working furiously to either establish a legitimate and functional second state, or preparing a robust constitutional framework to protect the rights of minorities in the coming single state. Every action not directed at either of these options is wasted, and may well haunt Israel in the coming years.

    •  Yes, but it's just as true that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JNEREBEL

      the Palestinians need to decide what they want.

      Just as Israeli words and deeds too often persuade Palestinians that Israelis, or at least a sufficient number of Israelis, are not ready for a realistic peace settlement with the nascent State of Palestine, so, too, Palestinian words and deeds too often persuade Israelis that Palestinians, or at least a sufficient number of them, are not ready for a realistic peace settlement with the existing State of Israel.

      By "realistic peace settlement," of course, I mean one based on the principle of two states for two peoples.

      Shalom v' salaam; peace and wholeness

      by another American on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 02:34:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  One Land for One Nation (0+ / 0-)

        What happens when the Palestinains realize they've been bamboozled and demand full citizenship in Israel?  What happens when they demand that the UN hold a plebiscite in the Occupied Territories to confirm that request?  Should the US try to prevent the first and veto the second demand?  On what legitimate grounds would the US stand to veto such a Palestinian request at the UN?

        "Love the Truth, defend the Truth, speak the Truth, and hear the Truth" - Jan Hus, d.1415 CE

        by PrahaPartizan on Tue Jul 23, 2013 at 07:36:10 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Israel already chose (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    poco, corvo, Anastasia Castro, RageKage

    They chose permanent occupation and subjugation of an identifiable group of "other" people, while forcing them into ever smaller and more marginal "homelands". Pretty much the definition of apartheid.

    All the rest is stalling, and trying to force out the victims from the occupied areas. While steadily "settling", jailing, harassing, killing.

    This Rover crossed over.. Willie Nelson, written by Dorothy Fields

    by Karl Rover on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 03:06:18 PM PDT

  •  The two state solution is dead. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    corvo

    Palestinians should start demanding full equal rights within Israel.  They will soon be a majority.

    It is a much less complicated demand, and would make the fact of apartheid impossible to deny.

    We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both. - Former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis

    by RageKage on Mon Jul 22, 2013 at 10:46:03 PM PDT

  •  The only thing the General got wrong was 'tense'. (0+ / 1-)
    Recommended by:
    Hidden by:
    JNEREBEL

    Israel will not 'become' an apartheid state.  Israel 'became' an apartheid state about 15 years ago.  And since then it has only been deepening its apartheid laws and their enforcement.  

    Arabs may not build on their own law.  Arab land is stolen by settlers.  Arab crops and olive trees, generations old, are uprooted and poisoned.   Arabs are terrorized and killed by settlers with guns and by the Israeli army which supports the settlers.

    Arabs and their land are occupied and the people may not vote.  They are a captive and imprisoned people.  

    The occupation of the west bank is illegal by any view of law or justice and has been declared illegal by the UN in countless resolutions.

    ISRAEL IS AN APARTHEID STATE.

    There are three kinds of stupid: 'Stupid', 'Really Stupid', and 'Stupid-Like-a-Republican'. With sincere apologies to Benjamin Disraeli.

    by MARTinNJ on Wed Jul 24, 2013 at 08:04:19 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site