WI: Israel annexed settlements after Palestinian UN bid.

As the title says, what does everyone think would have happened had Israel annexed its major settlement blocs in response to the PA's UN gamble?
 
I suspect that even the United States wouldn't support that. Israel would likely became even more an international paria.
 
Something to the tune of a Third Intifada by my guess.

I don't believe it would go that far unless the Palestinian leadership incited its people sufficiently enough. Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount was not by itself enough to provoke the Second Intifada. It was Arafat's calculated planning, incitement and financial support for terrorism that caused it.

If Mahmoud Abbas would do it, Bibi might would likely have him surrounded like Arafat or deported. Though if he already proved by annexing the settlements that he doesn't bow to international opinion, he may have Abbas simply taken out with a helicopter-launched missile.

If a Third Intifada did arise, Netanyahu's response would likely be invasions of the West Bank and Gaza Strip that make Operation Defensive Shield and the Gaza War look like walks in the park.
 
Bad things for everybody involved, including ruining for the Israelis any options of even hoping Palestinians might agree to some kind of peace treaty, while for the Palestinians this is a perfect recruiting opportunity for Hamas. After this any prospect for Israel of *considering* further settlements will make the Palestinian territories explode like a grenade, while to Palestinians it only confirms that success for Israel means their ultimate removal from the full territory of the old Mandate of Palestine, while doing absolutely nothing to redress the military imbalance strongly favoring Israel.
 
Bad things for everybody involved, including ruining for the Israelis any options of even hoping Palestinians might agree to some kind of peace treaty, while for the Palestinians this is a perfect recruiting opportunity for Hamas. After this any prospect for Israel of *considering* further settlements will make the Palestinian territories explode like a grenade, while to Palestinians it only confirms that success for Israel means their ultimate removal from the full territory of the old Mandate of Palestine, while doing absolutely nothing to redress the military imbalance strongly favoring Israel.

Did you read what I said before? Israeli actions by themselves cannot make the territories explode. Its the leaders who can choose to exploit certain actions and decisions, using it to channel Palestinian anger towards Israel.
 
Did you read what I said before? Israeli actions by themselves cannot make the territories explode. Its the leaders who can choose to exploit certain actions and decisions, using it to channel Palestinian anger towards Israel.

That seems somewhat delusional. I'm not at all sure how you can credibly justify that position.
 
hard to say, basically nothing in a big picture sense, the US has some mean things to say, Europe has meaner things to say UN meanest of all, but no body is willing to take real action, Turkey might do something like have big naval war games or something, Hamas in Gaza has a fit and shoots off a lot of rockets, they (as always) fail to hit anything, might see protests and riots in the West Bank and on Israeli borders, likely Israeli Embassies in Jordan and Egypt get attacked and maybe burned down, both say they're going to break relations, than don't do it, likely a month or two of a lot of light a little heat and no real change.
 
That seems somewhat delusional. I'm not at all sure how you can credibly justify that position.

For proof, look no further than the Gaza War. There was nothing but rioting in Jerusalem, a stabbing attack in an Israeli settlement, and a few rocket attacks from Lebanon. That's all Israel experienced. Yet when Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount, the Second Intifada erupted and lasted for years.

There is evidence that Yasser Arafat planned the intifada in advance, and used this incident to inflame Palestinian passions. It simply does not make sense that Palestinians would suddenly launch well-planned and executed terrorist attacks and persist for many years after the supposed offense, without any kind of incitement or financial support. The Palestinian Authority was constantly inciting in the media, paying pensions to "martyrs", and covertly assisting terrorist actions. Arafat launched the Intifada as a last-ditch all-out offensive against Israel after the failure of Camp David.

In the case of Gaza, Hamas were (and still are) Mahmoud Abbas' main political rival. Abbas' police actually broke up anti-war demonstrations in Ramallah. So there was quiet. Abbas never incited, never
 
Sorry. Unconvinced.

Your argument reminds me most of those old segregationists in the American south, or for that matter, protestant irish in the UK who would blame unrest on 'agitators.' Their 'song' was that race relations were fine, the blacks, the irish, the labourers were, if not happy, content with their lot and had no will or desire to rebel. Thus, uprisings, strikes, unrest, etc. were blamed on malicious and corrupt outsiders coming in to stir up trouble by rabble rousing. In a historical sense, these sorts of arguments were almost always wrong.

You seem to place a great deal of emphasis on what might be considered a narrow and self serving view of the second intafada.

But even if we accept that construction of the second intafada, there's nothing to say that a third intafada will exactly require the conditions and follow the trajectory of the second. History and politics simply do not work like that.

The first intafada, for instance, was not the result of any political conspiracy, but a response to Israeli repression and palestinian discontent. It was entirely indigenous, and at least initially, leaderless.

Right now, we're sitting in the middle of the 'Arab Spring' movement, in which popular demonstrations and civil resistance has seen the peaceful overthrow of Tunisian and Egyptian regimes, which has seen resistance continuing against traditional regimes in Libya, Syria, Yemen and Bahrain at least.

We can assume that the Palestinians are no happier than the Tunisians or Egyptians. We can assume that Palestinians have access to cell phones, text messaging, that they can fax and email, that they talk to each other.

All the same factors that allowed and drove the Tunisian situation seem available to the Palestinians.

Based on this, I really feel that your position is based rather more in wishful thinking than any balanced assessment of realities. This is not a personal attack on you, in any way shape or form. But nevertheless, I don't think that your view holds up.

This is not to say that there will be a third Intafada under these conditions. I'm just saying that a conclusive 'no' as you seem to suggest is reckless and insupportable.
 
Well, there hasn't been one yet. The Arab Spring is stalling into Arab Winter, much of the fervor and optimism is gone as people return to their daily lives, and the Palestinians still haven't risen. If they would have taken part, they would have rose up by now.

The Arab Spring was very different. Suicide bombings and other terrorist attacks require weeks, maybe months of planning ahead, which in turn requires good organization. That means it will either be the Islamic terrorist groups or the Palestinian Authority directly behind it.
 
I've always thought it silly to ask a question you have an answer to and while being unwilling to hear any other answer.

I agree that a 3rd Intafada is unlikely, for a different reason, but with human beings who knows what they might do, it could happen, I'd say that it doesn't much matter if it does, it'll only hurt the Palestinians, we might see Israel's wall finished if there is a 3rd Intafada, largely thats why I think there wouldn't be a 3rd as the 2nd was so economically bad for Palestinians, if things get tighter for West Bank Arabs they'll feel the pain, so I see a full Intafada unlikely, but who knows what people will do
 
I like how the blame again turned and would turn to the usual suspects again - Arafat, Palestinians in general... Not the Israelis. :rolleyes:
 
I like how the blame again turned and would turn to the usual suspects again - Arafat, Palestinians in general... Not the Israelis. :rolleyes:

Yeah, I noticed that.

The problem is that no matter how much wishful thinking is at work the Palestinians simply are not going to disappear.
 
hard to say, basically nothing in a big picture sense, the US has some mean things to say, Europe has meaner things to say UN meanest of all, but no body is willing to take real action, Turkey might do something like have big naval war games or something, Hamas in Gaza has a fit and shoots off a lot of rockets, they (as always) fail to hit anything, might see protests and riots in the West Bank and on Israeli borders, likely Israeli Embassies in Jordan and Egypt get attacked and maybe burned down, both say they're going to break relations, than don't do it, likely a month or two of a lot of light a little heat and no real change.

Pretty much my prediction, maybe sprinkle in a few high-profile terrorist attacks, but pretty much all of the major players have already taken every measure they're willing to again Israel unless it does something completely beyond the pale (as in "lets annex Jordan" or "Lets nuke the Aswan")
Well, there hasn't been one yet. The Arab Spring is stalling into Arab Winter, much of the fervor and optimism is gone as people return to their daily lives, and the Palestinians still haven't risen. If they would have taken part, they would have rose up by now.

What are you talking about? With the exception of Tunisia (where the revolutionaries essentially won without any complications whatsoever) people are most definitely not returning to their lives. The NTC is facing a major crisis with the western militia's, and is a revolutionary government anyway, Egypt is still facing daily rallies and protests, and Syria's falling apart at the seams.
 
Cynical possibilities;

Occident-US would turn to them is they ALL converted to Christianism. Like Baptism. :rolleyes:

Honestly I think the U.S. in its current form supporting the Palestinians is pretty much a political impossibility. Every politician of significance has to support Israel frequently and loudly whenever it comes up if they want to remain nationally relevant, and the cost of publicly changing your mind on an important issue is essentially political suicide anyway.
 
Pretty much my prediction, maybe sprinkle in a few high-profile terrorist attacks, but pretty much all of the major players have already taken every measure they're willing to again Israel unless it does something completely beyond the pale (as in "lets annex Jordan" or "Lets nuke the Aswan")

that was pretty much my point of view, anything short of Israelis murdering Arab babies in front of the US embassy won't have the Americans really stop backing Israel, the Europeans don't care enough to piss off the Americans over it, the Egyptians are busy at that moment (also long ago decided the Palestinians aren't worth a war)

I would like to know how much of the West Bank we happen to be talking about?
 
Only a really momentuous event will be able to stir up the Palestinians street. It won't be like Snake's suggestion, where any new settlement will bring a third intifada, not unless the Palestinian leadership decides. If something really bad happened, I could foresee an Arab Spring-style event, but not as carefully organized and planned as an Intifada.
 
Top