Eli Clifton does his usual sterling job finding this absolute chestnut. Rick Santorum unwittingly endorsed a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict when he made this statement on the campaign trail [emphasis mine]:
…The GOP presidential hopeful said that “all the people who live in the West Bank are Israelis, they’re not Palestinians” and offered his endorsement of Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank.
Santorum even went so far as to compare Israeli annexation of the West Bank to the acquisition of Texas during the Mexican-American war.
I’m all for it if Rick is. Let’s call all the Jews AND all the Palestinians living in the West Bank “Israelis” and solve the entire conflict by embracing a one-state solution. Of course, I don’t think this is what Rick has in mind. Likely, he’d support expelling most of those undesirable “Israelis” to some non-Israeli territory somewhere, like the Sinai, where they can make the desert bloom like Israeli pioneers did. He certainly can’t support giving all those “Israelis” (who happen to be Palestinian) full voting rights.
Oddly, settler wingnut Yisrael Medad seems to be offering them just that in this comment, in which he proffers citizenship to “the Arabs,” something he can of course afford to do because he knows his far right government wouldn’t do so in a million years.
Returning to Santorum, he clearly didn’t major in American, or any kind of history in college. Otherwise he’d know that his “historical” parallel doesn’t hold water. The territory the U.S. annexed after the Mexican-American War was quite sparsely populated and had very few Mexican nationals. The West Bank has several million non-Jewish residents. The U.S. didn’t expel the Mexican nationals that remained after the 1848 War. If he follows this example, he’ll be creating a single Israeli state including all the Jews and Palestinians from the “river to the sea.”
Speaking of one-state vs. two-state solutions, what is going on with that UN vote in the Security Council? I remember reading several weeks ago that it was imminent. Has it been postponed?
There won’t be a vote unless the Palestinians call for one. They are still working on a ninth vote.
It seems that the Palestinians have managed to secure only 8 votes, not 9. The vote may not take place. But the PA has declared that it would seek a General Assembly (as opposed to Security Couincil) resolution
and, just in case any of the Security Council members are thinking about casting that 9th vote, they will remember what Israel, via the US, did to UNESCO.
It is supposed to happen on or around Nov. 27th.
The US expansion after the Mexican war of 1848 is an interesting discussion. Great Britain never accepted the Louisana Purchase until after the War of 1812. Had GB won the Battle of New Orleans, even though fought after the war was settled by treaty, they would have kept the lower Mississippi basin by force. Texas fought a revolution and was an independent coutry. General Jackson had already conquered Florida for the US. Texas joined the US to protect itself. There were many hispanics in both Texas and Florida, but they were just as glad to get away from the wild corruption and brutality of Europeans. Native Amercan people were destroyed by Jackson (Cherokees and Seminoles), but not by the Texas Republic. Native Americans (Iriquois) were destroyed by Washington becasue they sided with the British and murdered civilians along the Appalachains. The Spanish and their descendents effectively enslaved the native Americans in the old Mexican empire. Thus, when Tyler went after Mexico he not only expanded US territory against the meddling interests of old Europe, but he gave US citizenship to every person in the newly acquired lands. Life is inherently imperfect and rough, but note: there was no mass exit from the US (Texas, CO, NM, Cali, NV, etc.) back to Mexico proper. Native Americans did not flee to the “safety” of Mexico, or declare their desire for British, Spanish or French protection. The popultion of North Carolina, Maine, Kentucky, etc. were all “sparse” and spread out by today’s standard – but not then. They were 90+ % non urban. No groups departed for safety, political freedom or economic advantage. Therefore, territorial expansion can be a wonderful thing. There are many families in San Antonio who trace their hispanic roots back to old Mexico and Spain for over 300 years (closer to 400). They speak Spanish at home and are as American as apple pie. They love it here. Israel’s problem: constant foreign intervention. Populations believe their rights go back thousands of years, quite beyond the realm of law. It is based on passion as much as any logic. Foreign intervention always speaks the interests of foreigners. What are those interests? Tyler looks fairly noble compared to the constant poker game that involves the foreign interests trying to solve a problem in Israel, which, quike franly, no foreign power really cares to solve. They have no stake in the personal outcome. The interesting solution will come when Europe folds and the little states therein apply for statehood in the US. This may include Scotland, The Baltics, Cheko, Poland, Ireland and Greece. It may also include Israel. That is the real soultion. Distance is airtime, communication is instant, US citizenship, though derided, is the world’s gretest asset. John Locke provided the logical foundation of the US philosophy. Passion is the great danger. Best regards to all readers.
WOW. Only a total lack of historical facts and blind extreme nationalism can produce such an analysis you offer us in your comment. Native Americans in Texas did not love the order the white men gave them. Not in Texas or elsewhere. At the time of the Texas Revolution, there were 30,000 Anglo and Hispanic settlers in Texas, and approximately 15,000 Plains Indians. By 1860, there were less than 8,000 Indians, and 600,000 Anglo settlers in Texas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas%E2%80%93Indian_wars
There was an ethnic cleansing by Anglo settlers in Texas.
The interesting solution will come when Europe folds and the little states therein apply for statehood in the US. This may include Scotland, The Baltics, Cheko, Poland, Ireland and Greece. It may also include Israel. That is the real soultion.
Heh, heh. “You” have not even taken Puerto Rico as a member state. Do you really think that people in Ireland or Greece want to join USA. In Greece they still hate USA for the military junta USA donated to them in the 60’s. “Fuck your parliament and your constitution.” That is quote what US president Lyndon B. Johnson said to the Greece ambassador. In Greece “they” still attack US interests using bombs and those “theys” were/are not Al Qaida or even Muslims.
If we now accept taking land by force (= war) in Israel/Palestine by Jews and the ethnic cleansing they perform, we have to accept in future when Israel is eventually destroyed through wars and the lands inhabited by Jews are given to new (or former) “owners”. Logical foundation means that the same logic is used to judge same kind of events.
Thank you for your information. The Republic of Texas existed from 1836 to 1848. My reference to actions or lack thereof taken by that entity stand. From 1848 until the US Civil War the population shift in Texas came with the change in political landscape – becoming US territory. There is no record of any mass emigration from either the Republic of Texas or later the states of the old Mexican empire – CO, TX, NM, CO, NV, Cali, etc. The great Apache and Commanche wars came after the US Civil War. There was no mass migration out of Cali, etc. The break with the Spanish generational control of land and law in Cali came in 1849 with the Gold Rush. Texas boomed because of cattle, free open range land, the rail, the telegraph, the San Antonio aquifer, the rise of Houston as a sister port to New Orleans. The figures you offer for the Native American population are speculation without any real census record and further degraded by the idea that Mexicans are not related to Native Americans. The missions kept a count in Corpus Christi and San Antonio, but there was no count for west Texas which begins about 50 miles west of San Antonio and runs to El Paso – about 600 miles. The Native Americans of West Texas roamed a very different geography than the Plains Indians of the Oklahoma Panhandle and Northeast Texas. As to entry of states, note that NATO is expanding east. When Europe folds, which it will, the little players in NATO will face the same old question: Russia, Germany or the West? There are millions of Greek Americans, Polish Americans, etc. By US law, they have been shut out of immigration even though they were a part of the past large immigration waves. Many in Europe have extended family in the US. It is not as foreign as you think. Consider: would one rather be a vassal of Germany, a serf of Russia or a partner in the US? Why didn’t Texas go with Great Britain, France or Spain? Great Britain had numerous possessions in the Carribean and they had the capital to develop Texas. They had democracy, a trade advantage and a navy. Why didn’t the rail go from North Texas to Corpus, thence upon the British merchant marine to the Commonwealth? Texas did not become part of the US until 1848. Today, distance is only jet time; communication is instant. Present your facts: what population group has ever made a mass exit from the US? The Phillipines? Is that it? The history of the Islands supports a very different story. Civil War, population shifts (e.g. dustbowl), isolations (e.g. Mormons and Amish) but no mass migration out of the US. Canada has had a mass immigration – to the US (French refugees) Mexico is having a mass migration – to the US. Put on a ballot, any of the juniors would probably jump at the chance to be part of the US. As to PR, their status is dynamic: statehood or tax advantaged commonwealth? They have not left, have they? Guam, Samoa, US VI, all stay. Consider: in 10 years suppose Cubans vote on joining the US. what result? Now consider, Poland votes to become part of…Russia. Can you guess the outcome? How about Greece votes to become part of …Russia. How about Scotland votes to become part of …Germany. The US is rhetorically maligned all day, every day, yet observe the first step: the little states want the US protection of NATO. That is fact. The populations of the desert, plains, mountain and Cali Native Americans cannot be grouped together as your reply indicates. Need further proof: every year the US has unlimited immigration from Mexico and Central America through Mexico. They vote with their feet. Let me shock you away from the false paradigm of politically correct rhetoric. Many of the Mexican immigrants bear the handsome characteristics of the Aztecs and their coastal allies of centuries past. Look at them. Are they all European Spanish? Of course not; many are the mixed history of Mexico and the Central Americas with a culture that goes back thousands of years. They speak modern Spainsh, but they are the backbone of history. Ready for this? Mexican immigration is also a Native American migration into the US; why do you think it is called “La Raza?”. Fact is, they are unique. Mexico and the Central Americas have a wonderful mixture of people, religions, history, and continuous development. Now imagine that Mexican immigration was cut off by 100%, but the US Government decided to have open immigration, no numbered restriction from: Greece, Ireland, Czecho, Poland, Finland, Romania, etc. What would the result be? I argue that people would flood into the US from those states, just as we have Mexican immigration today. It is about opportunity, rule of law, security. Getting back to Israel, the great poker game is open to many players, all of whom, as part of their foreign policy, play with people, populations, and historic passions with indifference to the result. The players don’t live there. The players vacation in Monaco, Martha’s Vineyard, London, Vail and more. And they will bug out to the US when it hits the fan at home. They buy farmland in the Dakotas, stock in CitiGroup, and waterfront in FL. Israel’s best solution: become part of the US. Takes your breath away…but that is exactly what the Republic of Texas did in 1848 having been an independent country since 1836. Hawaii, Alaska, Guam. Distance means nothing. There is more Native American DNA in the US than ever before – it comes from “latin” immigration. It is an interesting debate.
I had a different view on his comments in the video.
In my opinion, he did not unwittingly endorse a 1 state solution. He said Israel has property rights (through winning it in a war) to the West Bank and this can negotiate how they wish. He did not say that Israel owns the land and there should be no negotiation.
His comment that Israel has the rights to the land in the west bank (which was the answer to the question) is being taken and twisted into ‘Israel owns the land and wants to expel the Arabs’. I don’t know how you can draw that conclusion.
Sure he did. He said the residents of the West Bank were ISRAELI. He didn’t say the JEWISH residents were Israeli. He said all residents were. And of course he believes as you do that Israel OWNS the land. If Israel doesn’t own the land (you yrself say in the next sentence that he says “Israel has the rights to the land in the West Bank”) then it has no right to declare anyone living on it Israeli. Do you understand how sovereignty works?
So he thinks Israel has the land rights to the West Bank, and that makes him believe in a one state solution? He himself said that even though Israel might have the rights to the land, they can negotiate their land for peace. He does not say that the land belongs to Israel and they should kick out anyone they dont want on their land.
The “Israeli” comment, in my interpretation, was to emphasize that it is Israeli land, not a broad sweeping declaration on Palestinian sovereignty.
Maybe Im wrong, but I think you are jumping to conclusions based on an ad lib interview with a college aged kid. If he said these comments in a composed, prepared speech, then it is a different story.
Santorum is exceedingly stupid, as well.
Mixed in the with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is the fact that the land is sacred to three major religions. That is something that cannot be said for the USA. I never cease to be amazed at the stupidity of GOP wannabe leaders.
Partitions and borders and what not could have solved and did solve the Texan problem he is talking about, Mexico didn’t hold the land sacred, merely claimed it as land, it was a territorial battle only.
When religion is involved, even if there is genocide and ethnic cleansing the battle isn’t over, as the Crusaders discovered.
and yes, this Medad character is a wingnut, he has a blog at INN, and his wife too, she thinks the ‘goy’ (americans) owes them, i havn’t the time to look up the link which i have lying around somewhere. This is how these oddballs think, but the thing is this movement of wingnuts is growing. The IDF for example has problems with the rank and file (Jewish taliban) growing in their midst. Though it’s noteworthy, they’re kept at a certain level and not allowed to rise above it.
Ofer and Carl,
I was never comfortable with this resolution that the Palestinians are trying to get passed.
do you think it may not have been better for the Palestinisn not to have rooted for this resolution? It will bring a lot of unnecessary problems, which they don’t really need. A negotiated solution would have been preferable. It would have been better for them, to remain stateless untill that happened otherwise, they’ll be stuck in between. Just my opinion…and in actual fact give more ammo to the those who seek to deny them a state
RE: “Rick Santorum unwittingly endorsed a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict..” ~ R.S.
FROM ELLIOTT ABRAMS, 04/08/09:
SOURCE – http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/07/AR2009040703379.html
P.S. Ergo, the ‘Abrams Principle’ stands for the proposition that more Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank will ultimately result in a larger area for the Palestinian state. That’s why I say, “damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead” with the settlement actvity; so as to result in the largest Palestinian state possible (from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River)! “Let Right Be Done.”
RE: “Rick Santorum unwittingly endorsed a one-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict..” ~ R.S.
MY COMMENT: Crazier things have been known to happen!
SEE: Father First, Senator Second, By Mark Leibovich, Washington Post, 4/18/05
ENTIRE ARTICLE – http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61804-2005Apr17.html
P.S. Meet the Archangel GayBriel as he begins God’s mission to give guidance to all the Republican Presidential Candidates praying to him for help in making the difficult decision about running for President against the Great Satin Obama.
PART 1 (02:27) – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebEZ8sE2Kag
Hopefully these links will work.
VIDEO – GAYbriel’s Mission: Sara Palin
PART 1 (02:27) – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebEZ8sE2Kag
PART 2 (02:35) – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=769JgGq5tw4