Palestine becomes a member of the U.N., what's your opinion?

Recently, Palestine just became a member of the U.N. without U.S. authorization. The U.S. vetoed their entrance, and France admitted them.

What is your take on this decisive action, how do you think it will affect relations hitherto with the middle-east?

Discussion is openly prompted, please speak out what you think on this situation, but keep it on topic.

USA Today

I'm always happy that a new-found people are recognized, even in the face of aggressors. However, Israel is going to be a little more unsettled with this decision and it's going to examine how other nations react. Diplomatic relations between Israel and Iran are very frigid to say the least, might this tempt Israel to preemptively strike Iran to limit the possible dangers around it.

All I know is that the Middle East is going to shake and rumble soon, and the entire world will feel it.

Took them long enough. Seeing how the state has de facto existed for quite a while now and is definitely not going to disappear again, this should have happened much earlier.

Outside of the big 5, the UN means shit all.

I second this stance. Palestine won't make much of an impact besides irritating Israel to no end.

To the US though, even the Big 5 means shit all if you've kept up on U.N. decisions.

I think this could be a constructive step towards an established border, and a potential addition to this new chapter in US foreign policy.

If the next couple moves are properly executed, we could see an end to the conflict within the next 50 years.

My suggestion: The new youth movements should depose Netanyahu (excuse my spelling). He WILL NOT allow the conflict to move forward, believing Israel is entitled to the entire region. The next leader of the country should have a wider diplomatic focus, and run on a platform emphasizing economic reform, and cooperation with the Arab League.

War with Iran is not an option. Their intelligence agency is too entrenched in Palestinian affairs. Starting another conflict will trigger response throughout the region, potentially causing another World War. Western allies on one side, and Iran/N. Korea/China on the other.



******
This embodies the worst case. It is unlikely to come to bare, but should be treated as fact, until proven otherwise.

The best thing the US could do is use its intelligence network to de-stabilize the opposing countries. It would be a shot in the foot to the commanding interests in this country, but would provide the best possible outcome for our citizens. The US doesn't like gambling on new regimes, but I believe it is better to have a potential trading partner, than a defined enemy.

I think this is a natural step, at least for the UN that in recent times has no real legitimacy at all and is suffering from a major image problem. Failing to let Palestine in would have shown it to be an incredibly biased organisation (which I don't doubt it still is - but not recognising what the rest of the world sees as a state is a new low as far as hypocrisy goes).

Unfortunately this will not do Palestine much good other than annoy Israel.

Your suggestion sounds decent enough, but I do find some discrepancies within it, generally around the World War issue and the western vs eastern evils stand,.I just have a hard time believing China will go to war with their biggest exportee and trading partner, whilst I can see probably recalling US debt, adding trade restrictions and fees, and perhaps a "cold war" of sorts, especially in low atmosphere/space with satellites and intelligence, full out war seems like something china would perhaps not like to do, more than likely they'll simply fund North Korea and side diplomatically with Iran

Palestine was already recognized for decades, it bears the name of 'Israel' which makes sense considering palestinians there are 2nd class humans at the very best.

The big thing I'm getting at is that the US is already entrenched in a cold war, perhaps of an even larger scale than the last.
Or, at least, with more players against.

I cite China as a participant, beyond funding, because America doesn't have the teeth to get to it, diplomatically. The options boil down to:
-Subvert the Chinese government, induce a sufficient amount of suffering on the general populace, and form a puppet "revolt"
-Overt war with the flat---largest civilization of the modern age. Cause a WWII level of devastation, and neuter the government. Next thing you know, China will be run by middlemen, and it's primary exports will be robots and schoolgirl porn.

People talk about power shifts, new lands, and possibility. The thing is, investors forget core Machiavellian principles.

The object of being in power is staying in power.

Direct war? Only as a last resort.

Proxy wars using smaller countries as the fighting grounds? Certainly, because it happened in Vietnam.

On topic: I see nothing happened because of Palestine getting a U.N. seat besides the usual impotence of the organization. Anything Palestine or it's supporting states proposes that threatens Israel, will be Vetoed by the United States at the security council.

Palestine has the right to sovereignty.

That said, this is also dangerous for the middle eastern proxy wars. Israel is very important ally because it give us military territory in the middle east without having to rely on Saudi Arabia. Anything which threatens Israel is naturally a threat to America as a superpower, otherwise China will get the upperhand because they have Iran as their own proxy.

You're probably a more effective (modern) diplomat than I am.

Proxy war is an impracticality. A huge waste of resources, combating the wrong enemy. I prefer to ensure our victory, strike fast, and decimate the enemy completely.
Fuck Geneva.

I'm not sure if Iran is a puppet state of China. I think they really "drank the kool-aid," and just happened to find themselves on the side.

And, the Iranian forces make up one of the most highly monitored (public) intelligence threats. That's some matryoshka shit...

Although this is a small step towards achieving sovereignty, they're going to face much tougher challenges ahead. Fiery Penguin of Doom pointed out what's going to happen next. The U.S. is already threatening a veto in the S.C., but I'm not aware of what China thinks about the situation.

I'm a little irate at this because "Palestine" is little more than a terrorist state supported by Syria and Iran. I'm sure that France added them to spite Israel because the French president hates their prime minster.

-Palestine (state/administrative area) has existed since the 5th century BC.
-The modern state of Israel was established in 1948, after the ruling faction (Turkey?) lost. The citizens of the area had no role in its creation, and many were displaced as a result.
-Following the "end" of the formal conflict, the Palestinian forces absorbed a guerrilla resistance, taking help as it was offered. Terrorism is a point of view.

And, perhaps France allowed their addition because they acknowledged the tenacity of Arab culture. They see that the route to end the conflict involves either concession or extermination.

this is a pretty good summary of my thoughts

Sorry, but I can't take Pat seriously since he also criticizes Atheists.

That said, I'm getting tired of all the stupid David Duke-bots who copy+paste every damn thing he says blindly, without doing research of their own. The results are people speaking as if Zionism is a bad thing, without even knowing what Zionism is! (The return of Jews to their holy land? THAT is the "evil" people speak of!?)

I don't even understand the point of the Zionism fear-mongering! The only reason people even care is because David Duke attaches New World Order conspiracy theories to his "Zionism" theories. Otherwise, I could bet you people would be simply apathetic.

I also have a problem with people who play the card that "Jews think they are 'chosen'" people, because that was never true. What actually happened in the bible is the Israelites made a deal with god to spread his message in exchange for his blessings. That is all. Seriously. Read the whole Bible and Torah instead of just googling and copy pasting the first paragraph you see on Wikipedia, or some other unreliable source.

Why the hell do people preach how "abusive" Israel is from ONE abusive cop being brutal? Does that mean you're going to judge the US as a whole because one cop was brutally pepper spraying a crowd in during an occupy protest?

Did people suddenly forgot how bad people really are in Palestine? And how Hamas supports Al-Qaeda? Why the hell would we give an Al-Qaeda supporter MORE territory!? My thoughts are he doesn't even give a damn about Palestinians in the first place, but Hamas is simply crying victim just to slander Israel in the international image. Syria also has no place to be preaching human rights either when it comes to Israel, nor' Iran (Which is constantly contradicting itself in its stance towards Israel.)


Honestly, I'm getting tired of it. Even the Arabs themselves don't know why they hate Jews, other than the dictator-spoonfed "They stole Arab lands." though I would argue by that logic, Native Americans should be declaring war on the United States. Palestine is an old, dominated nation, and we could blame the British for that. Now is a new regime, and if the issue is Arabs, then they are free to join Israel. The problem is they are refusing to do so, and are sticking with Hamas because they are ignorant.

But I guess if we want to look at the bigger picture of things and the TRUE reason for hate against Israel, the Arab governments themselves don't care whatsoever a damn about Zionism or the Jews. It is all about Western military presence in the Middle East. America needs Israel for military territory and missile deterrence, and the Arabs are allied with a somewhat "Phantom" Warsaw Pact with China and Russia. Getting America out of the middle east would be a HUGE BLOW to their territorial defenses, allowing China to set up in North Africa. And that is VERY dangerous for an opposition superpower because the Middle East contains some of the world's most precious resources like Oil and minerals!

Anyways, that's my shot at tackling the Israeli issue. Bottomline is Palestine is only crying victim because they KNOW they will get support that way, not because they're honest about their woes.

I'll admit I'm a Jewish Atheist so I might be bias, but that is really my honest opinion. Don't think I'm blindly following Israel though. I have quite the passionate hate against Benjamin Netanyahu, but that is a separate issue. I just think Palestine will not do good for the world, and giving Al-Qaeda more territory is foolish. I think we should just wipe Hamas off the map, and give the Palestinians citizenship with Israel. Then they could still roam free in their lands and continue to practice Islam. Why exactly is Palestinian sovereignty necessary?

Not true Palestine was used by the Romans after they took over the area 500 years later.

The Palestinians had a chance to have their own country already but they didn't want to live next to jews so they rejected the offer.

The Ottoman Empire lost that are after WW1 when the British invaded and spilt the area up in a British area and a French area. The Brits controled Iraq, Israel and Jordan, while the French had Syria and Lebanon. The "Palestinian" culture is the exact same as those living across the Jordan River, the only reason Jordan doesn't grant them citizenship is the keep the hatred alive for Israel.

My point is that the Palestinian people were not displaced, until the end of WWI. We're dealing in tribes and races here, not geographical areas.....kind've geographical areas.....

The real point is that both cultures are equally "entitled" to the area. Perhaps they're changing their mind about "living next to" the Israelites.