Democratic Underground - Why isn't a provisional 60% state viable?

Reply #105: Why isn't a provisional 60% state viable? [View All]

shira

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat May-01-10 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #104

105. Why isn't a provisional 60% state viable?

Edited on Sat May-01-10 06:21 PM by shira

The Jews accepted the partition plan of 1947 despite the fact that Israel would have been non-contiguous.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/middle_east/israel_and_the_palestinians/key_documents/1681322.stm

Are you aware there are smaller states in the world than Israel or the 60% proposed for the W.Bank?

http://www.mapsofworld.com/world-top-ten/world-top-ten-smallest-countries-in-area-map.html

Those countries are much smaller, yet viable.

As for Israel encroaching via settlements, a 100% deal was proposed that included 93% of the W.Bank plus land swaps in 2008 by Ehud Olmert. It's false to assert that due to settlement expansion there is less land available in the future for a Palestinian state. In 2000, the same deal was basically proposed so it's not like in 8 years there was less land to negotiate due to settlement expansion.

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

Reply #105: Why isn't a provisional 60% state viable? [View All]