Tawtin is fezey3a

[LiNk]

Originally Posted by TripolySunni

Well the Government Should take care of everybody while giving priority to the Lebanese. However, the Government seems to not concern itself with Lebs or Pals.

I agree.

For me, A part of the Solution would be a retreat until the 1967 borders.

Even if such a retreat would ever happen - and I won't bet on that, at least for the meantime - I really doubt that the Israelis would welcome the idea. They are already stressing on the fact that Palestinians who happen to be outside the occupied territories will never be granted the possibility of getting back to their homes.
A retreat till '67 borders in addition to the return of the displaced seems to me too improbable to quite occur. That is, if any deal takes place anyway.

Moreover, and I would like to add a major remark. Don't you feel that it would be a bit unpleasant and unjust towards our country, since we will be completely linking its fate to the outcome of the whole Arab-Israeli conflict? It's not as if I'm saying they're not related, but looking at the big picture, it appears that there is no solution for them inside Palestinian territory. So we better think of a plan B.

What can that be? I honestly have no idea. But there's one thing I'm goddamn sure about, we have a sh!tload of problems ourselves, so I do not feel like solving someone else's issues. Be that person a brother or anyone.

So yes, a plan B, or whatever it takes to get that burden off our chests while of course, preserving the dignity of this people who happen to have also won its share of wars and misery.

[TripolySunni]

Originally Posted by LiNk

I agree.



Even if such a retreat would ever happen - and I won't bet on that, at least for the meantime - I really doubt that the Israelis would welcome the idea. They are already stressing on the fact that Palestinians who happen to be outside the occupied territories will never be granted the possibility of getting back to their homes.
A retreat till '67 borders in addition to the return of the displaced seems to me too improbable to quite occur. That is, if any deal takes place anyway.

Moreover, and I would like to add a major remark. Don't you feel that it would be a bit unpleasant and unjust towards our country, since we will be completely linking its fate to the outcome of the whole Arab-Israeli conflict? It's not as if I'm saying they're not related, but looking at the big picture, it appears that there is no solution for them inside Palestinian territory. So we better think of a plan B.

What can that be? I honestly have no idea. But there's one thing I'm goddamn sure about, we have a sh!tload of problems ourselves, so I do not feel like solving someone else's issues. Be that person a brother or anyone.

So yes, a plan B, or whatever it takes to get that burden off our chests while of course, preserving the dignity of this people who happen to have also won its share of wars and misery.

100% Correct, a deal will never happen .... UNLESS you Force it down thier Throats with Armed resistance الكفاح المسلح

Only then will they ever consider making a deal.

[LiNk]

Originally Posted by TripolySunni

100% Correct, a deal will never happen .... UNLESS you Force it down thier Throats with Armed resistance الكفاح المسلح

Only then will they ever consider making a deal.

I beg to differ, but if that's a plan B, I do not think we will ever be able to force anything down their throat at all.

You cannot impose anything when facing one of the best equipped and funded armies in the world. Be it Israel or anyone else.

We could resist them, and it worked both in 2000 and 2006. But we can never force anything. That's reality.

Their only weakness is their numbers. And what they fear most is a demographic outbalance. So there is simply no way they could consider making a deal over such a crucial matter of life or death.

One thing is clear though : we're heading towards a serious riddle where everything is pointing down again that we'll be the only ones paying the price.

[Danny Z]

Originally Posted by LiNk

You cannot impose anything when facing one of the best equipped and funded armies in the world. Be it Israel or anyone else.

Only when Iran becomes Nuclear that Israel would stop walking around with a cocky attitude. Only then they will start negotiating and giving concessions.
That's the reason why Israel does not want to give in to building squatlements now and wants to hit Iran before it is too late, while the American approach is for Israel to get away with a strong peace deal now that favors Israel before Iran becomes Nuclear because then Israel will be in a weaker position.

[Saladin]

Originally Posted by LiNk

I beg to differ, but if that's a plan B, I do not think we will ever be able to force anything down their throat at all.

You cannot impose anything when facing one of the best equipped and funded armies in the world. Be it Israel or anyone else.

We could resist them, and it worked both in 2000 and 2006. But we can never force anything. That's reality.

Their only weakness is their numbers. And what they fear most is a demographic outbalance. So there is simply no way they could consider making a deal over such a crucial matter of life or death.

One thing is clear though : we're heading towards a serious riddle where everything is pointing down again that we'll be the only ones paying the price.

Actually that's the strongest strategical weapon of all in this conflict.

[Robin Hood]

Originally Posted by Anny

Its not called racism its called self defense against a sect who is trying to make another a minority just because they have support from a huge masse of immigration. You said it yourself, Palestinians are not angels, they harmed alot of Lebanese and they were very much welcomed by them first, I can understand why after there was a revolt against Palestinians. If Palestinians were good to all Lebanese, they wouldn't be treated that way today!

Granting them human rights is not tawtin. And I agree that they should be disarmed and that they are troublemakers, but treating them like sub-humans is only putting fuel on fire. Again Lebanon is a (supposed) democracy.

[Nasser]

I think they should be given all the basic rights of a human , the right to work , to possess , to travel - and no that doesn't mean naturalization - once they give up their weapons outside and inside the camps , obviously these weapons ain't doing anything to "resist" Israel.

Me as a sunni , I am against Naturalization ... because once they are given citizenship they will never return to Palestine which helps the Israeli project. - []
PS: its funny though how "X" throws something that has nothing to do with naturalization , but about basic human rights - then he links it to the naturalization subject ... and most of you jumped to discuss the naturalization issue disregarding the real topic ... nice way to drift people - see , this subject always acts as a good "fezay3a" for some people.

[GeorgeY]

Originally Posted by Robin Hood

Granting them human rights is not tawtin. And I agree that they should be disarmed and that they are troublemakers, but treating them like sub-humans is only putting fuel on fire. Again Lebanon is a (supposed) democracy.

before looking at how lebanese r treating palestinian look at how israel is treating them the alleged democracy. and granting them "civil rights" since no one has removed their human rights from them is the BIGGEST for of tawtin cause if all i need to live in a place is to work have money and build a family i really dont "need" a passport to do that.
and again and again and again no one is treating them sub-human we want to help them get what they want to go back to their countries and we r doing whwat they want in this issue. don tthey have their weapons still with them, they preferred weapons on food and decent live and now we r agreeing with them

Originally Posted by Nasser

I think they should be given all the basic rights of a human , the right to work , to possess , to travel - and no that doesn't mean naturalization - once they give up their weapons outside and inside the camps , obviously these weapons ain't doing anything to "resist" Israel.

Me as a sunni , I am against Naturalization ... because once they are given citizenship they will never return to Palestine which helps the Israeli project. []

PS: its funny though how "X" throws something that has nothing to do with naturalization , but about basic human rights - then he links it to the naturalization subject ... and most of you jumped to discuss the naturalization issue disregarding the real topic ... nice way to drift people - see , this subject always acts as a good "fezay3a" for some people.

i will only answer the part that i hate in this country where u refered to urself as Sunni please ask any king and there are many in the arab region to take them and really given them a decent live.do u have any statistics other than jordan how many have the arab nation taken from palestinians?
and now to the lebanese part, i am really against any child to grow hungry, sad and have a literaly pathetic life, i am against any elder man to die with a burn in his heart. but lets say a person (disregarding religion) that is dying comes to me for help and he needs some cash and i am sinking with debts and i am unemployed while "his" brother (in reference to being sunni) KSA is floating on a sea of cash. what i did is sheltered him fed him "ALL WHAT I CAN DO" and now he wants to take my job and sink me even more in debts while still the sea of money with our brother KSA is rising.
REALLY PPL WHAT DO U WANT US TO DO??????? ISNT THERE ANY OTHER SOLUTION OUTSIDE LEBANON IN UR MINDS AT ALL ??? these questions are the ppl that like to mention they r sunnis (not mentioning the civil wars and destruction that came to lebanon from the arab-israeli conflict)
PS on ur PS: naturalization is about tawtin and giving palestinian working rights is the first fizai3a

[naro]

ميشال عون والتوطين وجيوب الأثرياء
14 أيلول 2009
حياة الحويك عطية - "الدستور" الأردنية

لم يكد ميشال عون ينهي حديثه على قناة الجزيرة ، مركزا بشكل اساسي على موضوع التوطين ، حتى خرج صائب عريقات في النشرة التي تلت الحديث ليؤكد بان التوطين غير وارد بالنسبة للسلطة الفلسطينية. هل يمكن للرجل الاول ان يتحدث دون معلومات؟ وهل يمكن للرجل الثاني ان يتحدث دون خلفية لدى المنظمة والسلطة وهو كبير المفاوضين ؟ سؤالان يخرجان من دائرة التناقض اذا ما وضعنا بالاعتبار ان الموضوع لا شك مطروح من جانب الطرف الاسرائيلي والاميركي ، فحق العودة للاجئين امر لا تريد اسرائيل ذكره باي حال من الاحوال ، كما انه لا يضير الولايات المتحدة شطبه لتسهيل الوصول الى انجاز دبلوماسي تسجله في حسابها. لكن ذلك لا يعني بالمقابل ان تتنازل الجهات الفلسطينية المسؤولة عنه . لذلك نتمنى ان يكون كلام صائب عريقات هو نفسه ما يكرره كافة المسؤولين الذين يمتلكون القرار. وما يصر عليه بالمقابل كافة العرب اصحاب الثقل في المفاوضات. واذا كان هذا التمني ينطلق مبدئيا من اساس حقوقي قانوني ، اذ لا يحق لاحد التنازل عن حق العودة ، لانه ليس حقا فرديا ولا حتى جمعيا انيا بل انه حق الاجيال ، فانه ينطلق ايضا من واقعية لا تريد ممارسة سياسة النعامة ازاء الاوضاع المشحونة وازاء مخاطر مستقبل لا يجوز ان نسمح بان يكون اسودا . فقد يكون بعض العرب بعيدين عن نار هذه المسالة المركزية ، لكن اكثرهم ، وبخاصة الدول المضيفة الرئيسية يرمون انفسهم في نار مقامرة صعبة اذا ما تراخوا او قبلوا امام اغراء التعويضات المجزية بمجرد مبدأ توطين اللاجئين. واذا صح ان الخلاف العميق الاساسي على طريق تشكيل الحكومة اللبنانية هو ، كما يقول ميشال عون ، مسالة التوطين ، فمعنى ذلك ان هذا الرجل هو زرقاء اليمامة ، وأكثر السياسيين حرصا على الا تتكرر فرص اشتعال حرب جديدة . اما الاخرون ، الذين يقبلون بالمبدا ، فان السؤال المحير هو : ما الذي يدفعهم الى قبول طرح لا ينفع احدا ، ولا يؤدي بالبلد الا الى النار؟ اهي وعود بتشجيع استثمار تصب فوائده في جيب الاثرياء فتزيدهم ثروة وتزيد الفقراء فقرا؟ اهي ارتباطات سابقة لم يعد بامكانهم التحلل منها ؟ ام هي ضغوط عرّاب من هنا وعرّاب من هناك ؟ ام هي مسألة سوء تقدير ؟ اذا كان الجواب بنعم على السؤال الاول ، فاي استثمار يمكن ان يزدهر في بلد تسوده الفوضى ؟ وتتأزم اموره حتى - لا قدر الله - المواجهة المسلحة ؟ الا يذكر هؤلاء ليل الحرب وكوابيسه المرعبة ؟ اما اذا كان الجواب بنعم هو على السؤالين التاليين ، فليبتعد هؤلاء عن الساحة السياسية في وقفة ضمير ، ان لم تستطع المواجهة ، فهي تستطيع الاستقالة . وليتركوا الساحة لمن قراره اكثر تحررا . والنتيجة نفسها تنسحب على السؤال الاخير مع فارق ان من يسيء التقدير لا يعي انه كذلك بل يعتقد نفسه في الغالب على حق ، وهنا واجب المعارضة وواجب الاصدقاء معا. وفي كل الاحوال يظل القول الفصل في هذه القضية لصاحب القضية ، له ان يتخلى عن حقه فيدفع بالجميع الى الهلاك ، وله ان يتمسك به امام الضمير وامام التاريخ فينجو بشعبه وباشقائه .