Considering the little girl singing this:
http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1637.htm
"Look how beautiful our Gaza is. We crowned it with a laurel wreath.
We have proven that with our will, we can defeat the colonialist army.
We have regained our freedom through bloodshed and the wrath of fire.
We came out on the day of liberations to celebrate our pride – hurrah!"
"Oh Gaza, the first stone [of the Intifada], where we celebrated our victory -
raise your sail for the sailors, and let your lighthouse illuminate the sea of blood.
If we receive good tidings, we will meet our death with no hesitation.
We are the swords of Allah, we are the victorious armies.
We are the swords of Allah, we are the victorious armies."
What do you think? Does 'land for peace' really bring about peace? Or does it simply empower the militants, convincing them that terrorism pays?
2007-12-30 13:18:28 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Travel ➔ Africa & Middle East ➔ Israel
The misguided "land for peace" has not worked yet.
And why not call a spade, a spade. The people yoiu term "militants" are in fact murderous terrorists.
The prime example was giving all of Gaza to the Arab residents. (Note that I say "giving" and not "giving back" or "returning," since the local Arabs there never had sovereignty over Gaza.) In 2005 Israel removed all presence from Gaza, and the result was unceasing barrages of mortar bombs and rockets on Israeli citizens. Which, of course, had been predicted in some circles and turned out to be accurate.
The Egyptians occupied Gaza from 1948 to 1967 and gave no rule to the locals. In fact, the Egyptians oppressed the Gazans and had no idea of that new term, "Palestinian nationalism."
No, the "land for peace" idea is not useful and is a failure.
Albert Einstein said that doing the same thing over again and expecting different results is a sign of insanity.
.
2007-12-30 17:04:27 · answer #1 · answered by Ivri_Anokhi 6 · 1⤊ 4⤋
The results are mixed - but Israel does need to allow for the creation of a Palestinian State in the West Bank and Gaza - in fact they should have just pulled out in 2000 regardless of Arafat's rejection and said - here you go anyway.
Good Luck!!!
2007-12-30 17:39:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
'Land for Peace' seems to have worked in Egypt, though that is a cold-peace. 'Land for Nothing' certainly doesn't work, as both Lebanon and Gaza have shown us.
2007-12-31 14:54:18 · answer #3 · answered by Michael J 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
After much careful thought (mind you, it didn't require careful thought considering it was so obvious, but I gave it anyway) I have come to the conclusion that it tells them terrorism pays.
http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-vKI.61U1erTUyNHU1qLoAtahpHNWUw--?cq=1&l=6&u=10&mx=10&lmt=5
2007-12-31 00:33:24 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
everything works if it's done in good faith, with everyong involved doing it for real and not just as a ruse to get land and then reneg on the peace. any arrangement can work if all parties involved REALLY want peace.
it works with egypt.
2007-12-30 23:15:40 · answer #5 · answered by joe the man 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
"Land for peace" or more accurately "Justice for peace".
2007-12-30 22:47:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Israel has three choices
1 The return of land to Arab rule.
2 Incorporation of the occupied territories and people into Israel, and no longer having a Jewish majority
3 Genocide and/or ethic cleansing of the occupied territories which, even outside moral consideration, would result in the destruction of of Israel because western nations would withdraw their support leaving them alone to face enraged Arab countries.
There are no guarantees, but giving up the land seem like the like the best option for Israel's long term survival as a homeland for the Jews. Continuing the occupation with the present policies is not going to make things better and they will still face the same choices 20 years from now as they did 20 yeas ago. Most of the "militants" were born and raised under Israeli occupation.
2007-12-30 20:41:37 · answer #7 · answered by meg 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
gaza was not a land for peace intiative
the sinai was so in the case of eygpt it worked to a certain degree
2007-12-30 14:42:39 · answer #8 · answered by greengrass44444 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
'land for peace' did not work 1947 but it did empower the Israeli militants and Israel kept asking for more land. The dialectical process of the Israelis it takes 2 to make peace.
2007-12-30 14:19:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
no, past experience shows that when u give away land (or anything else) in exchange for peace, you get more war, more taking, more aggression from the other part.
e.g. Germany got land for peace before WW11 and still invaded Poland
2007-12-30 13:25:10 · answer #10 · answered by Fernella13 5 · 4⤊ 5⤋