Sharon: West Bank settlements to expand

[SeanAshi]

Prime Minister Ariel Sharon signaled a right turn Sunday, vowing to build inside the West Bank settlement blocs, even as bulldozers began mowing down Gaza's settlements.

"There will be building in the settlement blocs," Sharon said. "Each government since 1967 – right, left and national unity – has seen strategic importance in specific areas [beyond the Green Line]. I will build." Sharon mentioned specifically that "Ma'ale Adumim will continue to grow and be connected to Jerusalem," and that Ariel and its satellites would be a part of Israel forever.

Referring to the controversial E-1 plan that would connect Ma'ale Adumim to Jerusalem, and which the Palestinians argue would split the West Bank in two, Sharon said "this will not cause the cutting-off of Judea and Samaria. Solutions can be found."
Take that Hamas! :P

[LibertyUnites]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/23/west.bank.pullout/index.html

[Moledet]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/23/west.bank.pullout/index.html
This is part of the expulsion plan, only four settlements: Ganim, Kadim, Homesh and Sanur. Sanur and Homesh can be rebuilt pretty easily.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Well that shoots down any chance of peace.

[UoUo]

:lol:

And if we whould stop the building there will be peace? :lol:

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

:lol:

And if we whould stop the building there will be peace? :lol:

Look it's a very complex issue.

Personally I think the following should happen in the Middle East. This affects Isreal, Jordan, Syria, Saudia Arabia, Iraq and Egypt. Call it Minardiau's peace proposal.

It is a utopian idea but hey the world doesent advance without utopian ideas

1. Restore all pre 1967 borders with Lebenon, Syria, Jordan, Israel and the resettlement of the populations affected IE Jewish Settlements.

2. Jeuresolum, Medina, Mecca, those 2 Iraqi holey cities to be controlled by a UN administration. Because of the religious importance to these areas especially Jeuresolom which is the Holy city for all 3 religions the area should be dis-armed, and de-classified as a state. Turn the area into a stateless region that is for all of humankind to enjoy in peace and to be able to visit their repspective religious sites free of violence ect

But hey. Just an idea

[UoUo]

And you think the muslims will let you enter mecca?

And i ask you again, what about the "right" of return?

[Palmach]

Yeah, well, who is gonna believe him now? A year ago he said that Netzarim is as important as Tel Aviv....

[Ayura]

And you think the muslims will let you enter mecca?

And i ask you again, what about the "right" of return?


What is your interest about Mecca?


I have gone over this a million times with other people. Mecca is not a tourist attraction where people with cameras and stuff can dance around and take pictures of "pretty buildings" or whatever.



However - as far as I'm concerned, muslims can worship with jews and christians anywhere. So long as it isn't Mecca and Madinah.

[UoUo]

And you think the muslims will let you enter mecca?

And i ask you again, what about the "right" of return?


What is your interest about Mecca?


I have gone over this a million times with other people. Mecca is not a tourist attraction where people with cameras and stuff can dance around and take pictures of "pretty buildings" or whatever.



However - as far as I'm concerned, muslims can worship with jews and christians anywhere. So long as it isn't Mecca and Madinah.


I couldn't care less about mecca.
I just talked about Minardiau plan. to put mecca unser UN rule.

And question to you. whould you care if we will start praying in the tempel mount as well?

[Ayura]

Temple mount? Hmm...not sure. I personally wouldn't mind...



However - what's the point. The Yahoodis only seek the destruction of it.

[UoUo]

No we don't.
The acoording to the Jewish bible the Tempel whould raise and whould build by god.

We won't do anything to the muslims there.

[Ayura]

No we don't.
The acoording to the Jewish bible the Tempel whould raise and whould build by god.

We won't do anything to the muslims there.


UoUo - I get a sense of slight tension anytime we engage in conversation. If you hold a grudge against me - let it all out :)


An interesting article I find:


The Rabbis have ruled that Jews may not enter specific areas (approximately 15%) of the Temple Mount [4] because of the danger of entering the area of the Temple courtyard and the difficulty of fulfilling the ritual requirement of cleansing oneself with the ashes of a red heifer (see Numbers 19), and declared it punishable with kareth, or death by heavenly decree [5]. The boundaries of the areas to be avoided, while having large portions in common, are delineated differently by various rabbinic authorities.

Many Rabbis have "imposed a blanket ban on access for Jews to the entire Temple Mount"[6], given the uncertainty about the location of the permitted areas, an opinion still supported by Rabbis such as Ovadia Yosef, Avraham Shapiro, Eliahu Bakshi-Doron, and Israel Lau. In August 1967, the Chief Rabbis of Israel, Isser Yehuda Unterman and Yitzhak Nissim, in concert with other leading rabbis, asserted that "For generations we have warned against and refrained from entering any part of the Temple Mount."

However, many other rabbis, including Maimonides, Abraham Isaac Kook, Shlomo Goren, former Chief rabbi of Israel, Chaim David Halevi, and Mordechai Eliyahu have "strongly encouraged" Jews to visit the permitted sections of the Temple Mount. [7]. During Maimonides' residence in Jerusalem, a synagogue stood on the Temple Mount alongside other structures; Maimonides prayed there. The law committee of the Masorti movement (Conservative Judaism in Israel) has issued two responsa on the subject, both holding that Jews may visit the permitted sections of the Temple Mount. One responsa allows such visits, another encourages them.


Under Islam - it won't collapse. We'll have to see whether the Ahl-Al Kitaab (people of the book) or the Muslimeen are correct. Only time will tell ;)

Salam.

[hajaji]

Yeah, well, who is gonna believe him now? A year ago he said that Netzarim is as important as Tel Aviv....

Yeah, he full everyone.
I hope he will not be the next PM, although i have any illusions from Netanyho.

If the settlers are smart they will move the settlements near to the fence so they will have a chance to be inside.

[Palmach]

Yeah, well, who is gonna believe him now? A year ago he said that Netzarim is as important as Tel Aviv....

Yeah, he full everyone.
I hope he will not be the next PM, although i have any illusions from Netanyho.

If the settlers are smart they will move the settlements near to the fence so they will have a chance to be inside.

Bibi is a motor-mouth. They way he miss-managed the Hebron agreement should pretty much preclude him trying to assume a position of unbending defender of the land. If he cave to pressure from Clinton, there is no way he'll stand up to Bush-EU tag-team.

Sadly, at this juncture I do not see anyone remotely capable of holding the fort. The best cource of action right now in my opinion is to pull out of all territories that can not be held, officially annexing the rest, and building like hell. It, however, requires ********s currently missing in the Knesset.

[Moledet]

Yeah, well, who is gonna believe him now? A year ago he said that Netzarim is as important as Tel Aviv....

Yeah, he full everyone.
I hope he will not be the next PM, although i have any illusions from Netanyho.

If the settlers are smart they will move the settlements near to the fence so they will have a chance to be inside.
Ah? The whole point of the settlements is to be deep inside the west bank so that the most eastern Jewish house will decide where the border will pass.

Even though the IDF did clear Sanru and Homesh, as always someone will go over there and rebuild these settlements.

BTW, Palmach, i'm sure Liberman is good enough and he'd pretty much rip Bush to peices.

[hajaji]

Yeah, well, who is gonna believe him now? A year ago he said that Netzarim is as important as Tel Aviv....

Yeah, he full everyone.
I hope he will not be the next PM, although i have any illusions from Netanyho.

If the settlers are smart they will move the settlements near to the fence so they will have a chance to be inside.
Ah? The whole point of the settlements is to be deep inside the west bank so that the most eastern Jewish house will decide where the border will pass.

Even though the IDF did clear Sanru and Homesh, as always someone will go over there and rebuild these settlements.

BTW, Palmach, i'm sure Liberman is good enough and he'd pretty much rip Bush to peices.

I admire the settlers , i think that that settlers are the best jewish group in the world.
If we had more of them the Palestinians were never start there terror war.
But we have to be also realistic, we all saw what happend since last week.
We all know that everything that behind the fence will be left - do not believe to Sharon and Netanyho.
Since our goal is to keep as much as many of our land, it is the settlers interest to move the settlements
near to the fance hoping that the government will change the course of the fence so that those settlements
will be inside eventually.

[hajaji]

triple post

[hajaji]

Yeah, well, who is gonna believe him now? A year ago he said that Netzarim is as important as Tel Aviv....

Yeah, he full everyone.
I hope he will not be the next PM, although i have any illusions from Netanyho.

If the settlers are smart they will move the settlements near to the fence so they will have a chance to be inside.
Ah? The whole point of the settlements is to be deep inside the west bank so that the most eastern Jewish house will decide where the border will pass.

Even though the IDF did clear Sanru and Homesh, as always someone will go over there and rebuild these settlements.

BTW, Palmach, i'm sure Liberman is good enough and he'd pretty much rip Bush to peices.

I admire the settlers , i think that that settlers are the best jewish group in the world.
If we had more of them the Palestinians were never start there terror war.
But we have to be also realistic, we all saw what happend since last week.
We all know that everything that behind the fence will be left - do not believe to Sharon and Netanyho.
Since our goal is to keep as much as many of our land, it is the settlers interest to move the settlements
near to the fance hoping that the government will change the course of the fence so that those settlements
will be inside eventually.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Since our goal is to keep as much as many of our land, it is the settlers interest to move the settlements near to the fance hoping that the government will change the course of the fence so that those settlements
will be inside eventually.

If this happened I do hope the Palistinians constinue to go ape ****.

Thats like saying to a German Village that borders with France to build new streets and what not in France.

[gaijinsamurai]

What I think SHOULD happen, and what I think will be realistic are not necessarily the same.

I think Israel SHOULD withdraw to the pre-1967 borders, including vacating most of East Jerusalem (except the sites which are important to Judaism). Minor adjustments in the border can be made.
Palestinians who lost homes in 1948 SHOULD be told they won't be going back there, and SHOULD be compensated.
Israeli settlers who wish to stay in the West Bank SHOULD accept Palestinian sovereignty, and acknowledge that they are guests. Nearly all West Bank settlements SHOULD be dismantled.
A multi-national force SHOULD monitor the borders and East Jeruslem's holy sites.

But again, I don't think that necessarily will happen anytime soon. Furthermore, I don't think Sharon is really interested in allowing the Palestinians to have any sort of viable state, nor do I think enough of the Palestinians are really interested in living at peace with Israel.

[Clarsachier]

Unless there's enough continuous land for the Palestinians to create a state, it's only a matter of time before Abbas will loose control to the radical elements and intefada 3 will begin.

Unfortunately, this scenario will play into the hands of some right wing elements who will say, 'told you so' and use it to justify the occupation and
fortification of the West Bank.[/i]

[Palmach]

Unless there's enough continuous land for the Palestinians to create a state, it's only a matter of time before Abbas will loose control to the radical elements and intefada 3 will begin.

Unfortunately, this scenario will play into the hands of some right wing elements who will say, 'told you so' and use it to justify the occupation and
fortification of the West Bank.[/i]

Define "enough" and "continuous".

There are some small freaken countries in the world, UAE for exxample, and they are doing just fine.

Israel is 7 miles wide in some areas, no reason why settlement blocks make WB non-continuous, especially if Beit Lehem-Hebron highway is built.

Finally, why not bring Jordan and Egypt into the mix: they can provide for WB-Gaza passage and give some territory to the Palestinians (I mean there freaken nothing in Sinai (and pretty much all the way to the Suez (minus the resorts) next to Gaza, give poor bastards some room to breath).

[Clarsachier]

Unless there's enough continuous land for the Palestinians to create a state, it's only a matter of time before Abbas will loose control to the radical elements and intefada 3 will begin.

Unfortunately, this scenario will play into the hands of some right wing elements who will say, 'told you so' and use it to justify the occupation and
fortification of the West Bank.[/i]

Define "enough" and "continuous".

Enough : It's called negotiation, obviously Pals aren't going to get all they want. Israelis are probalby going to have to give up a bit more land (please no hysterics.)

Continuous = enough room for unrestricted passage between all parts of the Pals territory.

There are some small freaken countries in the world, UAE for exxample, and they are doing just fine.

Concur. However, divide UAE up with roadblocks and ect and you'd have the same situation.

Israel is 7 miles wide in some areas, no reason why settlement blocks make WB non-continuous, especially if Beit Lehem-Hebron highway is built.

I don't have good info on this - any link? Are you saying that the Pal claim that they don't have a continuous land is bogus?

Finally, why not bring Jordan and Egypt into the mix: they can provide for WB-Gaza passage and give some territory to the Palestinians (I mean there freaken nothing in Sinai (and pretty much all the way to the Suez (minus the resorts) next to Gaza, give poor bastards some room to breath).

Good point. Egypt and Jordan certainly would have a lot to gain; giving up
some land would deter unrest in their countries. Unfortunately, the diplomatic expertise to bring that about seems in short supply, all over.

History shows that the leaders who've been capable of negotiating concessions in the ME (Jimmy Carter, Rabin) get reviled (or worse) by
the right wing. And the right wing guys don't seem to be able to understand the concept of the power of diplomacy.

[Palmach]

Enough : It's called negotiation, obviously Pals aren't going to get all they want. Israelis are probalby going to have to give up a bit more land (please no hysterics.)

Continuous = enough room for unrestricted passage between all parts of the Pals territory.

That is not a definition in any sence. Obviously a territorial compromize will have to be reached, the debate revolves around the exact amount of territory that needs to change hands. Palestinians, for obvious reasons, claim that anything short of the entire WB will preclude a "viable" Palestinian state, which, in my view, is a bogus claim.

As far as continuity is concerned, the same thing applies. Palestinians claim that anything short of the entire WB will preclude someone form Jenin from traveling to Hebron and that is bogus, since it would be no different then someone from Katzrin traveling to Ber Sheva.


Concur. However, divide UAE up with roadblocks and ect and you'd have the same situation.

We are not talking about the present situation, we are talking about the final or long-term temporart settlment.


I don't have good info on this - any link? Are you saying that the Pal claim that they don't have a continuous land is bogus?

Well, obviously, any claim has SOME merrit. However, some and 100% are two different things. With a new highway constructed, settlement blocks would not impact on North-South travel in the West Bank in the way that would make the state non-viable.



Good point. Egypt and Jordan certainly would have a lot to gain; giving up some land would deter unrest in their countries. Unfortunately, the diplomatic expertise to bring that about seems in short supply, all over.

History shows that the leaders who've been capable of negotiating concessions in the ME (Jimmy Carter, Rabin) get reviled (or worse) by
the right wing. And the right wing guys don't seem to be able to understand the concept of the power of diplomacy.

Lets just say that my opinion of the deplomatic solutions by Carter and Rabin do not match yours.

[Clarsachier]

Obviously a territorial compromize will have to be reached, the debate revolves around the exact amount of territory that needs to change hands.

Agree 200%

Palestinians, for obvious reasons, claim that anything short of the entire WB will preclude a "viable" Palestinian state, which, in my view, is a bogus claim.

Their of 'the entire west bank' is nothing but political rhetoric used by extremist organizations. Nobody in their right mind believes the PALs will get the whole west bank.

As far as continuity is concerned, the same thing applies. Palestinians claim that anything short of the entire WB will preclude someone form Jenin from traveling to Hebron and that is bogus, since it would be no different then someone from Katzrin traveling to Ber Sheva.

Can the route you're describing, Jenin - Hebron be traversed without crossing Israeli controlled land?


I don't have good info on this - any link? Are you saying that the Pal claim that they don't have a continuous land is bogus?

Well, obviously, any claim has SOME merrit. However, some and 100% are two different things. With a new highway constructed, settlement blocks would not impact on North-South travel in the West Bank in the way that would make the state non-viable.

For the record - territorial continuity = all parts of the territory being linked without traversing another country/territory.

If the 'highway' you mention goes through Israeli controlled land(?) then it does not suffice to make the territories continuous. Not by any means.


Good point. Egypt and Jordan certainly would have a lot to gain; giving up some land would deter unrest in their countries. Unfortunately, the diplomatic expertise to bring that about seems in short supply, all over.

History shows that the leaders who've been capable of negotiating concessions in the ME (Jimmy Carter, Rabin) get reviled (or worse) by
the right wing. And the right wing guys don't seem to be able to understand the concept of the power of diplomacy.

Lets just say that my opinion of the deplomatic solutions by Carter and Rabin do not match yours.[/quote]

Going back to the 'territorial compromize' that we agree must be reached,
I don't see anybody that seems to have the abilities or influence to acheive the goal.

It seems the Israelis want their leaders to be 'tough' above all else. And
there's certainly not much hope the current U.S. administration assisting in any type of 'win win' negotiating.