| superchunk said: Guys don't argue with bubbles on this. I have many times and its pointless. He is so biased towards the thieves that he cannot see what they have stolen. The issue with Obama's announcement is that the '67 borders have always been the starting point and in past negotiations most of the swapping has been agreed. Its always come down to the facts that neither side has properly setup their population for the real life situation of certain things that will be given up in order for this to work. Palestinians will have to give right of return for at best some financial recoup. Israelis will have to give up the largest blocs of settlements in WB that are holy (i.e. Abraham's Tomb) as well as some big blocs on the eastern side of Jerusalem. Both sides will have to give up sovereignty over the old city of Jerusalem and the shrine area. While a couple temples did exist there and it is Jews holiest site, the Dome of the Rock has stood longer than both temples combined and the site is just as revered by Muslims. There has to be a duality and an international presence, potentially similar to the Vatican. However, the important of Obama's speech is that it allows US policy to become less blindingly subservient to Israel demands and it can, at least for appearances sake, demonstrate a real level playing field. I for one am far more interested in the UN vote in September as well as how Hamas will continue to mature from a die hard fanatical group to a real partner for Palestinian leadership. I do believe there is a push within the populace that recognizes Hamas' actions have not strengthened their situation in the least. |
Hamas' appeal comes from the idea on the Palestinians side that the Israelis simply aren't willing to deal, and that the PA's constant concessions that have yielded jack-all simply provide final proof that peace isn't an option. Ergo, the Israelis make progress on peace, Hamas' violent tendencies get marginalized
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
