Iceland votes to recognise Palestinian State - Polidicks

[release] [TABLE="width: 100%"] [TR] [TD="class: ArticlePicture, align: left"][IMG]http://www.dailystar.com.lb/dailystar/Pictures/2011/11/29/__AMM13_JORDAN-_1125_11_53_634581965289824475_main.jpg[/IMG][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="class: ArticlePictureCaption, align: justify"]An activist prays near a painting of the Dome of the Rock at the Jordanian side of the Dead Sea during a rally after Friday prayers. (REUTERS/Majed Jaber)[/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: left"][/TD] [/TR] [TR] [TD="align: left"][/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] REYKJAVIK: Iceland's parliament voted on Tuesday in favor of recognising the Palestinian Territories as an independent state, the first Western European country to do so according Iceland's foreign minister. The vote paves the way for formal recognition by the small north Atlantic island, which led the way in recognising the independence of the three Baltic states after the collapse of the former Soviet Union in 1991. "Iceland is the first Western European country to take this step," Foreign Minister Skarphedinsson told Icelandic state broadcaster RUV. "I now have the formal authority to declare our recognition of Palestine." The Icelandic parliament decided by 38 votes in the 63-seat house to back a resolution allowing for the recognition of a Palestinian state within the borders of the Six Day War of 1967. "At the same time, parliament urges Israelis and Palestinians to seek a peace agreement on the basis of international law and U.N. resolutions, which include the mutual recognition of the state of Israel and the state of Palestine," said the resolution, proposed by the foreign minister. It also called on all sides to cease any violence and recalled the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. Iceland's recognition, however, is expected to amount to a little more than symbolic step as the Palestinian Authority strives to get United Nations recognition. Its quest for a seat at the international body has so far failed. [/release] Read more: [URL]http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2011/Nov-29/155542-iceland-votes-to-recognise-palestinian-state.ashx#ixzz1fAgaV7MO[/URL] (The Daily Star :: Lebanon News :: [url]http://www.dailystar.com.lb[/url]) Good work, Iceland.

Good for you. At least someone is willing to.

...what's the purpose and why?

[QUOTE=darkedone02;33502355]...what's the purpose and why?[/QUOTE]That's redundant but no matter. Giving some sense of validity and recognition to a nation and people that have been wrongfully displaced and tormented by Israel.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;33502374]That's redundant but no matter. Giving some sense of validity and recognition to a nation and people that have been wrongfully displaced and tormented by Israel.[/QUOTE] but what if the palestinians are unable to actually exist as a state? the palestinian region is divided into two, with two seperate governments which don't cooperate. one of these governments refuses to make peace under any circumstance with israel. regardless of what role israel plays in the matter, the palestinians don't /yet/ seem to actually have the ability to operate as a single state, let alone a state that can live peaceably with its chief neighbour.

[QUOTE=R3N3GADE;33502442]but what if the palestinians are unable to actually exist as a state? the palestinian region is divided into two, with two seperate governments which don't cooperate. one of these governments refuses to make peace under any circumstance with israel. regardless of what role israel plays in the matter, the palestinians don't /yet/ seem to actually have the ability to operate as a single state, let alone a state that can live peaceably with its chief neighbour.[/QUOTE] They're divided because the original plan of having connectors between Gaza and the West Bank was blocked when Israel declared war on the other Arab states in the War of 1948. The original partition had already been approved by the UN, but Israel declared its independence ahead of time.

First they refused to pay debts of private banks with public funds. Then Iceland recognizes Palestine; I think a little liberation is in order to restore freedom to that rouge-terrorist, anti-semitic nation.

[QUOTE=darkedone02;33502355]...what's the purpose and why?[/QUOTE] why not? i think it's because iceland has had a history of occupation as well. maybe they think the israeli's are acting like the danish.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33502550]They're divided because the original plan of having connectors between Gaza and the West Bank was blocked when Israel declared war on the other Arab states in the War of 1948. The original partition had already been approved by the UN, but Israel declared its independence ahead of time.[/QUOTE] it's not the physical division i'm talking about (don't need to be in the same place to have a nation - after all, there's a canada between alaska and the us mainland), but the political division.

[QUOTE=thisispain;33502613]why not? i think it's because iceland has had a history of occupation as well. maybe they think the israeli's are acting like the danish.[/QUOTE] Iceland was originally unsettled, Icelanders and Icelandic culture today branches entirely from settlers, from e.g. Denmark and Norway. They were never "occupied" except by the British during WW2. The road to Icelandic independence was relatively quiet and completely civil and non-violent, I don't think there's much room for comparing with the Palestine situation.

[QUOTE=jA_cOp;33502694]Iceland was originally unsettled, Icelanders and Icelandic culture today branches entirely from settlers, from e.g. Denmark and Norway. They were never "occupied" except by the British during WW2. The road to Icelandic independence was relatively quiet and completely civil and non-violent, I don't think there's much room for comparing with the Palestine situation.[/QUOTE] mmm it's a bit more complicated than that [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland#History[/url]

[QUOTE=R3N3GADE;33502690]it's not the physical division i'm talking about (don't need to be in the same place to have a nation - after all, there's a canada between alaska and the us mainland), but the political division.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=R3N3GADE;33502442]but what if the palestinians are unable to actually exist as a state? the palestinian region is divided into two, with two seperate governments which don't cooperate. one of these governments refuses to make peace under any circumstance with israel. regardless of what role israel plays in the matter, the palestinians don't /yet/ seem to actually have the ability to operate as a single state, let alone a state that can live peaceably with its chief neighbour.[/QUOTE] Any disagreements between the two have been strongly reduced, and is even safe to say there is very little animosity between the two, if any. First beginning with the [URL="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/04/2011427152119845721.html"]reconciliation deal in April 2011[/URL] (held by the new Egyptian government) and with further talks and gaps narrowed [URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/24/hamas-fatah-talks_n_1112065.html"]just a few days ago[/URL] for a new unity-government. This has resulted in both Hamas and Fatah hailing these steps, expressing mutual interest for continued cooperation. Abbas has set the date for elections to May 4, which according to the WP is “[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-president-sets-may-4-as-date-for-elections-in-west-bank-and-gaza/2011/11/28/gIQAE1Wc4N_story.html"]meant to end a long-standing rift that has left his people divided between rival governments in the West Bank and Gaza Strip[/URL].” Having them unified isn't an issue anymore - the only thing next thing would be for Fatah to deradicalize Hamas. Also: Remember who's fault the initial division between the two lied, Israel created and encouraged Hamas, so they could split Palestine and to especially counter the Yasser Arafat’s PLO. [url]http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ZER403A.html[/url] [release] Thanks to the Mossad, Israel's "Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks", the Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat's Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. [B]According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, "Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)".[/B][/release] And from the [URL="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123275572295011847.html"]Wall Street Journel[/URL][release]Instead of trying to curb Gaza's Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, [B]encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction,[/B] Yasser Arafat's Fatah. [B]Israel cooperated with a crippled, half-blind cleric named Sheikh Ahmed Yassin[/b], even as he was laying the foundations for what would become Hamas. Sheikh Yassin continues to inspire militants today; during the recent war in Gaza, Hamas fighters confronted Israeli troops with "Yassins," primitive rocket-propelled grenades named in honor of the cleric.[/release]

I never really understood why everyone supported Israel but not Palestine. I'm not implying that I don't think people should support Israel, but I just don't understand why you don't support Palestine as well. I don't really feel any of them have more right than the other to be a state, in an ideal world I would prefer them to merge into a country belonging no more to one side than the other. Then again, this whole conflict is despite my attempts to read up on it, confusing the living fuck out of me.

Saddam was a secular nationalist. Really though, they weren't radical at the time but turned that way later, something numerous religious organisations did in the 80s. Remember a time when the religious ones were the good guys and the seculars were evil? And I dunno about this one, they hardly even recognise themselves. Politics can be slow so getting a head start isn't a bad idea, not really doing any harm either is it. [editline]30th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Simski;33503092]I never really understood why everyone supported Israel but not Palestine. I'm not implying that I don't think people should support Israel, but I just don't understand why you don't support Palestine as well. I don't really feel any of them have more right than the other to be a state, in an ideal world I would prefer them to merge into a country belonging no more to one side than the other. Then again, this whole conflict is despite my attempts to read up on it, confusing the living fuck out of me.[/QUOTE] Yeah, it'd be ideal if they were together but a lot of unions like that could never work. Hell, look at Portgual and Spain, former Yugoslavia, even Australia and New Zealand, the differences between them are minuscule and even they can't get along. The best we can hope for is a good administration with good diplomatic relations so there is the least amount of friction between them.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;33502603]First they refused to pay debts of private banks with public funds. Then Iceland recognizes Palestine; I think a little liberation is in order to restore freedom to that rouge-terrorist, anti-semitic nation.[/QUOTE] They don't even have a military, I could take a pickup truck full of friends to the airport and a few hours later successfully annex Iceland

[QUOTE=thisispain;33502739]mmm it's a bit more complicated than that [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland#History[/url][/QUOTE] Not really, the only country they've been at war with has been the United Kingdom.

[QUOTE=Starpluck;33502826]Any disagreements between the two have been strongly reduced, and is even safe to say there is very little animosity between the two, if any. First beginning with the [URL="http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/04/2011427152119845721.html"]reconciliation deal in April 2011[/URL] (held by the new Egyptian government) and with further talks and gaps narrowed [URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/24/hamas-fatah-talks_n_1112065.html"]just a few days ago[/URL] for a new unity-government. This has resulted in both Hamas and Fatah hailing these steps, expressing mutual interest for continued cooperation. Abbas has set the date for elections to May 4, which according to the WP is “[URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle-east/palestinian-president-sets-may-4-as-date-for-elections-in-west-bank-and-gaza/2011/11/28/gIQAE1Wc4N_story.html"]meant to end a long-standing rift that has left his people divided between rival governments in the West Bank and Gaza Strip[/URL].” Having them unified isn't an issue anymore - the only thing next would be for Fatah to deradicalize Hamas. Also: Remember who's fault the initial division between the two lied, Israel created and encouraged Hamas, so they could split Palestine and to especially counter the Yasser Arafat’s PLO. [url]http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/ZER403A.html[/url] [release] Thanks to the Mossad, Israel's "Institute for Intelligence and Special Tasks", the Hamas was allowed to reinforce its presence in the occupied territories. Meanwhile, Arafat's Fatah Movement for National Liberation as well as the Palestinian Left were subjected to the most brutal form of repression and intimidation Let us not forget that it was Israel, which in fact created Hamas. [B]According to Zeev Sternell, historian at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, "Israel thought that it was a smart ploy to push the Islamists against the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO)".[/B][/release] And from the [URL="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123275572295011847.html"]Wall Street Journel[/URL][release]Instead of trying to curb Gaza's Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, [B]encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction,[/B] Yasser Arafat's Fatah. [B]Israel cooperated with a crippled, half-blind cleric named Sheikh Ahmed Yassin[/b], even as he was laying the foundations for what would become Hamas. Sheikh Yassin continues to inspire militants today; during the recent war in Gaza, Hamas fighters confronted Israeli troops with "Yassins," primitive rocket-propelled grenades named in honor of the cleric.[/release][/QUOTE] but according to your articles, they haven't actually been able to agree on anything yet. i quote huffpo: "Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas chief Khaled Mashaal talked for two hours in Cairo but did not reach agreement on touchy matters like the composition of an interim unity government and a date for elections. The meeting raised new questions about whether the rivals are serious about sharing power, or just going through the motions." consequently, having them unified is still very much an issue, let alone the deradicalisation of hamas. it is a good sign that they're talking, i agree, but i'm not going to believe hamas and fatah are forming a unity government capable of leading a palestinian state until i see it - or some real progress, at least, not just discussions and speeches. as to your statements that israel created the current political division, i take a few issues: a) it's irrelevant. the point is not /who/ created political division in palestine, merely that it's there. it's there, and that's one of the obstacles to palestinian statehood. b) you haven't provided enough evidence to suggest that the current division is israel's fault. you've provided evidence that israel is partially responsible for the rise of political islamism in the palestinian region, and let such groups militarise in order to fight the PLO, which it considered terrorists. however, there's nothing here that suggests israel is actually the cause of conflict between the groups - merely that it allowed it. moving on through history, there's once again no sign that israel was responsible for hamas' overthrow of fatah a few years ago, nor that israel is responsible for their split now. [editline]30th November 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Devodiere;33503118]Saddam was a secular nationalist. Really though, they weren't radical at the time but turned that way later, something numerous religious organisations did in the 80s. Remember a time when the religious ones were the good guys and the seculars were evil? And I dunno about this one, they hardly even recognise themselves. Politics can be slow so getting a head start isn't a bad idea, not really doing any harm either is it. [editline]30th November 2011[/editline] Yeah, it'd be ideal if they were together but a lot of unions like that could never work. Hell, look at Portgual and Spain, former Yugoslavia, even Australia and New Zealand, the differences between them are minuscule and even they can't get along. The best we can hope for is a good administration with good diplomatic relations so there is the least amount of friction between them.[/QUOTE] as an australian, i personally possess a deep, institutionalised hatred for everyone across the tasman brought on by centuries of tribal conflict. that's not going to just go way.

Now we get to wait and see if the US will cut all political and financial support to Iceland like they did to UNESCO.

[QUOTE=thisispain;33502739]mmm it's a bit more complicated than that [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iceland#History[/url][/QUOTE] If you've really read through the section you posted and still think it's more complicated, I'd appreciate it if you pointed out some specific examples. Because as far as I can see, your link only further backs up my summary.

ICELAND Y U NO MY COUNTRY??! Sorry, just had to. It's a good decision in my opinion.