63
Here is a list of peace offers which would grant the Palestinians a country of their own, they refused all of them
1937 - Peel commission, rejected
1947 - Partition resolution, rejected
2000 - Camp David, rejected
2001 - Taba, rejected. Arafat starts the second intifada and a year later changes his mind.
2008 - Olmert offer, rejected
Hamas have tried to agree to boundaries Despite media attempts to portray it as a new Hamas charter, it is not. The new ‘policy document’ accepts the creation of a Palestinian state in 1967 borders, but still rejects Israel and claims its territory. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39775103
Here are some other noteworthy peace meeting or proposals from Israel to the rest if the Arab world, which were rejected
1919: Arabs of Palestine refused nominate representatives to the Paris Peace Conference.
1920: San Remo conference decisions, rejected.
1922: League of Nations decisions, rejected.
1937: Peel Commission partition proposal, rejected.
1938: Woodhead partition proposal, rejected
1947: UN General Assembly partition proposal (UNGAR 181), rejected.
1949: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNGAR 194), rejected.
1967: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNSCR 242), rejected.
1978: Begin/Sa’adat peace proposal, rejected (except for Egypt).
1994: Rabin/Hussein peace agreement, rejected by the rest of the Arab League (except for Egypt).
1995: Rabin’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
2000: Barak/Clinton peace offer, rejected.
2001: Barak’s offer at Taba, rejected.
2005: Sharon’s peace gesture, withdrawal from Gaza, rejected.
2008: Olmert/Bush peace offer, rejected.
2009 to 2021: Netanyahu’s repeated invitations to peace talks, rejected.
2014: Kerry’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
Not gonna link Trump’s imbecilic peace plan as an example.
Here is a list of peace offers ~~the Palestinians~~ the governing body of palestinians offered to Israel -
None
Well that’s a whole lot of nothing. Israel, Britain and the UN stole their land and their homes. Why should the oppressed have to concede to the oppressor? So, you can preserve your cognitive dissonance? As it was in South Africa, so it should be in Israel.
Weak argument, your comment was much shorter than his. :P
edit: not that you need it but /s
I’m sick and don’t have the energy to suffer fools. Your doing a great job BTW.
Thanks, been cribbing inspiration from your LJ posts. Although, I'll say a lot of them come off as quite "emo" :D
edit: Get well soon friend!
Uh yeah.. If people came and stole more than half your land, forced you into slums as they thrived off what was your land going back the Bedouin aborigines, then turned around and offered a consolation prize of giving some of your land back when you deserve it all, you'd be pissed off, too.
The new Hamas charter is the best you'll likely see. They accept the borders but don't have to accept Israel itself, and that's completely understandable. They don't need to. Doing so would also play into the Israeli religious rhetoric regarding their biblical justification for the land. But here's the good news: Only Israel needs to accept Israel.
Well not quite. Leading up to the Oslo accords the PLO and Israel recognized each other. We all know how that ended, and that is why Hamas became what it is today (well there's also a lot of direct and indirect support by the Israeli government). What I'm trying to say is: Palestinians not recognizing Israel isn't inevitable; just the result of Israeli actions.
MFer called the 2014 offer "rejected" by Palestine. Seriously. There are (not very strong) arguments for Palestinian responsibility for camp david, but 2014? LMFAO. Also Rabin's offer was "rejected" (it wasn't) because Rabin fucking died bruh (edit: More accurately he was assassinated by a Zionist).
Rabin’s plan was also the most sane. Don’t forget that Bibi Netanyahu and his conservative accomplices openly encouraged Rabin’s death. Even paraded around a coffin at rallies
So I guess those 4000 unreasonable dead children had it coming. Good to know!
this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
63 points (88.9% liked)
politics
19097 readers
5666 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS