Charlie Rose

JohnGelles  04/14/2011 08:28 AM Report

Robdverity ~

The war begun against Israel in 1948, and against the Jews by Muslims in Palestine before that, is not over.

It is not over because Muslim-majority nations in the Middle East have not seen fit to end it. They have little practical sympathy for Palestinian Muslims such that Palestinians could live in peace with the Jewish State inside a Muslim-majority state defined in 1948 by the UN.

Rather, war has been the order of the day except on the borders of Egypt and Jordan with Israel.

Palestinian immigrants inside Muslim-majority nations are likewise not usually full citizens where they now live. What Palestinians are not allowed to do, where Israel has the power to stop them, is prepare for more war against Israel.

I was not disingenuous in wanting oil money to finance development of Palestine outside of Israel. But that development would have to oriented toward peace not war. As long as peace is as distant as it is, the situation remains ambiguous at best and hostile most of the time.

Benezraa ~ In my opinion the UN has the authority to recognize nations -- but not the power of its own to make war and seek treaties of peace with its adversaries. Without such power, nations establish international law by treaty which the UN accommodates or not under its own rules.

Accordingly, in my view the UN cannot effect the legality of Israel's existence beyond its original recognition and acceptance as a nation among nations. The Security Council has all the teeth in the UN's operational effect. The General Assembly is not a sovereign state or government. It is bound by its treaty obligations with sovereign states -- and these are protected by the Security Council's powers, including the veto power of its founding members.

I'm sure my opinion is of no more consequence than others of ordinary people and that the issues surrounding the General Assembly's anti-Israeli record are many and complicated beyond words. But Israel's existence is Israel's responsibility. This is true for all nations. In my view, middle east oil will be of no interest to the US is the near future. We will develop a hydrogen based economy with solar/wind energy and related unlimited sources at its base. After this occurs, Israel and the US will remain allies in fact and by treaty for the sake of peace and freedom on earth no different than our relations with other friends of very long standing.

The test of our relations will come soon enough as Iran tries to get as far along its path to nuclear weaponry as North Korea. In my view, the US will not allow this to happen. And were I in charge, I would use conventional weapons to prevent a nuclear armed Iran because of its risk to all life on earth. However, The current risk posed by North Korea is high. And it may happen that adding the risk of Iran will be acceptable to those who might prevent it.

BENEZRAA  04/13/2011 11:23 PM Report

WHAT ARE THE PROTOCOLS OF THE U.N.G.A., WHEN IT COMES DUE THIS FALL TO VOTE ON WHETHER OR NOT TO RECOGNIZE AN "EXISTING" STATE OF "PALESTINE".

Setting aside whether or not the Palestinian Arabs should or should not be recognized to have a State, the name should not be "Palestine", as this is a geographical name dating back to the Roman Occupation of Ancient Israel, is a name in recent times of British Occupation, and is a name that will rob Jews of their Palestinian identity. If there is a new State recognized for the Palestinian Arabs, another name should be found. The lives of Jews and Arabs have been intertwined in Palestine for thousands of years. Whether by a two-state solution or a one-state solution, "Palestine" is a name that should be reserved to apply to the larger geography, possibly even parts of Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan.

With regards to legal protocols and given the history of anti-Israel prejudices at the U.N. especially as reflected in voting prejudices, biased so-called "human rights" studies, etc. (e.g. The Goldstone Report, which he has currently retracted, and which report has been requested by Israel that it be retracted), what can happen in terms of content and procedure at the U.N.G.A.?

In terms of content, can the U.N.G.A. decide that Israel's existence as a whole is altogether an "occupation of Palestine" vote Israel out of existence altogether, over-riding the 1947 U.N. decision to recognize Israel? Can the U.N.G.A. vote that Israel shrink to 1947 borders? Even though the request before the U.N.G.A. may be stated in terms asking for borders based on 1967 borders, is the U.N.G.A. free to do what it wants in that regard?

And what of the infrastructure Israel has built in Judea and Samaria -- will that all face the same fate as Gaza, when Israel made it's self-destructive decision to forcibly remove itself? In the bad neighborhood of the Middle East Israel has shown that it will self-destruct -- willingly and with force.

In terms of procedure and content, is there anything Israel can do, or, are there enough votes to side with Israel, to prevent the U.N.G.A. from making a mockery of Israeli sovereignty, even demanding Israel's suicide?

doodah  04/12/2011 11:10 PM Report

The Washington DC residents whining over their limited voting privileges because they CHOOSE to live in the capital of the United States, and not in an actual state, should pick their lazy asses up and travel 2 or 3 miles and reside in a state so they can have the same FULL and WONDERFUL voting rights that all those other Americans have.

I suspect they still prefer to reside in DC because of some other intangible and not so obvious ADVANTAGES afford them; that somebody living out in the boonies would be no wiser. So my advise to those DC cry-babies (ie. SnortinNortin, MarionBarryJr.SlickWillyVannilly, etc.) shut the F up! And go back to your chitlins and watermelon and crack cocaine.

robdverity  04/12/2011 05:20 PM Report

Point taken. We're a live-by-the-sword species which throws open the door to all possibilities -- which probably isn't good long term. We'll doubtless decapitate ourselves with a nuclear sword - over something sooo vital as a border or a religious rock or rocks (Kaba to W. Wall?) someday.

In the meantime the brutality of your tribe (Stockholm syndrome?) makes for exported terrorism (9/11 and ensuing results) and the time remaining all the more demeaning to us all.

Your last sentence that other Arab nations can help the Pals is a bit disingenuous. Israel embargos and filters every item. They would keep the Pals under-economized (wd?). No way they would allow them to attract new citizens - especially to live on a par w/Israelis. You say it makes no sense to oppose the existence of Israel. Israel opposes Pals to live on a par with them. But such an outcome would prob. come closer to the survival of each than the resentment and humiliation extant.

JohnGelles  04/12/2011 02:12 AM Report

To Robdverity ~

The history of every nation is unique. But war is the common denominator that settles border disputes.

Sometimes money is an initiating factor, as when America bought the Louisiana territory from France and Alaska from Russia.

The Mexican War between America and Mexico decided that America would include what was northern Mexico before the war.

Negotiations of a treaty of peace to acquire the our Western land began in earnest in January 1848.

The Mexican government, headed by the ad interim Mexican president Manuel de la Pena y Pena, quickly agreed to the boundary issues: Texas's southern boundary would be the Rio Grande, the cession of Alta California would include the port of San Diego, and Mexico would give up its territory between Texas and California, with a boundary to be surveyed.

[Detail above from Google.]

When France and America helped to make Israel able to defend its existence, it more or less established what we have today. Russia, too, had recognized Israel early on -- but had also threatened it before America made Israel, France and England get out of Egypt in 1956.

It makes no sense to oppose the existence of Israel. If Russia or China were to attack Israel, a nuclear holocaust might result. If such holocaust happened by accident or design it is unlikely that any life on earth would survive.

Suicide is painless, it was said in MASH. Maybe so. But not welcome in the circumstances. After all, Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. And America's nuclear defenses were created more by Jews than any other Americans. What's fair is fair.

Israel is our ally because its more like us than any nation that is not a democracy.

If anyone wants to help Palestine succeed in becoming a prosperous nation, nobody is stopping them. Other Arab nations have oil money enough to really help their cousins.

AntonGrambihler  04/12/2011 12:00 AM Report

Israel needs to move back to the boundaries assigned to it by the United Nations (UN) Resolution which authorized the division of the British Mandate of Palestine and made JERUSALEM INTERNATIONAL PROPERTY that belongs to ALL the people of the world.

The world must never forget that over 35,000,000 Gentiles (Including Middle East Gentiles) died helping to bring World War II to an end, therefore; no Gentiles must be denied their right of return.

tabs  04/11/2011 06:32 PM Report

Mr. Peres most interesting comments came at the end of the interview. "I don't serve history I serve people." speaks for itself. Further "History is the story of blindness...and that one should take a longer view" The reflections of a man who has been around the block 88 times.

robdverity  04/11/2011 05:34 PM Report

Imagine the world without Israel. It's origination (from a holocaust guilt?) in 1947 or whenever has set us on a downward spiral ever since. Established by fiat, not history as alleged. Too arbitrarily dictatorial. Contrasting before and after is too revealing to be ignored. Admit it or no 9/11, Iraq and Af-Pak all stem from US backing of an arbitrary 1947 fiat.

How about a fiat reestablishing the Indians to Manhattan? About as whimsical, but probably more just - and even more logical.

jerrywayne  04/11/2011 03:56 PM Report

Charlizecourries seems to be one of those hateful people. I guess he/she is waiting for the American Indians to begin an uprising to take back American and the Mexican Government to invade Texas and take that back and also the Spanish to invade California. And I guess if we really wanted to be accurate we had Mongolian Empire, The Ottoman Empire, The Roman Empire, The Assyrians, and I am not sure who else controlled that area of the world at some time so who does it belong to...maybe CharlizeCourries wants control.

JohnGelles  04/11/2011 03:02 PM Report

REM ~

A century ago Jerusalem was inside the Ottoman Empire. Jews were emigrating from Russia. Zionism as a political movement was aimed at creating a homeland for Jews inside the Empire. There were tribal customs in Palestine; and property in many places that could be bought and sold. There was no incipient Palestinian state that would emerge in time if the Arabs ever united to defeat the Turks.

The first time there was an opportunity for sovereign states to emerge in the Mandated territory removed from the Turks, by France and England at Versailles, was after WW I, under promises made by England to both Jews and Arabs that were not easily interpreted by anyone. None emerged.

After WW II the UN took jurisdiction over mandated territories left over from WW I. The only legal sovereign states in these territories needed the UN to authorize their boundaries and a PEOPLE to demand the land. Israel and the Arabs were offered land. Israel chose to create a sovereign state in its land. The Arabs chose war.

REM you are a scoundrel to hint that America is allied with an illegal state in the Middle East. If you meant something else, please explain.

As far as the occupied West Bank of land vacated by Jordan and the Hamas controlled Gaza strip vacated by Egypt, after Israel fought for its existence, these are presently the subject of the Israel-Palestine peace process. Palestine may soon declare statehood there. If enough powerful allies recognize such declaration, there will be a belated Palestinian state in the former desert lands of the Ottoman Empire.

If that state is still at war with Israel, it will need a TREATY OF PEACE.

Peres and other leaders will insist on a de-militarized state.

Not too many states are de-militarized forever. If you want Palestine armed now, you will have to go to war. International law is most often made by treaty.

john_q_public  04/11/2011 06:49 AM Report

Perez is too good for Rose. Perez is a heavy weight. Rose is one level above the National Inquirer compared to Perez.

robdverity  04/10/2011 06:15 PM Report

Demographics is a formidable force. Ask Malthus. Which exists both within and without Israel. It's time to be nice (for once).

US and S. Am. great example; 2050 hispanics in majority. Laws and walls will not stall it.

REMant  04/10/2011 03:19 PM Report

IMHO since Israel is an illicit occupying power, which started all of the trouble a century ago, no one should be under the obligation to accept the status quo. I also don't accept the idea that fighting for one's rights is terrorism, or that one can separate civilians from soldiers in this. That strikes me, like its use in the Libyan controversy, as merely a ploy. The issue re the Goldstone report, incidentally, was not whether civilians were targeted or not, but that Israel used disproportionate force including internationally condemned anti-personnel weapons. While I certainly agree with Peres that it is unlikely democracy will come thru the front door, if the economic situation were in fact better it would be hard to justify separate states. Perhaps, beyond the rhetorical flourishes, that's what he's saying.

JohnGelles  04/10/2011 03:16 PM Report

Rob ~

Historical facts that you have learned are yours -- for as long as your head holds them. I have not clouded what only you can cloud -- or not.

Economi success will be the reward to Palestinians who achieve it -- just as it is our reward in America. More will achieve it if the poor and middle class ever learn to vote in their own interest.

The growth in population of the Arabs within Israel is possibily problematic for the future of Jews in Israel. There is every reason to believe it is a problem that nation will solve on its own.

robdverity  04/10/2011 02:42 PM Report

John/Shalom - Your biases are clouding historical facts. Economic parity for the Pals will never happen with the Zionists foot on their neck. And militarily of course - forget it. That's why Israel wants a proxy war w/Iran and US. Opposing parity (nuclear or not) cannot be allowed.

This leaves only the bedroom offensive. A formidable juggernaut (that should be taken into consideration for Israel's long term).

ShalomFreedman  04/10/2011 10:24 AM Report

Shimon Peres is one of those rare leaders who has real vision, and courage to realize that vision. His contributions to the development of modern Israel touch all areas of its life. He is a living witness and participant in the creation of the miracle which is modern Israel. At eighty- eight he remarkably continues to serve with distinction the people he has devoted his life to.

Listening to his wisdom , his humor and his deep understanding one cannot help but be moved and inspired. His words of faith in America were too a tonic to so many words of despair we have heard recently about the United States.

JohnGelles  04/10/2011 03:35 AM Report

The Jews and Arabs, in the lands that were Palestine before 1948, are today living in one sovereign state of Israel and one potentially sovereign sate of Palestine.

Israel is a major military power in the Middle East. It has a substantial Palestinian minority within its borders.

The future state of Palestine may, by treaty with Israel, not becpme a major military power. It may never have a substantial Jewish minority -- ay least not within this century.

If this outcome becomes a fact over a long period of time, it will not be unique on Earth. Many nations exist without military power -- and they enjoy peace as much as any other nation. They are not threatened -- and their neighbors will defend them if a bully makes a move against them.

The above may be the outcome for Jews and Arabs in the former Palestinian land that was a part of the Ottoman Empire -- and was under British rule for 30 years before 1948.

If the above outcome does not remain stable, the Palestinian minority may want to leave Israel. This does not seem likely at the moment.

And the de-militarized Palestinian State may want to be at war with Israel -- and it may have Muslim-majority nations as allies is such war.

Peres was optimistic that a stable peace will be the outcome of the past wars in these lands -- with Israel remaining a major military power in the Middle East. He saw Palestine remaining a de-militarized nation -- but with a bright economic future.

Chrisitan and Jewish Zionists at the present time believe in some version of Peres' optimistic vision -- as do many others who see that outcome preferable to any other.

Many people see war ahead that will force the Jews in Israel to leave -- so that Palestine may become another armed Muslim nation in the Middle East. They may not like this possibility, but they see it as the probable future for the Middele East.

Still other people see the armed nation state as a political animal that will have to change into something different within a few centuries. How this might effect Christians, Jews and Arabs in the Middle East is anybody's guess. Ethnic inter-marriage may solve the problem before nation states morph into something else.

martynushka  04/09/2011 11:47 PM Report

Fantastic and informative interview with a giant. He has a great sense of humor!

blank  04/09/2011 05:59 PM Report

aright resend but you can build a zero energy house that can run your car too so that would make rich people pay zero taxes

-----------

aright forget that i sent that last message that i sent

-----------

http://distributedenergy.com/blogs/de-editors-blog/the-energy-tax-man-cometh-79713.aspx

-----------

robdverity  04/09/2011 04:45 PM Report

Hope I understood right that Obama is following Geo. W's hands-off policy re the ME and let them negotiate amongst themselves. Nothing else would work long-term anyway.

But my takeaway was Shimon wants US involvement. Probably to continue the structure of the current agreement w/Egypt, where we bought (bribed) Egypt with USAID infrastructure sewerage system for Cairo, grain handling in Safaga, yadda, yadda to go along with the treaty.

With the US directly involved Shimon doubtless hopes to bribe concessions from the Pals for border-bending, settlement encroachment etc. with more bribes from the US in the form of USAID infrastructure (doubtlessly badly needed after the Israeli's incursions). Like our treasury can afford it.

Israel, Shimon et al play us like a fiddle.

charlizecourriers  04/09/2011 02:57 PM Report

Shimon neglects to understand that the Palistinians will return, not with permission, but when they choose to, after defeating the Zionists. That day is rapidly approaching. That will be their satisfaction, and one last fulfillment for Peres, of his need for dissatisfaction!