I have thought for a long time now that after the 1967 war that Israel should have said
Forget about it ! And kept ALL the concoured land.
I apparently would have been more generous to the Palestinians as I would have given them the whole Sinai and made sure they had a supply of water.
But I can see your point of creating a buffer between the new territory and Israel though I doubt the border between the new territory and Egypt would be better regulated than between Egypt and the Sinai is now.
At least a porous border between the new territory and Egypt would not flow directly into an outpost within Israel, as it does now into Gaza through the Rafah Border Crossing. Israel would control its entire southern border, and would presumably manage it more carefully than Egypt manages Rafah.
Jason... Thank you for all this information. Wow! You did a lot of research. This is for sure a new approach. A good one! You said, "No matter what course of action Israel takes, it will be condemned, so it might as well do what’s in its own best interest." Sad. True. Appreciate your in-depth reporting on the history of how we got here. I thought it was heavy hitting but presented without judgment. Your solution is well thought out and well defended.
You're most welcome, and thank you for your support. I hope the historical perspective in this series and proposal for a fresh start helps reduce violence in the area, a long shot but worth trying.
Just read this (an excerpt) in Cherie Zaslawsky's substack:
As Victor Sharpe reminds us: “…the Arab League, meeting in Khartoum in August 1967, delivered the infamous three no’s: NO peace with Israel, NO negotiations with Israel, NO recognition of Israel. From 1937, Israeli politicians have five times offered the Arabs a state. Five times the Arabs have rejected the Israeli offers. The reason being the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians want no state next to Israel. They want no Jewish state to exist. Period!”
NO state next to Israel??? If that's their attitude, Jason, YOUR SOLUTION should appeal to them. . . if only they were ruled by common sense instead of hatred.
Most of the Middle East is desert, including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. There would be little change of terrain in moving from Palestine to the Sinai. The success of other economies in the Middle East, and of Las Vegas, prove that people can thrive in deserts. With access to the Mediterranean, there's no reason the new State of Palestine could not thrive. Whether it would choose to try is another matter.
I have thought for a long time now that after the 1967 war that Israel should have said
Forget about it ! And kept ALL the concoured land.
I apparently would have been more generous to the Palestinians as I would have given them the whole Sinai and made sure they had a supply of water.
But I can see your point of creating a buffer between the new territory and Israel though I doubt the border between the new territory and Egypt would be better regulated than between Egypt and the Sinai is now.
Thank you, Jan.
At least a porous border between the new territory and Egypt would not flow directly into an outpost within Israel, as it does now into Gaza through the Rafah Border Crossing. Israel would control its entire southern border, and would presumably manage it more carefully than Egypt manages Rafah.
Jason... Thank you for all this information. Wow! You did a lot of research. This is for sure a new approach. A good one! You said, "No matter what course of action Israel takes, it will be condemned, so it might as well do what’s in its own best interest." Sad. True. Appreciate your in-depth reporting on the history of how we got here. I thought it was heavy hitting but presented without judgment. Your solution is well thought out and well defended.
You're most welcome, and thank you for your support. I hope the historical perspective in this series and proposal for a fresh start helps reduce violence in the area, a long shot but worth trying.
Jason,
Just read this (an excerpt) in Cherie Zaslawsky's substack:
As Victor Sharpe reminds us: “…the Arab League, meeting in Khartoum in August 1967, delivered the infamous three no’s: NO peace with Israel, NO negotiations with Israel, NO recognition of Israel. From 1937, Israeli politicians have five times offered the Arabs a state. Five times the Arabs have rejected the Israeli offers. The reason being the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians want no state next to Israel. They want no Jewish state to exist. Period!”
NO state next to Israel??? If that's their attitude, Jason, YOUR SOLUTION should appeal to them. . . if only they were ruled by common sense instead of hatred.
The block of land you propose is a desert. How can millions survive on that land?
Most of the Middle East is desert, including the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. There would be little change of terrain in moving from Palestine to the Sinai. The success of other economies in the Middle East, and of Las Vegas, prove that people can thrive in deserts. With access to the Mediterranean, there's no reason the new State of Palestine could not thrive. Whether it would choose to try is another matter.