Abbas to put state request to UN General assembly in less then a month. - Polidicks

[QUOTE] [IMG]http://cdn.ph.upi.com/sv/upi/UPI-97761351164882/2012/1/b290598e1e473931e1182fa76fc982e8/Palestinians-seek-UN-recognition.jpg[/IMG] The Palestinian president is moving forward with his plan to seek upgraded observer status at the United Nations next month, despite American and Israeli threats of financial or diplomatic retaliation, officials said Sunday. The decision sets the stage for a new showdown between Israel and the Palestinians at the world body, following last year's attempt by the Palestinians to seek status as a full member state. Although that initiative failed to pass the UN Security Council, it caused months of diplomatic tensions with Israel. "We will go to the UN regardless of any threats," said Tawfik Tirawi, a senior member of President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah movement. "I expect the Israelis to take punitive measures against us if we win this status, but this is our choice and we will not retract it." This year, the Palestinians are seeking "non-member state" status in the UN General Assembly, where passage is assured. The 193-member assembly is dominated by developing nations sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Officials say they are looking for what they call a "quality" majority that includes European countries as well, though Germany and Britain, for instance, have been cool to the Palestinian plan. While upgraded status would not change the situation on the ground, the Palestinians say the move is still significant. They will ask for international recognition of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem, territories captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war. They believe the UN vote would then require Israel to withdraw to the pre-1967 lines or face international legal action. Israel rejects a full return to those lines, and says the borders between Israel and a future Palestine must be reached through direct negotiations. The Palestinians also hope to use upgraded status to join additional UN bodies, such as the International Criminal Court, where they could attempt to prosecute Israel on war crimes violations. The Palestinians last year received membership in UNESCO, the UN cultural agency. Over Israeli objections, they subsequently won recognition of the Church of the Nativity in the West Bank town of Bethlehem as an endangered heritage site. A Palestinian official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said Abbas is expected to formally put his request to the General Assembly on Nov. 15 or Nov. 29. Both dates are symbolic. The 15th is the anniversary of the 1988 Palestinian declaration of independence. The 29th is the anniversary of the 1947 UN decision to partition what was then British-ruled Palestine into Israeli and Arab territories. Jewish leaders agreed, but Arabs rejected the plan, war erupted, and the Palestinians remain without a state. The U.N. now observes Nov. 29 as its annual day of solidarity with the Palestinians. The Palestinians last year decided to turn to the UN after years of deadlock in peace efforts with Israel. Negotiations have been frozen since late 2008, in large part over Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. The Palestinians say they will not resume talks without a settlement freeze. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu approved a partial settlement freeze in 2009, but he refused to extend the slowdown when it expired, and a short-lived round of peace talks collapsed just weeks after they were launched. Abbas has said he will be ready to resume talks after the UN vote, perhaps even without a settlement freeze. While Netanyahu has in the past said he is ready to talk without preconditions, he has not said how he would react to a UN vote. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Yigal Palmor said Israel has not yet decided how to respond, but he warned that UN recognition would "irreversibly poison the atmosphere" and make it impossible to resume peace talks. [/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/10/28/israel-palestine-showdown-un.html"]cbc[/URL] Good on the PA, standing up to Israeli aggression.

What is so damn big of a threat to Israel and the United States if Palestine becomes a state? Is it such a threat to Israel's security?

[QUOTE=ewitwins;38232182]What is so damn big of a threat to Israel and the United States if Palestine becomes a state? Is it such a threat to Israel's security?[/QUOTE] Don't question Israeli interests you anti-semite.

I thought this would be about the Swedish pop-group.

[QUOTE=ewitwins;38232182]What is so damn big of a threat to Israel and the United States if Palestine becomes a state? Is it such a threat to Israel's security?[/QUOTE] If you read the article you'd see two issues. The first is asking for recognition along the 1967 borders which while Israel doesn't like them because they're not very defensible, it is better to have negotiated borders rather than arbitrary post-war borders. The second is joining the international criminal court and trying to prosecute Israel for shit, something which is an absolute joke if you know how effective the ICC is. The main reason for doing this though is PR. With all the shit in the region and numerous groups wanting a turn at power, Abbas has to maintain support and not be seen as a puppet or someone who will just take whatever he's given. The negotiations have gone to shit and they can't even make anything public because of how sensitive everyone is so even if it's completely useless to do it, it's his best move. The strangest thing is that even if it's defeated, it's still good for Abbas because all the sensationalist idiots who don't know shit have a nice strawman of the Israeli controlled US conspiracy to fight against, works wonders for solidarity.

The israelis don't want palestine on the UN because they don't want to get a shitty deal with the UN since the deck would be stacked in palestine's favor.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;38232421]If you read the article you'd see two issues. The first is asking for recognition along the 1967 borders which while Israel doesn't like them because they're not very defensible, it is better to have negotiated borders rather than arbitrary post-war borders. The second is joining the international criminal court and trying to prosecute Israel for shit, something which is an absolute joke if you know how effective the ICC is. The main reason for doing this though is PR. With all the shit in the region and numerous groups wanting a turn at power, Abbas has to maintain support and not be seen as a puppet or someone who will just take whatever he's given. The negotiations have gone to shit and they can't even make anything public because of how sensitive everyone is so even if it's completely useless to do it, it's his best move. The strangest thing is that even if it's defeated, it's still good for Abbas because all the sensationalist idiots who don't know shit have a nice strawman of the Israeli controlled US conspiracy to fight against, works wonders for solidarity.[/QUOTE] You're right, Israel cannot defend itself against the menace that is the Palestinian police force.

[QUOTE=laserguided;38232439]You're right, Israel cannot defend itself against the menace that is the Palestinian police force.[/QUOTE] hurr hurr funneh joke Really though while a full scale war is unlikely and if the PA can make a stable state they won't have to worry about guerilla groups crossing over, it's just the best PR reason. 1967 borders are shit with numerous communities of both Arab and Jewish all over the place. No-one really wants them, they can do a hell of a lot better, and while demanding them works to push forward negotiations it's not an end-goal.

What's wrong with a one-state system anyways? Obviously there's no way in hell to reunite Gaza with the West Bank without cutting Israel, what are they to do? I mean I understand what can obviously go wrong with a one-state system, but this who situation seems unfixable.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;38232474]hurr hurr funneh joke Really though while a full scale war is unlikely and if the PA can make a stable state they won't have to worry about guerilla groups crossing over, it's just the best PR reason. 1967 borders are shit with numerous communities of both Arab and Jewish all over the place. No-one really wants them, they can do a hell of a lot better, and while demanding them works to push forward negotiations it's not an end-goal.[/QUOTE] And building religious settlements to expand and manipulate any border agreement is definitely the way to do it. [editline]29th October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=ewitwins;38232502]What's wrong with a one-state system anyways? Obviously there's no way in hell to reunite Gaza with the West Bank without cutting Israel, what are they to do? I mean I understand what can obviously go wrong with a one-state system, but this who situation seems unfixable.[/QUOTE] I don't think Palestinians would want to be flagged under "the jewish state" or be governed by a theocracy.

[QUOTE=ewitwins;38232502]What's wrong with a one-state system anyways? Obviously there's no way in hell to reunite Gaza with the West Bank without cutting Israel, what are they to do? I mean I understand what can obviously go wrong with a one-state system, but this who situation seems unfixable.[/QUOTE] cut israel anyway and give the Palestinians the land that is rightfully theirs (and maybe prosecute israel for all the shit they've done to the Palestinians over the years while you're at it)

All through the article, I couldn't stop thinking it was referring to ABBA.. [video=youtube;cvChjHcABPA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvChjHcABPA[/video] T'will be an interesting plea though..

religion has pretty much poisoned the well for Israel in the first place not only is israel where it is completely based on a demagogic lie recited by a utterly misled Rabbi, but Israel also can't escape the fact that there's a huge ultra-conservative extremist wing who sees replacing Palestinians with Jews as a jewish duty.

[QUOTE=ewitwins;38232502]What's wrong with a one-state system anyways? Obviously there's no way in hell to reunite Gaza with the West Bank without cutting Israel, what are they to do? I mean I understand what can obviously go wrong with a one-state system, but this who situation seems unfixable.[/QUOTE] Czech republic and Slovakia, Sudan and South Sudan, all the former Yugoslavs, one state solutions don't work especially when there's such a disparity between the two peoples. Despite the idealism of it and the apparent issues here, it's by far the better solution. [QUOTE=laserguided;38232512]And building religious settlements to expand and manipulate any border agreement is definitely the way to do it. [editline]29th October 2012[/editline] I don't think Palestinians would want to be flagged under "the jewish state" or be governed by a theocracy.[/QUOTE] They want more territory, that's the way you do it, thus the statehood attempt to push back. The reality of it is that there's people from both sides on both sides, it's better for everyone if you take that into account rather than deny reality. Also funny to see the only country in the region without an official state religion called a Theocracy. Delicious sensationalism.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;38232580]Czech republic and Slovakia, Sudan and South Sudan, all the former Yugoslavs, one state solutions don't work especially when there's such a disparity between the two peoples. Despite the idealism of it and the apparent issues here, it's by far the better solution. They want more territory, that's the way you do it, thus the statehood attempt to push back. The reality of it is that there's people from both sides on both sides, it's better for everyone if you take that into account rather than deny reality. Also funny to see the only country in the region without an official state religion called a [B]Theocracy. Delicious sensationalism[/B].[/QUOTE] Isreal is zionist, most of the population are bias to Jews and their slogan I've heard many of times is "the only jewish state". If you want to call me sensationalist go call Netanyahu sensationalist, since the people who always win the elections in Israel are ultra right nutheads. Its not like their flag is the star of david or anything.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;38232580] Also funny to see the only country in the region without an official state religion called a Theocracy.[/QUOTE] lack of an official state religion doesn't mean the country isn't a theocracy an official state religion is just that, making something official. considering so many people call it "The Jewish State of Israel" and also considering the fact that people such as I with jewish background are invited to come over others raises significant questions about how secular israel really is

[QUOTE=thisispain;38232574]religion has pretty much poisoned the well for Israel in the first place not only is israel where it is completely based on a demagogic lie recited by a utterly misled Rabbi, but Israel also can't escape the fact that there's a huge ultra-conservative extremist wing who sees replacing Palestinians with Jews as a jewish duty.[/QUOTE] Religious reasoning or no, there's nothing wrong with Civic nationalism. The right wing part of the population is a problem though, not sure how to practically change that in the current state. Any examples of movements that have successfully liberalised countries you can think of? [QUOTE=laserguided;38232602]Isreal is zionist, most of the population are bias to Jews and their slogan I've heard many of times is "the only jewish state". If you want to call me sensationalist go call Netanyahu sensationalist, since the people who always win the elections in Israel are ultra right nutheads.[/QUOTE] Do you understand what Theocracy means? They may share more in religion than any other trait but a conservative nutjob is a conservative nutjob, no need to lump them in with Theocrats. I'm not denying they're retarded ultra-conservative, but that's a problem to fix, not an argument on why they shouldn't exist.

[QUOTE=thisispain;38232628]lack of an official state religion doesn't mean the country isn't a theocracy an official state religion is just that, making something official. considering so many people call it "The Jewish State of Israel" and also considering the fact that people such as I with jewish background are invited to come over others raises significant questions about how secular israel really is[/QUOTE] Didn't Israel pull a US tv marketing scheme that begged all jews to come back to the promise land not to long ago. [editline]29th October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Devodiere;38232635]Religious reasoning or no, there's nothing wrong with Civic nationalism. The right wing part of the population is a problem though, not sure how to practically change that in the current state. Any examples of movements that have successfully liberalised countries you can think of? Do you understand what Theocracy means? They may share more in religion than any other trait but a conservative nutjob is a conservative nutjob, no need to lump them in with Theocrats. I'm not denying they're retarded ultra-conservative, but that's a problem to fix, not an argument on why they shouldn't exist.[/QUOTE] But they are theocratic otherwise they would not be authorising religious settlement in other peoples land.

[QUOTE=laserguided;38232636]But they are theocratic otherwise they would not be authorising religious settlement in other peoples land.[/QUOTE] No, that still falls under Ultranationalist. They identify themselves as a nation by their religion, but all of that still falls under Nationalist and right wing. Lebensraum may not have had a religious justification but it was pretty much the exact same as here.

[QUOTE=Devodiere;38232666]No, that still falls under Ultranationalist. They identify themselves as a nation by their religion, but all of that still falls under Nationalist and right wing. Lebensraum may not have had a religious justification but it was pretty much the exact same as here.[/QUOTE] You're right, it isn't theocracy but its going to be run by religious nutheads for the foreseeable future, and religion has MASSIVE influence on their policies and are probably the reasons behind Isreal not being able to come to an agreement with the PA.

[QUOTE=laserguided;38232681]You're right, it isn't theocracy but its going to be run by religious nutheads for the foreseeable future, and religion has MASSIVE influence on their policies and are probably the reasons behind Isreal not being able to come to an agreement with the PA.[/QUOTE] Not really. Religion is a divider and a justification but a lot of it seems to be stuff they would've wanted to do anyway, generally true for any religious influence. They want more land, they want it populated by ultra-conservative people who will be loyal, they don't want to negotiate because they want to take it anyway, seems to be things that everyone in dispute does whatever the point of contention. Them being conservative is true though, they're one of the few nations that supported the Iraq war ffs. Their unicameral proportional Knesset makes everything complicated and their history would make anyone conservative. A dying down of hostilities, a good deal of self-criticism from within, and less sensationalist garbage that makes them out to be an abomination worthy of destruction seem good ways to help this.