i dont really understand what you're asking here... all any side wants to do is have their voices heard.

well, there's about a billion opinions on each side. so that's a start.
there's ultra-orthodox jews (black hats) who hate israel and meet with ahmadinejad and some that believe in a divine right for exclusive jewish control over "greater" israel. some plainclothes religious feel the same, and some believe in pragmatism and compromise with our Arab neighbours. there's secular nationalist who believe we must make a deal to protect the jewish majority by security mechanisms, and some by giving up land to an Arab state. some secular leftists believe in any deal at any cost, and some that just think everything is entirely israel's fault. some actively work against settlement, some actively work for.

israel has political parties that are explicitly nationalist, anti-nationalist, religious, anti-religious, communist, capitalist, moderate and extreme, and a few dozen in between. i couldnt find poll numbers and i encourage you to post raw data (not media-spinned articles).

as far as the arabs: i wouldn't presume to speak for them, so i'll let them speak for themselves (Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research Poll, 2011):

Summary of the results:
Only one in three Palestinians accepts two states for two peoples as the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 62% supported kidnapping IDF soldiers and holding them hostage. 53% were in favor or teaching songs about hating Jews in Palestinian schools. When given a quote from the Hamas Charter about the need for battalions from the Arab and Islamic world to defeat the Jews, 80% agreed. 70+% agreed with a quote from the charter (and a hadith of the prophet Muhammad) about the need to kill Jews hiding behind stones and trees. But only 45% said they believed in the charter’s statement that the only solution to the Palestinian problem was jihad.

The survey’s more positive findings included that only 22% supported firing rockets at Israeli cities and citizens and that two-thirds preferred diplomatic engagement over violent “resistance.” Among Palestinians in general 65% preferred talks and 20% violence. In the West Bank it was 69-28%, and in Gaza, 59- 32%.

But nobody reported these unpalatable results; the preferred myth that the Palestinian Arab street majority prefers peace will live on.

^That would be WB and Gaza's Palestinians

Thanx Gamblor, hope I'm being appropriate but I think my derail is in line with others.

Who do they want to hear there voice? Just the other side or the UN, or the world?

Do you think both sides are quite introverted, as in they don't think about the rest of the world (starving, repressed peoples, human trafficking etc. going on in other countries) or is that just a bias the world sees because we just hear about conflict (I live in a country full of ignorance so please don't take any offense to that)?

Whats the most tangible aspect of the conflict that you think could be solved and both sides would accept? Or does it just need one whole solution.

Do you think the UN is bias? What do you think the UN's intent is with the conflict and the future of that area?

It's not my thread. But Mr. Haywood appears to have slinked back into the mist after his usual ranting and raving against Israel was met with reason and analysis.

The way I'd personally characterize the conversation is that Palestinians, their supporters, others that provide mere lip-service to their cause (i.e. Arab leaders), and general anti-Israel activists hurl accusations. Israel (the government, citizens, and its supporters) defends itself against them by justifying its role in the world and the reasons for its actions. Rinse, repeat.

One side certainly is.

Palestine Press (Arabic) reported that Abbas whined that "the United States does not pay attention to the peace process at this time because of concern about the country's presidential election in November."

In the New York Times, Abbas explicitly (in reference to his UN application stunt last year), said that:
The UN stunt, the terrorism, its all to "internationalize" the conflict. To make sure the Palestinians are front and centre no matter what else is going on.

Similarly, the International Solidarity Movement and Free Gaza Movement, two NGOs that claim to support Palestinian human rights, show their true colours when Adam Shapiro, speaking at Rutgers, said the following a few years back, before the Free Gaza Flotilla to Israel:

Did you hear that?

He says explicitly that the flotilla is a tactic in a larger war there the goal is to undermine Israel altogether, where he wants to change the conflict from Israel versus the Palestinian Arabs into Israel versus the world -to internationalize the conflict.

On the other hand, how does Israel respond to other issues in the world?
Israel's Medical Operation in Haiti
IsraAID's humanitarian aid and disaster response activities around the world

Israeli technology helps India reroute emergency vehicles more efficiently
Israeli pilot develops new, safer method for commercial airspace usage, receives United States Decoration for Exceptional Service
Israelis develop method to train brains to fight cancerous cells
Israeli company develops cancer-fighting antibodies
Israeli company develops more accurate sepsis diagnosis
Israeli company develops less-invasive tumour removal procedure
University scientists develop method to transform stem cells into healthy heart tissue (wait, stem cells? I thought Israel was full of religious nuts!)


I don't know. I'm no political expert. But I'm not the one making accusations and demanding other people act in the way I want them to.

Everyone should pay attention to this:

I make no ethical or value judgments against the Palestinians, and I am certainly not trying to convince you to love us or hate them or anything stupid like that. They do what they want, and we will act the best way we know how.

My argument is that sticking Israel's neck out when we have clear evidence of what the response will be is simply not prudent behaviour.

The "UN" doesn't care about the conflict.

The UN like any other organization, its made up of individuals. Individuals with their own interests. And votes and decisions are made in those interests.

So Arab/Islamic states, with 25+ voting members, act in their own interests (pan-Arabism) by voting against Israel. European members, whose energy resources come mainly from Russia and the Arab world, often vote politically(if the US can go to war in part over oil then why do people think others wouldn't act in their oil interests either?).

The decades-long Arab and Islamic-bloc voting, repeating the same accusations, prejudging outcomes of negotiations between israel and the palestinians, supported by political, not legal or moral voting, has led to all sorts of ridiculous outcomes, including having Libya, Syria, and China on the Human Rights Council, and thethe blocking of a resolution supporting the human rights of homosexuals (eventually passed after watering down the language). In the ultimate absurdity, Israel is the only permanent item on the Human Rights Council's agenda, and more resolutions have been passed against Israel at the HRC than all of the other states combined.

All of these, for a country that has been at conflict for 65 years with total Israeli and Palestinian casualties fewer than 20000 people combined - about 250 per year - a number that includes suicide terrorists as casualties! A war with 1/20th as many casualties as Sudan, 1/20th as Indonesia, 1/4 as Turkey/Kurdistan, 1/7th as Phillipines, 1/20th as Somalia, 1/3rd as the Mexican Drug war! And the Syrian conflict, in a year, has already surpassed the total combined casualty toll as the entire history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict! The mortality rate is higher in Detroit, than it is in Israel and the territories! Life expectancies in Gaza/the West bank are higher than half the countries on earth!

Like I said. I don't dare say Israel good and UN bad or Palestinians bad. or anything so simplified or presumptuous.

But I do know that the value in the United Nations is not as a objective moral or legal arbiter of conflicts.

It is nonsense,and you know it.The goal is explicitly told said and it is the end of occupation.

Gamblor it's pretty absurd how you love to point out (correctly so) that Israel is full lots of different kinds of people with vastly different viewpoints and then you always refer to Palestinians as one whole unit that (according to your posts) thinks the same way no matter what.

Not all Palestinians want all Israelis to die and burn in hell, for starters.

Oh look another unsolicited prolonged ramble by Gamblor going on about good things on Israel's side and bad things on Palestines.
Oh of course not! How could anybody get that impression? No, you are quite accomplished at providing innumerable little details and nuances behind why israel is good and palestine is bad. But the point remains the same.

My favourite bit was when you started to list scientific accomplishments israeli companies had achieved. It really is a smorgasbord where you will throw absolutely anything, no matter how unrelated to any else, at the pro-israel column that you can think of.

wtf? I've said the opposite dozens of times, and literally 3 posts back, I posted survey results that explicity show significant internal disagreement within the Palestinian electorate.

What else did you want?

The vast vast vast majority don't. What the hell kind of straw man is this?

[QUOTE=Gamblor;34173717]i dont really understand what you're asking here... all any side wants to do is have their voices heard.






as far as the arabs: i wouldn't presume to speak for them, so i'll let them speak for themselves (Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research Poll, 2011):



Summary of the results:
Only one in three Palestinians accepts two states for two peoples as the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. 62% supported kidnapping IDF soldiers and holding them hostage. 53% were in favor or teaching songs about hating Jews in Palestinian schools. When given a quote from the Hamas Charter about the need for battalions from the Arab and Islamic world to defeat the Jews, 80% agreed. 70+% agreed with a quote from the charter (and a hadith of the prophet Muhammad) about the need to kill Jews hiding behind stones and trees. But only 45% said they believed in the charter’s statement that the only solution to the Palestinian problem was jihad.


Alrighty then.........

The red stat is simply not true, the other stats are highly questionable. While some Palestinians believe a two state solution is not possible, most of them (the majority) are for the two state solution, .

A 2007 poll conducted by Sami Smooha, a sociologist at Haifa University, found that: (these are raw statistics directly from a well respected majority Jewish college)

"67.5% of Arab citizens of Israel said they would be content to live in the Jewish state, if it existed alongside a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip"

this is a interesting stat, Because there is much false speculation in the media (mostly Fox news) that if Palestine was indeed given statehood, attacks and terrorism would increase in Israel and Palestine,

"44% of Arab citizens of Israel said they viewed Hezbollah's bombing of Israel as a war crime"

this is something you should be proud of Gamblor, many news outlets are saying 10 or 15 % of Arabs are not for Hezbollah, when in fact almost half of them are against Hezbollah's bombings and against Hezbollah in general

the stat below is via A 2010 Arab Jewish Relations Survey, compiled by Prof. Sami Smooha in collaboration with the Jewish-Arab Center at the University of Haifa shows that

"11.5% of Arab citizens of Israel support the use of violence against Jews to advance Arab causes"

A fact like this is highly important. Again many news outlets and some politicians from Israel and even the USA (mostly Michelle Bachman who is just lol) continue to say "We stand by Israel" (the politicians that is, although it seems like Fox News also works for Israel every now and then ) which I think is great, but! they refuse to say we stand by the people of Palestine as well, its a total double standard and they refuse to admit it. Yet according to a study compiled by a Jewish University, (Haifa University) most arabs are indeed against any type of violence against jews.

So many false stats out there in which portray the opposite of what is true. The facts are both the people of Israel and Palestine are very peaceful well meaning humans whom are for a Two state solution. Unfortunatly many far right wingers in the Knesset and U.S senate continue to incorrectly portray Palestinanes as hostile towards Israels

I don't think it's as simple as either of you make it out to be.

Many Palestinians living in the West Bank (not sure about Gaza, but I imagine they feel at least somewhat similarly) would be perfectly happy with actual representation in a government (whether it be Israeli or Arab) and the full rights that citizens of most countries in the world enjoy. The reason that they are tentative about such ideas is because they are scared Israel will just take it all away again. Like most human beings, they just want the chance to have families and be happy and successful, both of which are extremely difficult for them currently.

For some Palestinian expats and some Arabs, simply having a Palestinian state would not be enough, they want Israel gone. Others would fine with a peace agreement, and yet another group doesn't give a flying **** because it really has nothing to do with them.

It all depends on the person, not this "Palestinian" or even worse, "Arab," collective that is being presented.

I'm on my phone and it's difficult to selectively quote from your earlier post, but that first paragraph where you lump all Palestinians in together is a good place to start.

Champstark's post is terrible because he hasn't realize that while every single post in this thread demonstrates an unrelenting attempt to paint israel as good and palestine as bad, you are sufficiently careful NOT to take it is vacuous extremes like saying all palestinians want israelis to die and burn.

You will say things like this:
Of course, you should not be the least surprised when someone interprets this as you lumping everybody together what with your they's and lack of qualifiers. But I know that as soon as you are pressed you will immediately inform everybody of course you didn't mean that you just mean some palestinians.

Thx Gamblor for the detailed response

In light of some of the responses,

I believe that the same conflict that is going on in this thread is the same conflict that is going on in the Middle East.

I don't believe it is any different or that we are at all separate from it. And I believe that thinking it is any different is the real root of the problem and the path to the solution.

I also believe that the same root is found here: Do threads require conflict

Reread my post - the post is details and nuances are why the activists' accusations against Israel are provably false. That Palestinian leadership is actively undermining mutually beneficial co-operation efforts, that Palestinians that are interested in co-operation are discouraged (sometimes violently, but that's a story for another day) prohibited from doing so; not that Palestinians are bad. That Palestinians' positions are extremely varied, per the survey results I posted literally 3 posts before the one you're quoting. But the survey results speak for themselves.

If your reading comprehension is this bad there's not much point in continuing this conversation.

No. Read newguy's post again for comprehension: he asked specifically about the introversion of the parties: whether "Do you think both sides are quite introverted, as in they don't think about the rest of the world (starving, repressed peoples, human trafficking etc. going on in other countries)".

So I replied with examples of Israeli government-funded efforts to solve worldwide medical problems and humanitarian disasters, contrasted with Palestinian Authority efforts to promote their own problems as more important than others.

And, of course, because it paints one side in a more positive light than the other, you simply can't have that. So, instead of really thinking about how the conversation went down, you just make general, blanket accusations about "throwing in anything", "unrelated", and "pro-israel" blah blah blah.

I suggest you reread all of the posts carefully.

Gamblor, here are a few stats directly from a Jewish College Haifa University

"67.5% of Arab citizens of Israel said they would be content to live in the Jewish state, if it existed alongside a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza Strip


"44% of Arab citizens of Israel said they viewed Hezbollah's bombing of Israel as a war crime"

"11.5% of Arab citizens of Israel support the use of violence against Jews to advance Arab causes"

I did want to directly ask you Gamblor, are you for a two state solution?? Weather it be the pre 1967 borders?? Or borders set up in agreement by both sides??

In general do you think the state of Palestine should be accepted into the United nations???

It seems like you are a highly intelligent person Gamblor, and I commend and respect you for that, and I myself think Israel people are great people with excellent values, I would of course think the same way about Arabs in Israel.

Now I know you do as well Gamblor, but often your posts are 100 % pro Israel without any real solid pro mentions of Arabs in Israel. So for the record what are you're thoughts of arabs in Israel? In other words Do you think arab non jews in Israel should have the same rights (land ownership, voting rights,) as there jewish counter part

The real question for him is why shouldn't Palestinians have the same rights as Arab Israelis?

That's fair. And I should 100% be better about that. Some Palestinians actively celebrated - a significant minority, lets say. But those are the people with whom there is conflict. The innocent, silent majority are caught up in it, which I've known since the start and have never denied. Is that a fair assessment?

But how many supported them generally?

Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No (43), April 2012


Opinion Poll re 9/11 Attacks

As of 2009, 24% of Palestinian Arabs explicity support the 9/11 attacks, and 15% more had mixed feelings. So 39% felt at least some positivity at the 9/11 attacks.

Not the most immediate results, but the oldest I could find quickly.

In any event, I'll say it here for posterity, citing the above polls (and dozens more like it):

So, according to the polls, like any normal, human population, the majority (albeit relatively slight) of Palestinians are far less concerned with politics than with the normal human concerns: how to feed their families, how to deal with their bosses, the idiocy of their government, and their role in the world. They, like a majority of Israelis, want to live in peace and quiet, and to be safe, whether their neighbours are Jewish or Arab.

A very significant minority of Palestinians are active or passive supporters of terrorism, mostly by offering political support for groups who are actively involved in terror against Israeli civilians, but also by celebrating terror in the arts, naming summer camps after terrorists, recruiting, etc etc.

A very small minority are actively involved in terrorism, whether planning attacks, smuggling arms and weapons, committing crimes to obtain financing, etc. etc.

I will absolutely concede that I must do better at distinguishing these groups when I am talking about them. Palestinian society is divided, make no mistake.

Gamblor can you please address my post of statistics directly from Haifa university

And answer my questions from a few posts ago to affirm you are somewhat bipartisan in regards to this issue, otherwise you should not really be posting without saying at the end of each post "I am 100 % biased on this issue at hand".

many thanks

What are you trying to prove here? That Israeli Arab society is divided? I can post you articles that glorify Arab participation in the Israeli army. Or that call them a 5th column. Or, that praise Jewish-Arab collaboration. Or, that point out Israeli Arab complicity in terrorism. Generalizations are sketchy, and I'm as guilty of that mistake as anyone else here. This, of course, says nothing about the Druze Muslims, and Bedouin Arabs, other groups within Israel that serve in the army and participate to varying degrees in Israeli society.

It's a tough one. I accept a two-state solution in principle. I don't think a one-state solution is going to result in any less than full-scale civil war. I certainly don't think the 1949 armistice lines (which were never intended to be a border - at the Arab states' insistence, anyway) are necessarily defensible, so I would not support that.

Personally, I'd expect:
-unconditional negotiations with the PA.
-I'd expect the negotiators to strongly consider the Palestinian National Committee's Plan of Stages - which insisted that any compromise by Israel as a staging ground for future demands, and is still officially in effect - as well as the result from the withdrawal from Gaza (i.e. Hamastan), as well as the major issues like:
-Jerusalem (Israeli sovereignty with PA Arab full right of access to religious sites and civil property)
-settlements (big blocs stay in exchange for Israeli transfers of land, Jews choosing to live in Arab state are guaranteed safety with explicit penalties for security failures, and guaranteed civil rights)
-protection and right to visit religious/historical sites (equal control rights guarantees), etc.
-some sort of mechanism that provides for PA responsibility for all Palestinians under its control - i.e. terrorist groups that do not "agree" with the peace.
-and finally, a final and comprehensive peace and mutual recognition with the Arab world.

Not right now. In the context of a peace agreement and financial stability, yes.

Thank you for the compliment. I return it in earnest.

In my opinion, an Arab citizen of Israel must have the same civil and legal rights as Jew. It must be absolutely prohibited that there be any discrimination at law or in the by-laws of any publicly-owned company or crown corporation or agency against a person for any of the usual enumerated grounds - sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, etc. etc., and that is non-negotiable. Private organizations can do as they choose, I guess, though I may disagree with their individual choices. But these are normal political arguments not unique to Israel.

There is the question of so-called "national-rights". As in many other countries based on particular nationalities (i.e. Greek, Italian, Brazilian, Thai, Chinese), there is a tension between individual civil rights and national rights, where preference is given to members of that nationality. They are usually resolved using immigration preference rules and through the use of public works such as national heritage sites and public funding of particular institutions. For example, Canada publicly funds Catholic schools but not Jewish religious schools. Whether you agree or not is an individual matter, but Israel ought not be held to a higher standard of multiculturalism than Canada, fer cryin' out loud. And these are issues for Israeli voters to decide, not foreign activists.

So yeah, Israeli Arabs may unfortunately get the short end of the stick in some nationalist, public funding endeavours, but I will never support a person who hires someone just because he's Jewish, or fires someone just because he is Arab. While certain cultures may tend toward certain values and behaviours, any one person can have any number of combinations of values and morals, and its wrong to make assumptions when dealing with a person, on the basis of his ethnicity.

So yeah, it's a complicated view and I don't think real-world issues can be distilled down to stupid slogans like "99%" or "everyone is the same!" But I suppose that, with you being as intelligent as you are, I don't need to explain nuanced approaches to you

That's fair. I never see you post any crazy religious or even mild religious tomfoolery.

I was in the middle of typing as you wrote this.

Also, what difference does it make if I am directly involved in this? Am I to apologize that I take much more than a passing interest in it? That my knowledge comes from more than the odd newspaper article or headline, but rather direct contact with both sides of the issue? That I am pretty invested in it?

What difference does it make where I'm from? Address the arguments. Analyze the actions and words.

Not at all, if one is critical of canadian actions regarding catholic schools in ontario then it is completely appropriate to be likewise critical of any similar issue in israel and one is holding them to precisely the same standard.

I don't think there should be publicly funded religious schools anywhere in the world and if there is it should not be restricted to one specific religion. It is wrong that this occurs in Canada and, as per your charge, I would hold israel to the same standard.

You seem to be missing the point. At issue here is that in this thread (and I suspect others) you have consistently said a huge range of positive things on the israel side and a whole range of negative things on the palestine side. I am not saying you think all palestinians are bad or something like this (although some of your rhetoric does come close to this until pressed) but instead that you are just incrediably bias and systematically saying anything and everything positive and negative you can about the two camps. This isn't even a normative point, it is just an objective description of your comments in this thread.

This is not to say that other people on the other side of the conflict don't do the same, surely there are some that do. And earlier in the thread YOU called out people who only criticize israel and support palestine. I am noting that you are doing the exact same thing only with the positions reversed and, I submit, that it is exactly this kind of entrenched us vs them mentality that underlines much of the conflict.



This isn't a problem of comparing apples to oranges, it is apples to rocks. Israel, like every other first world democracy on the planet, conducts medical research. Impoverished third world countries with the kinds of GDP and economic development of palestine largely do not. To contrast this with Palestines UN bid (where they want the same recognition every other country, including israel, has) is ridiculous. It is just one more example of you saying good things about israel, and bad things about palestine.

I never, ever said anything about where u were from dude. I was just making sure that you address my post, in which you did and I thank you

Additionally I organized my resources and references from Haifa University, it is a highly respected college in Haifa, Israel which does many studies on the issue at hand. ( If you were implying that I intake my information from biased news papers that is ) Which I do not, I rely on peer studies, which point out both Palestianiens and Israels can easily get along, and both people on each side are for a two state solution. In addition Gamblor, I respect and applaud you that you are for a two- state solution,

but If I may ask you, Why not allow Palestine into the United Nations once they indeed become a state???? Just because they may necessarily have bad leadership should not disqualify them. We both know that many countries whom belong to the U.N are much more corrupt then Palestine