untermensche
Contributor
The situation in Vietnam was the South wanted to reunite but the US violently opposed it and blew the place up. Like a mad dog.
-
Features
What's the fuss about recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital?
- Thread starter Lumpenproletariat
- Start date
The situation in Vietnam was the South wanted to reunite but the US violently opposed it and blew the place up. Like a mad dog.
coloradoatheist
Veteran Member
Didn't you mean the North? The situations are very the same. Post European colonialism with the UN deciding to partition the area between two parties who didn't necessary agree on the division. The Palestinians didn't originally want the two state solution, they wanted one. Israel was okay at the beginning but now don't want it. But in the case of North Vietnam, they were a very repressive regime and they invaded the south and used horrible tactics both before and after the war and you were okay with it.
untermensche
Contributor
No. The North did not invade the South. They did not have to. Most of the people in the South wanted to reunite with the North and break away from the Imperial controlled government of the South.
That is why the US invaded the South and carried out an insane murderous policy.
coloradoatheist
Veteran Member
And it took the North two years of fighting with millions of men to overcome the south after the US left. If Israel wanted to they have the warfare capabilities to carry out a full scale attack on Palestine, but they don't.
sharon45
Veteran Member
Which I've heard many times, and answered as, because that would be just far too obvious.
Negotiating 101: You don't start talks with your final position.
If Israel defines it's borders that will be used as a starting point to demand more concessions.
They have made it clear what they want:
67 borders with swaps
No right of return
Peace
The Palestinians won't agree to any of these.
The South would have liked to reunite but they weren't going to do so by force of arms. The North used force. I can't recall a single case of those on the left using force that you haven't approved of, no matter what the death toll.
Jayjay
Contributor
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2002
- Messages
- 7,173
- Location
- Finland
- Basic Beliefs
- An accurate worldview or philosophy
Palestinians have agreed to all of them. Swaps would of course have to be acceptable to both sides, not just dictated by Israel, and right of return can be addressed in a way that's acceptable to Israel, i.e. compensation and not unlimited right to migrate to Israel.
Besides, why should Palestinians be forced to go into negotiations with their final position, if Israel doesn't?
untermensche
Contributor
They had massive rebuilding to do after all the insane US murderous bombing.
They faced a military propped up by the US not by any South Vietnamese.
Those people in the South that joined with the Imperial invader were traitors.
coloradoatheist
Veteran Member
While it's getting off topic, the south fought the north for 2 years after the US left. If they didn't want to fight it would have fallen within days but it didn't. And Israel could say that the Palestinians are traitors and do the same things the North Vietnamese did to the people in the south who disagreed with them.
untermensche
Contributor
They have said one thing one day and another the next.
They are arrogant and despotic like people who harm others without punishment become.
Show me the map they have made up as their starting position.
Show me the 67 map with what Israel wants to "trade".
Show me how serious they are to negotiate.
sharon45
Veteran Member
It's been already shown that the Israelis are not serious about negotiating for a two-state solution at the moment.
repoman
Contributor
Huh? Where is there agreement to the first two? Especially since the second is treason.
untermensche
Contributor
What's treason is for the Israeli government to treat Palestinians like humans with human rights.
It hasn't been done since 1967.
From there begins the slow theft of more and more land.
Which any thinking person fully understands is proof of their nature and intentions.
If all you want is peace you don't continually steal land for decades.
The truth is not Israel or the Palestinians or the US should be involved in any settlement agreement.
That should be done by neutral parties. Nations from Africa and Asia and South America.
That is the only way anything will be done. This has gone on long enough.
It hasn't been done since 1967.
From there begins the slow theft of more and more land.
Which any thinking person fully understands is proof of their nature and intentions.
If all you want is peace you don't continually steal land for decades.
The truth is not Israel or the Palestinians or the US should be involved in any settlement agreement.
That should be done by neutral parties. Nations from Africa and Asia and South America.
That is the only way anything will be done. This has gone on long enough.
sharon45
Veteran Member
Then nothing is going to be done, because I sincerely doubt even one camp would agree with those recommendations.
untermensche
Contributor
I am just talking about what should happen.
So we can see how having Israel and the US on one side against the lowly Palestinians is an absolute despotic attempt at a railroading.
It has never been a fair and honest negotiation between two parties. Not for a second.
Arctish
Centimillionaire
If I show you clear evidence, the sort of evidence a reasonable person would find convincing, do you promise to stop posting the same unfounded claims over and over again?
sharon45
Veteran Member
As was stated a few times in this thread, the Palestinians seem to have more than just that one side against them. Hamas sure isn't much of a representative either.
Cite? I was using the term in the legal sense--Palestinian law makes an acceptable peace to be treason. It also makes trying to change the law treason.
Your eternal preaching proves nothing.