Reply #12: Yeah, I think you are right. [View All]

[bemildred]

The OP is somewhat dishonest in its presentation.

"“Listen, again, we have nothing against Jews. This is a political conflict,” he explained. “Once the political issues our resolved, every Palestinian should be welcomed in Israel. Every Israeli should be welcomed in Palestine. But under the current circumstances — an occupation power occupying a people against their will — this is something we are trying to end.”

Of course one can say that he is lying and his words mean nothing, but then why should I believe any of the rest of this, or pay any attention to it? I think his real "sin" is casting it as a political and secular issue.

Edit: I think what he is really saying is he wants any Israelis who do not accept Palestinian citizenship to leave, and I would expect the motive is to have a chance to get the new state off the ground with a minimum of internal conflicts. I would expect the new state to have its hands full with rejectionists as it is; and if the settlers stay, then the new state would have the duty to protect them. It is a recipe for trouble. On the other hand, the British partition of Raj comes to mind as a counter-argument of the "what could go wrong? variety of argueable relevance.