The truth is that the Arab League keeps the Palestinian refugees issue as a political weapon against Israel, with which they continue to fool the United Nations and propagate their perfidious policy.
The proofs of such intentions are given by Arab sources themselves: At a refugee conference in Homs, Syria, the Arab leaders declared that «any discussion aimed at a solution of the Palestine problem which will not based on ensuring the refugees' right to annihilate Israel will be regarded as desecration of the Arab people and an act of treason».
In 1958, former director of UNRWA Ralph Galloway declared angrily while in Jordan that «the Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront to the United Nations, and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders do not give a damn whether Arab refugees live or die». King Hussein, the sole Arab leader who directed integration of the Arabs, in 1960 stated: «Since 1948 Arab leaders have approached the Palestine problem in an irresponsible manner.... They have used the Palestine people for selfish political purposes. This is ridiculous and, I could say, even criminal».
Just listen to the non-corrupt Arabs and you will understand the farce that the radical Islamists preach in their plan to dismantle the state of Israel.
.
2007-05-30 05:14:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Gam Zo Letovah 3
·
1⤊
9⤋
The best solution for Israeli-Palestinian conflict is to look how other nations solved their conflicts. South Africa experiment of peace is a good example to fallow. The country is to small to be divided into 2 states and even if there was a 2 state solution in place the future of the solution is eventually one state why wast time on wars and killings.
We are not many but logic say we will be.
2007-05-30 10:58:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
regrettably, it is going to in straight forward terms substitute whilst the Palestinians settle for Israel's appropriate to exist, which isn't going to ensue. that component is non-negotiable on the two facets. Giving land did no longer do it. Giving sovereignty did no longer do it. in straight forward terms the removal of Israel will do it for the Palestinians. And as long simply by fact the encircling Arab countries proceed to assist them, they haven't any genuine reason to provide up hating and combating them. That being pronounced, I do see a fashion there might desire to be peace without the finished destruction of one or the different team. you probable won't like it, yet i'm particularly valuable it is going to paintings. If the Israelis say that by skill of helping acts of Palestinian terror, the different Arab states are beautiful in an act of conflict by skill of proxy (think of of the Palestinians as mercenaries) and could be held in charge as such, you place them on be conscious that they are going to flow after, say, Syria no rely if it truly is got here across that they have been in touch. Then if a Syrian supported attack occurs, the Israelis blast a Syrian protection tension base into orbit. If a nuke gets popped off, then the Israelis use certainly one of their undeclared nukes (they allegedly have approximately two hundred) and turn a city right into a radioactive sheet of glass. If that form of protecting posture is taken, then the help for the Palestinians will dry up and that they are going to provide up attempting to bomb pizza places and start up focusing on construction roads and getting the trash accrued.
2016-10-09 01:25:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by higgs 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no "best" solution. The best solution would have been to never have gotten here in the first place, but hey---we are human beings---and so here we are. Arguments will carry on until the end of time about who is right and who is wrong in this conflict. Given the feelings & opinions expressed here in this little question/answer arena---how could we possibly find a BEST solution? Just my opinion.
2007-05-31 07:47:29
·
answer #4
·
answered by alacy88 1
·
1⤊
2⤋
My best solution would be for both sides to just stop and rebuild, but do it together, Neither side is willing to give up anything, so they would have to share everything equally. Just like you have to do when you have more than one child who wants the same toy at the same time. You have to get them to share and be kind to one another. That's how teachers control their classes of children, and that's my suggestion for people who have not learned to be adults after 60 some odd years.
2007-06-01 16:37:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
In short, there are two potentially stable scenarios: complete genocide or complete separation. Since the genocide option is both highly unlikely (for both Jews and Palestinians) and has the unfortunate downside of being very evil, it seems complete separation is the way to go. I can't give any details, so in general I'd say it would involve a compromise on the West Bank (as in each party gets some part). I would also add that all terror has to cease prior to any agreement, and that terror alone is what's holding up the peace process.
2007-05-29 02:09:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by Michael J 5
·
1⤊
5⤋
stop the occupation and oppression of Palestinians
honor the right to return
stop the killing of innocent
stop stealing land
go back to the 1967 borders
give Palestine statehood
FREE PALESTINE
2007-06-01 00:23:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by Chery 5
·
5⤊
1⤋
The problem is that the Palestinians are today's Modern Jews. They were dumped by the rest of the Arab world, and have no legitimate claim to the land that they want. The Jews got Israel, under the Balfour Agreement, with Great Britain. If the Palestinians, would stop the radical element, the Israelis would leave them in peace, and ultimately co-exist.
2007-05-29 00:12:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by Beau R 7
·
5⤊
9⤋
In my opinion, if Israel stood by the original standards set forth in the documents that formed the state in 1948, as they agreed, then there would be peace. They vowed not to displace the indigenous Palestinians. They broke this vow. Israel still, on a daily basis, commits hundreds of human rights violations against the people of Palestine. The world's media remains silent. If one teenage Palestinian boy responds with a stone and gets murdered, the news reads, "armed militants attack thwarted, militant killed." Israel still steals land from inside the declared borders. They build walls to form prisons out of neighborhoods. They jail and torture without charge. Now, I ask you, how can there be peace with such injustices being committed? They need to end the occupation of a land that they stole.
2007-05-29 03:09:53
·
answer #9
·
answered by arianah 2
·
11⤊
7⤋
When will the apologists for the Arab terrorists pay attention to, and admit, what is actually taking place, rather than what they fantasize?
Every day the Hams and Fatah terror groups bombard Sderot and neighboring towns and villages in Southern Israel with deadly Kassam missiles. Their only objective is to kill and maim as many Jews as they possible can.
No amount of diversion of the topic can possibly hide the fact that radical Islam, along with secular Muslim nationalism, is making its most extreme efforts to destroy the Jews and their state.
Only if we are aware of the problem can we take the proper steps to eliminate it.
.
2007-05-29 07:22:09
·
answer #10
·
answered by Ivri_Anokhi 6
·
4⤊
7⤋