|
WantsOfTheFlesh -> RE: Antisemiticism on the collarme boards. (1/18/2013 11:43:02 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: vincentML
quote:
Buddy boy you haven't a clue what youre a talkin' bout. Provide proof dat Barak was going to split up da West Bank an' Gaza. Da territory wuz to be contiguous. Arafat didn't walk out over territory concerns. He wuzn't happy relatin' to da grand mosque an' simply didn't want to make peace so he started da Second Intifada, which wuz far worse than da first.
From Wiki Reasons for impasse
Although in U.S. media Barak's offer was often portrayed as being "generous," the Israeli group Gush Shalom stated[25] that "the offer is a pretense of generosity for the benefit of the media", and included detailed maps of what the offer specifically entailed. Among Gush Shalom's concerns with Barak's offer were Barak's demand to annex large settlement blocs (9% of the West Bank) with no Israeli land given to a proposed Palestinian state in return, the lack of contiguity that the settlement blocs would cause for a Palestinian state, lack of trust in the commitment and/or ability of the Israeli government to evacuate the thousands of non-bloc Israeli settlers in the 15-year timeline, limited sovereignty for Palestinians in Jerusalem (the historically important Arab neighborhoods such as Sheikh Jarrah, Silwan,and At-Tur would remain under Israeli sovereignty, while Palestinians would only have sovereignty over the outer Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem), the lack of Palestinian sovereignty over holy sites in Jerusalem (Palestinians would only receive "administrative control" over their holy sites, and the Old City's Muslim and Christian Quarters, however Israel was to receive complete sovereignty over Jewish holy sites, and the Old City's Jewish and Armenian Quarters).
The attached map (hopefully) shows how the West Bank was carved up in Oslo 1993 with Israeli settlements throughout. Many more settlements since than.
Da West Bank wuz only carved up for what waz to be an intrim period, da status of territories to be finalised in end phase talks. No new official settlements waz founded by Israel since da Oslo Two process if what I keep readin' is correct. Reckon your map confuses officially sanctioned settlements wit illegal outposts dat aren't recognised. Da 9% territory criticism still conforms to da claim I made of 90% plus of Palestinian territorial demands. Seems generous.
Da claim of non-contiguity doesn't stand up at all. It's a requirement in da Clinton Parameters an' sources like Dennis Ross da main ME advisor to Clinton also dismiss it http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/mideastdispatches/archives/000555.html
quote:
HUME: ... what can we – that situation shows that the territory at least is contiguous. What about Gaza on that map?
ROSS: The Israelis would have gotten completely out of Gaza. And what you see also in this line, they show an area of temporary Israeli control along the border.
HUME: Right.
ROSS: Now, that was an Israeli desire. That was not what we presented. But we presented something that did point out that it would take six years before the Israelis would be totally out of the Jordan Valley.
So that map there that you see, which shows a very narrow green space along the border, would become part of the orange. So the Palestinians would have in the West Bank an area that was contiguous. Those who say there were cantons, completely untrue. It was contiguous.
HUME: Cantons being ghettos, in effect...
ROSS: Right.
HUME: ... that would be cut off from other parts of the Palestinian state.
ROSS: Completely untrue.
By da way ya didn't include da paragraph right above from your link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit#Reasons_for_impasse
quote:
Clinton blamed Arafat after the failure of the talks, stating, "I regret that in 2000 Arafat missed the opportunity to bring that nation into being and pray for the day when the dreams of the Palestinian people for a state and a better life will be realized in a just and lasting peace." The failure to come to an agreement was widely attributed to Yasser Arafat, as he walked away from the table without making a concrete counter-offer and because Arafat did little to quell the series of Palestinian riots that began shortly after the summit.[19][22][23] Arafat was also accused of scuttling the talks by Nabil Amr, a former minister in the Palestinian Authority.[24]
|
|
|
|
