Israel-US settlement deal 'close'

[Netto Azure]

Israel-US settlement deal 'close'​

Israel says it is nearing agreement with the US on settlement building in the occupied West Bank, after its PM held talks with a US envoy in London.

The US wants Israel to comply with Palestinian demands that it stop all building before peace talks can start.
The US and Israel were "getting closer" to a "bridging formula", a spokesman for Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu said.
Mr Netanyahu said earlier that he hoped talks with the Palestinians would restart "shortly".
BBC Middle East editor Jeremy Bowen says US President Barack Obama is hoping to unveil a Middle East peace plan at the United Nations in September.

Mr Netanyahu and US envoy George Mitchell released a joint statement after their four-hour meeting at the Park Lane Hotel, saying Israeli officials would meet Mr Mitchell again next week, AFP news agency reported.
Before the two met, Mr Netanyahu said the US and Israel were "making headway" and said he hoped the two sides would "shortly be able to resume normal talks".
There has been speculation that Mr Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas could meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in September.
Speaking anonymously, Palestinian officials said this was a possibility, although the two could only meet for talks, not formal negotiations.
The Palestinians have refused to resume peace negotiations unless Israel stops all settlement building.
Wednesday's meeting in London followed talks with UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, when Mr Netanyahu rejected any construction freeze in occupied East Jerusalem.
He reiterated his demand that the Palestinians recognise Israel as a Jewish state.
Mr Netanyahu has said Israel will not build new settlements, but wants to continue building within existing ones to allow for the "natural growth" of the communities living there.
The American pressure on Mr Netanyahu has strained normally close Israel-US ties.
After meeting Mr Mitchell in London, Mr Netanyahu is travelling to Berlin, the next stop on his four-day European tour.

Dispute

Some 450,000 Israeli settlers live in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem. The settlements are illegal under international law, although Israel disputes this.
Israel agreed to freeze settlement activity as part of the 2003 staged international peace plan known as the roadmap.
But Israeli officials say there was an unwritten understanding with the administration of former US President George W Bush that allowed limited growth within existing settlements to continue.
Mr Netanyahu's right-leaning government has not published tenders for new housing units in settlements since it came to power in April.
But the left-wing Israeli group Peace Now, which monitors building in settlements, says government-backed projects make up only 40% of construction and that building has been continuing on the ground in many places.

According to Mr Netanyahu's spokesman, Israel is ready to restrict construction for Jews in the occupied Palestinian territories. But it looks as if it won't be the comprehensive freeze that the Americans - and Palestinians - wanted.


Israel says it won't accept any restrictions on what it does in Jerusalem, part of which is occupied territory. A senior Israeli official said they were confident that the Americans would persuade the Palestinians to go along with the deal they're poised to make.


It's all aimed at paving the way for a resumption of US sponsored peace talks in the next few weeks. After that President Obama is hoping to unveil a Middle East peace plan at the UN in New York next month.


During this visit to London Mr Netanyahu has also quoted approvingly a call by the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for crippling sanctions against Iran. She said they'd be necessary if diplomacy failed to stop Iran's programme of nuclear enrichment.

A step forward? I still believe that the 2 State plan should be the ultimate goal...Opinions? Comments?

 

[Snake Bandage]

Jeez, so that's what I missed on the evening news while I was seeing Up? Bah!

All those goddamned settlers should've been kicked out of those places ages ago. "We need room for our families" my ass. They should all stop trolling the Palestinians, take themselves and their 10.4 children and settle somewhere within the border. Like, in the Negev! That entire area is so barren for no good reason at all. If they build new cities and towns in the Negev, it'll be beneficial for everyone. For one thing, the army's budget won't be wasted on protecting their ungrateful asses.

Frankly, though, I see a lot of violence in our future if our right-wing government will do what should be done. Claims of betrayal and baseless civil war threats and all that wonderful stuff.

I'll be surprised if they'll actually do it, though. Hell, I'll be surprised if they really limit construction.

 

[Kamikarasu]

This comment is in response to BBC reports about Israel as a whole, not just the above report.
I find it hilarious how the Middle East is so obsessed with getting rid of this tiny little nation just because it's occupied with Jews and not Muslims.

But what I really, REALLY find hilarious is the BBC's constant bullshit. Seriously, does anyone notice that Hamas firing missiles at Israel every day isn't the least bit important enough for headline news, yet the MOMENT Israel does ANYTHING in response, (like, nobody mentioned that back in December or so, the houses Israeli soldiers were destroying had been loaded with missiles Hamas had stored there to fire at Israel) it's immediately headline news. I listen to the BBC, and I don't think I EVER hear them saying ANYTHING bad about Hamas and their anti-semitic sentiment or determination to wipe Israel off the map; all they do is clearly bash Israel for EVERYTHING they do in RESPONSE to an attempted attack on them.

I really do try hard to try to look at their side of the coin, but when I do, all I see is a determination to always find a way to bash Israel for anything they can. It's not that I ever notice them outright lie about what Israel is doing, but without barely ever giving the full story, it is dishonest all the same, and if people knew the whole context, they might think differently.

So how can I listen to one of the countless stories the BBC has about Israel without knowing that they are a station that will find ways to knowingly omit any information about what Hamas is doing to Israel? Knowing that the BBC reports on the Palestinian-Israeli-conflict 90% more than any other part of the Middle East, or nations like Sri Lanka? Knowing from any prior reporting that they will only report things that Israel does without any context as to why they're doing it, or any information about what Hamas has been doing to them? (or trying to)

I simply cannot make any judgement about these stories, because even in a rare case like this where the argument does appear solid, I know that every story the BBC has done about Israel that I have ever heard does nothing but report when Israel has done anything in response to Hamas' daily actions, etcetera but omit anything that Hamas or Palestinians do to them FIRST, so that every report they do on Israel is done in such a way that everybody will blame Israel. The day that Hamas' actions are always reported and both sides of a story are always given, as opposed to only reporting Israel's RESPONSE without indicating that it even is a response; that's the day that maybe I will be able to believe the news story when it says something bad about Israel. If the BBC really always truly believed that Israel were to blame, then they wouldn't have to omit what Hamas does to Israel. If they hate Israel but can't even justify it by ever giving a full report, then why do they hate Israel? They must not hate it because of the Conflict; if they've always unjustifiedly bashed Israel, then they must have hated it from the beginning. If the BBC can't justify the blame, then they must not actually believe that Israel is to blame, yet they blame it anyways.

The above BBC article is more subtly blaming Israel, but if anyone goes to an archive of BBC reports on Israel and listens to them, I think it will become clear that the BBC doesn't always give the full story, and/or only reports when it can make it out to sound like Israel has done something bad.

 

[Falconwing]

The land was meant for the Palestinians, the land was taken by Israel. I've seen the camps the Palestinians live in. It's horrible. Give the rightful owners their land and get it over with.

 

[Kamikarasu]

The land was meant for the Palestinians, the land was taken by Israel. I've seen the camps the Palestinians live in. It's horrible. Give the rightful owners their land and get it over with.

Do you think I'm not aware that the camps are horrid? But are you talking about recently obtained land, or are you talking about the land obtained for Israel in the late '40's, the land used to build Israel? Because, as far as I know, many people seem to feel threatened by Israel even existing, even though it appears to me that many things Israel is blamed for are often things that are actually the fault of Hamas.

 

[Falconwing]

Oh, I have nothing against Isreal, but when the land was set aside for Israel to become a nation in the 40's, Palestinians had land set aside for them as well. Unfortunatley, because people didn't like Israel, they attacked. A war was fought, Israel won, and it kept the land it conquered, which happened to include the land set aside for Palestinians.

And actually, I wasn't directing my post at your comment. I don't think I even read it.

 

[Snake Bandage]

The land was set aside for Israel in 1917, when Arthur James Balfour made a horrible mistake and declared that the British government is more than happy to establish Palestine as a national home to Jewish people. Of course, he also let the Zionist Federation know that it should be done without prejudice to the non-Jewish residents of Palestine... makes me think declarations and agreements are all useless, no one ever follows them through as they should.

 

[ShinyMuk]

i really didnt read it all, but i read the newspaper, and by Benjamin Netaniahu, the only agreement was that israel will stop building in captured land, in exchange, arab countries will alow israeli flight transportation to fly over their lands.
and they didnt fully finish sign on that.

 

[Snake Bandage]

I heard that he's denying that any agreement has been reached. In any case, some members of his own party are already banding together to make a loud protest whenever he'll limit/halt the construction.

 

[ShinyMuk]

I heard that he's denying that any agreement has been reached. In any case, some members of his own party are already banding together to make a loud protest whenever he'll limit/halt the construction.

yes you're right. but the problem is that the group of protestors is small. as most of the "congress" is right-winged.

 

[Snake Bandage]

The Knesset is a parliament, not a congress.

Either way, yes, the people who are going to say anything against Netanyahu are a relatively small group. But most of his very right-wing coalition is going to be very unhappy with him, it's going to further destabilize the Neyanyahu government. Besides, Netanyahu himself believes we have a right for the entirety of the land, including the West Bank and Gaza. That's why he's extra stubborn about the settlements and would only bend if the US gives him no choice.

 

[Eredar Warlock]

The land was meant for the Palestinians, the land was taken by Israel. I've seen the camps the Palestinians live in. It's horrible. Give the rightful owners their land and get it over with.

Um, what? Historically, the land has been Israel/Judah land for thousands of years.

 

[Snake Bandage]

Arcane Mind, let's not get into what it was several millenniums ago. Might want to give it to the descendants of the Canaanites if you really want to distribute land that way. The fact is that the Jews haven't had control of the land of Israel in two thousand years, and the only thing that really gave us a right to claim Palestine as our own was the British government's incredibly stupid declaration.

 

[ShinyMuk]

there isnt a good and bad or wrong and right in this long term story, which is going on for thousands of years.
but, israel was conquered by

Assyria (Came back, but 10 lost tribes)
Babylonia (After persia conquered Babylonnia, gave Israelites freedom0
Greeks (Helestians) (Conquered back with the Maccabien revolt)
Romans (Conquered Back)
Romans (20 years later) (Israelites exiled, romans name israel Palestine)
Byzantine (Fell after Roman Empire fell)
Arabs
Crusaders (Jews become slaved)
Mamluks (Wide spread expude amongst the jews)
Ottoman
French (Napoleon wanted to create a jewish country back then but did not issue it)
Ottoman
British
Israel


The () are about Israelites.
So, if Israel belongs to the Arabs, they also belong to all the others in the list.

 

[Kamikarasu]

Arcane Mind, let's not get into what it was several millenniums ago. Might want to give it to the descendants of the Canaanites if you really want to distribute land that way. The fact is that the Jews haven't had control of the land of Israel in two thousand years, and the only thing that really gave us a right to claim Palestine as our own was the British government's incredibly stupid declaration.

As far as I know (I could be wrong, this isn't my number 1 topic of research) the land taken to build Israel was almost entirely Jewish-occupied land already, NOT Muslim-occupied land.

 

[H-con]

Well. The state of Israel should continue to exist, no doubt, although it's creation was a little ... wrong, because they took land from the palestinians that occupied the area. Still, when Israel continue to expand their territory and generally treat the Palestinians bad, I can't really support them either. However, some of the Palestinians have acted very, very wrong too (like some in Hamas), so they aren't completely without guilt either.