'Israel says that the solution to the Palestinian refugee problem must be found in a Palestinian state and/or the host countries, not in Israel – a position I support.'


Fair enough Steve but your Israel seems to want to extend it's borders somewhat into Palestinian territory. And you've claimed you don't support that. And now we see you starting to show signs of supporting David Boaz' ethnic cleansing resettlements.

However while I tend to agree that the refugees need not return to their former family homes some acknowledgement of the cause of their predicament, as well as recompense is vital. Sure the same should apply to Israeli refugees from Arab countries. However in the later case any compensation should include an estimation of any benefit they have received in the way of land grants etc from any former Israeli Arab assets.

Eh, Logic, you seem to insist that the Israelies are really a peaceful lot with no ambitions in the Middle East.

Yet most political philosophers and also global historians, do ask this question?

Do the Israelies believe that illegally arming themselves with atomic artillery, and building underground bunkers devoted to improving the artillery, besides allowing the Americans to sell them the latest in strike bombers on the never never. Is this the real recipe for peace in the Middle East?

Reckon in the long run with no other ME country to match Israel's nuclear missiles, it's the sure recipe for an unholy disaster.

Certainly what the Middle East needs is some sort of logical power balance, whether achieved by a rebuilt United Nations or for the US to perform its true unipolar role by acting as a buffer against a little Israel much too ready to fire.

Keith.... I'm confused.

You condemn my 'compensate/resettle' proposals then you come out with this:

"However while I tend to agree that the refugees need not return to their former family homes some acknowledgement of the cause of their predicament, as well as recompense is vital"

So, why are we arguing about this issue ? It's basically what I'm saying for crying out loud.

-Need not return to former homes. TICK
-Acknowledgement of their cause. TICK
-Recompense. TICK

The only thing I add is 'relocate' along with the rest of your points. If you leave them in the Camps, they will simply be kept on the boil by the radicals who I'm sure seek to infuence them.

I repeat it for all posters benefits. "Ethnic Cleansing" is not a bad thing in the bigger historical picture, as long as it is accompanied by resettlement compensation.
Most of us or our ancestors were 'ethnically cleansed' withOUT compensation, and gee.. life is pretty good for this decendant of ethnically cleansed Scottish Highlanders.

I had a visit from the Courier supervisor the other day, a Pom, and asked him if anyone in UK is conscious of the shades of ethnicity between Angles, Saxons, Vikings, Normans etc.. and among the English population "no", but it does remain among the Welsh and Scotts BECAUSE they were never integrated into the main blended English population.

So, Palestinian Arabs can be sent anywhere and blended, and while they might dissappear as 'Palestinian Arabs' they will not dissappear as human beings and that is the important point.

keith

"Sure the same should apply to Israeli refugees from Arab countries. However in the later case any compensation should include an estimation of any benefit they have received in the way of land grants etc from any former Israeli Arab assets."

I am glad you are acknowledging my point about refugees from Arab countries, but surely the compensation for them should also include the benefits that the Arab countries received form their assets.

Bushbred

Please show me where I insisted that the Israelis are really a peaceful lot with no ambitions in the Middle East.

And how is it illegal for Israel to build atomic artillery, assuming it has?

Where are the results on your survey that most political philosophers and also global historians, do ask this question? What was the methodology that you used?

Forgive me for asking but what is a political philosopher?

No Logic

I have always maintained the right of Jewish refugees to compensation.

The Jewish refugees would have had the benefit from deserted Arab property in Israel. Very few refugee Palestinians, since they were mostly confined to camps or to other Palestinian territory, would have been able to benefit from abandoned Jewish property in other Arab countries.

Before you ask.

No! Israel needs to take that matter up with the other Arab countries and must not attempt to involve the Palestinians in the wrongs of other nations. Israel should address it's admission and the compensation to the refugees it displaced.

David
We are on a different course. The reasons we are arguing about this issue are the following:

'"Relocate"' X
Camps for the young men, their women and children X
Deportation of Palestinians to other countries X
Dispersion of PalestiniansX
'"Ethnic Cleansing" is not a bad thing' X
Final solution X

ps David, I agree with you. You are confused.

keith

You know as well as I do that the other Arab countries will not compensate the Palestinians via Israel for land they stole from the Jews. If they had, the present problem would not exist.

The West has placed a lot of money in the hands of the Palestinians but the money has been misspent and often misappropriated. Fanatics have made it impossible to develop a modern society in these areas.

The half of Israeli society which is descended from ancient middle eastern societies (Christians, Jews Druze etc and also some Muslims) is for obvious reasons not inclined to return to a society where Muslims are in control, that is why they are not racing to endorse the Saudi proposal