# Annexing West Bank



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 7, 2019)

On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?


It may be, if it is done the right way.

We do have the PA aided by the EU attempting to create facts on the ground illegally.  And nothing is done about it.

I do not know if area C was eventually annexed, that the PA and EU would not continue to do what they are doing.

It looks like the PA and the EU, and others, do not believe that Jews have a right to any part of Mandate Palestine, as it has been declared many times before and by the PA map of their "Palestine".

Seriously, it should have been done in 1967.  The more one waits the more the Arabs think that they can take the heart of the Jewish Nation away from them for good, the same way as they keep trying to take away Jerusalem.

The Romans did it, and we know what the consequences have been ever since.


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?




If Bibi wants to start WWIII this is a great idea.

I'm sure Trump, Trump's base, and the religious right in AmeriKKKa don't have any issue with the concept.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?


Sounds like more good fun in the blood soaked "holy" land


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?
> ...


Except that such a WW III is not going to happen.

It will be Israel, America and its allies against whom?
Iran? Syria?  Saudi Arabia?  Egypt?  Jordan?


No match, in any way or shape.  Which is why there will never be a WWIII started if Israel annexes some of its ancient homeland (taken away in a offensive war against Israel in 1948) to what became Israel in 1948.


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...




Like I stated, those from the religious right, Trump, Trump's base, Republicans in general, etc., none will take issue with Israel being the roaring terrorist lion that it is, the nation that has violated more UN resolutions than any other nation in UN history. WWIII is a Christmas wish for many AmeriKKKans on the  right.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


Lol imagine if other countries started annexing land because they said it was their "ancient homeland."  "But you don't understand, this magic book says [insert deity] GAVE it to us!"


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...




Europeans annexed the North American continent during the 1700s & 1800s, thus the US was born & built as a nation.

I guess the US (government) has no issue with Israel doing something similar in the ME; we sure seem to support their land grabs, and our fore fathers did a better job at obtaining land by hook, by crook, and by war.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


At the end of the day whoever has more soldiers and better weapons will decide control of the "holy" land, as it always has.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?



A good idea to announce that he is going to do that?  Or a good idea to actually do that?


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...


Putin said, Crimea belongs to Russia......and he took it.....and is it really "Russian ancient land"?

But on the other hand, Judea and Samaria has been the ancient Jewish homeland.  They have the cemeteries and the archeology to prove it.

And it is not about some "magic book", it is about how England gave the Arab Hashemites 78% of Jewish land, when they had lived all of their ancestral life up to WWI........in Arabia.

It is about Jews being expelled from lands they had purchased and had every right to live on.

It is about Islam not allowing Jews to be 100% humans, therefore they have decided that Jews do not have the right to any of their ancient homeland.

It is about the Muslims listening to their Prophet and Allah, and both say "Any land we the Muslims have conquered.....belongs to us....forever".


So, imagine all you want about other countries, while you only worry about one, where the indigenous people DO have the right to live on their ancient land, but are being kept from doing so by Arab Muslims from Arabia.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Europeans were not indigenous to the Americas, Australia or any other part of that world.

The difference is that the Jewish people are THE indigenous people of the land where they have REBUILT, reconstituted their nation.

There is a HUGE difference between the two, if you ever care to look at it.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

Shusha said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?
> ...


I took it as doing it.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


The only right anybody has to land is what they can take and hold by force or treaty.  Israeli's have chosen to hold a land that is complicated by millenia-long haunting of religious madness, their own and others.  They better hope one day Christians don't decide to claim Israel as _their_ ancient homeland.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Apr 7, 2019)

I don't think it is a good idea.Why bring so many potential terrorists into Israel and change the dynamic vis a vis Jewish and Arab?

The last thing Israel needs right now is a greater percentage of  Arabs living within its borders.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Except that it was never "holy" to the Muslims.  It only became "holy" to them after Israel was created.

What took them so long?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

Did he mention all of Judea and Samaria?  Or just Area C?

Annexing Area C, and applying Israeli law over all of it, is just good for everyone.  Start giving growth and building permits to the Arab Palestinians.  Load them up with goodies.  All the goodies.  

The problem with this is that we would be creating another Gaza in Areas A and B.  An island of Arab Palestine which would in all likelihood be required to be cut off and isolated as Gaza is.  The question is whether or not people think that is a manageable problem.  And how people think other Arab countries may respond.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Please, do not make me laugh harder than I already am.
Such religious nonsense.  It has nothing to do with religion and Israel is protecting itself already from both Muslim AND Christian attacks, even if they do not come in the way of rockets and murder of civilians.

IT IS  Jewish land, the Jewish ancient Homeland, so of course the Jews, as Israelis and all others, have every right to defend and protect their borders and population against any assaults from any of its neighbors and even those who are helping those who wish its destruction.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...


That's just stupid.  Islam is descended from Judaism, just like Christianity.  Muslims have an ancient claim to the land too, but the magic they've been raised to believe isn't the kind preferred by the people who currently have the better weapons there.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Did he mention all of Judea and Samaria?  Or just Area C?
> 
> Annexing Area C, and applying Israeli law over all of it, is just good for everyone.  Start giving growth and building permits to the Arab Palestinians.  Load them up with goodies.  All the goodies.
> 
> The problem with this is that we would be creating another Gaza in Areas A and B.  An island of Arab Palestine which would in all likelihood be required to be cut off and isolated as Gaza is.  The question is whether or not people think that is a manageable problem.  And how people think other Arab countries may respond.


It would be only to area C.
The time to expel the Arabs as they did with the Jews in 1948 was in 1967.  But, I would guess it would all depend on what the PA would have in mind if area C was actually annexed.  The PA cannot stop its attempts at land grab with the EU's help.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

Dogmaphobe said:


> I don't think it is a good idea.Why bring so many potential terrorists into Israel and change the dynamic vis a vis Jewish and Arab?
> 
> The last thing Israel needs right now is a greater percentage of  Arabs living within its borders.



I honestly can't see how Israel can take in 3 million Arabs and have it work out.


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 7, 2019)

" [The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 June 1982.

"When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle." Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.

David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): "If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti - Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ? They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.

"We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves." Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October 1983.

"Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as reported on Kol Yisrael radio

" ... we should prepare to go over to the offensive with the aim of smashing Lebanon, Trans-jordan and Syria... The weak point in the Arab coalition is Lebanon [for] the Moslem regime is artificial and easy to undermine. A Christian state should be established... When we smash the [Arab] Legions strength and bomb Amman, we will eliminate Transjordan, too, and then Syria will fall. If Egypt still dares to fight on, we shall bomb Port Said, Alexandria, and Cairo." " David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben-Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.

"We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the Galilee of its Arab population." Israel Koenig, "The Koenig Memorandum"

"It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism, colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands." Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.

"We Jews, we are the destroyers and will remain the destroyers. Nothing you can do will meet our demands and needs. We will forever destroy because we want a world of our own." (You Gentiles, by Jewish Author Maurice Samuels, p. 155).


So, The US Government supports a terrorist state. No surprise.

AmeriKKKa is sowing what it reaps, and people wonder why our nation is dying a slow but sure death.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Dogmaphobe said:


> I don't think it is a good idea.Why bring so many potential terrorists into Israel and change the dynamic vis a vis Jewish and Arab?
> 
> The last thing Israel needs right now is a greater percentage of  Arabs living within its borders.


Lol that would be some funny shit


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> It has nothing to do with religion


Then Israel wouldn't block Christians or Jewish offspring of Christians from becoming citizens.  Don't try to cover up your chosen magical group's religious nonsense.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> It would be only to area C.
> The time to expel the Arabs as they did with the Jews in 1948 was in 1967.  But, I would guess it would all depend on what the PA would have in mind if area C was actually annexed.



Honestly, I think its inevitable that Israel annex Area C.  It will be better for the Arab Palestinians there.  Offer them a very generous grant for relocation, if they choose.  And if not, full citizenship and goodies galore.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?


He didn't say he would annex Judea and Samaria but only the Israeli communities there.  It is certainly high time he did.  Since there are no political entities among he Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel, the two state solution (solution to what?) is no longer anything than an old political slogan and policies and actions that conform to the political realities of the region must take the place of these old delusions.  Arafat made this clear and obvious to all who could see when he began the second intifada in 2000 and Abbas has confirmed it over and over since.  Whatever nationalist dreams the Arabs may harbor in their hearts in their heads they will have to adjust to the reality that they will always live next to and among the Jews of Israel.  The Arabs will continue to have full autonomy to govern themselves in ways that do not threaten the security of Israelis in parts of Judea and Samaria but not a sovereign state.  Contrary to what many seem to believe supporting impossible aspirations leads to conflict and ending these delusions by enacting policies that conform to the realities of the situation leads to peace.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Islam is not "descended" from Judaism.  Judaism did not give "birth" to Islam, and even less to Christianity.

Because Christians went to Arabia to convert people, one Arab decided to create Islam.  That is how "descendent" of Judaism it is.
Borrowing most of what is written in Judaism and passing your "new" religion as part of Judaism or that the Jewish Patriarchs all of a sudden have always been "the Arabs Patriarchs" after 2400 years of total ignorance and caring about it.
Geesh, I do have to wonder how a new religion all of a sudden makes it self  RELATED to Judaism all because it borrowed and stole most of what Judaism is 2400 years AFTER  Judaism was established .

Funny how that works.

Muslims only decided they had a claim to the land of Israel when the Jews decided to rebuild their nation.  That is basically a 1300 year wait to find and decide on something like that.  And only because one Arab created Islam.  And only because Islam does not see Jews as 100% humans with full human rights, much less to rebuild and become sovereign of their own future ON their ancient homeland.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Then Israel wouldn't block Christians or Jewish offspring of Christians from becoming citizens.  Don't try to cover up your chosen magical group's religious nonsense.



Not factual.  Children of Israeli citizens are Israeli citizens.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Your magic is not more special than theirs.  Theirs is based on yours.  If you think that is stupid, imagine what I'm thinking here, speaking to a person ranting at me about magic.  And the Muslims were just living on that land when Israel was created, why would they have had to "claim it" before then?


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> " [The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 June 1982.
> 
> "When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle." Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.
> 
> ...


I will bet anything that you got all of this quotes from some anti Israel site .

Would you care to check a site where any of the Israeli leaders actually have their quotes?

We'll wait.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Then Israel wouldn't block Christians or Jewish offspring of Christians from becoming citizens.  Don't try to cover up your chosen magical group's religious nonsense.
> ...


Yes, factual.  There is no right of return for those descended from Israel, unless they are Jewish without suspicion of loyalty to any other magic.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > It has nothing to do with religion
> ...


You are  misinformed.  No one is blocked from becoming a citizen of Israel, but Jews living in the Diaspora do have special rights to immigrate.  Others, Christians, Muslims, etc. have to go through the same immigration process they would have to go through to emigrate to the US or European countries.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 7, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Did he mention all of Judea and Samaria?  Or just Area C?
> 
> Annexing Area C, and applying Israeli law over all of it, is just good for everyone.  Start giving growth and building permits to the Arab Palestinians.  Load them up with goodies.  All the goodies.
> 
> The problem with this is that we would be creating another Gaza in Areas A and B.  An island of Arab Palestine which would in all likelihood be required to be cut off and isolated as Gaza is.  The question is whether or not people think that is a manageable problem.  And how people think other Arab countries may respond.



I believe he mentioned all of the major settlement blocs as well as isolated settlements.  He also said there would be a military presence in the Jordan Valley, and no Palestinian state because that would be a danger to Israel.  Sounds like a pretty hefty chunk of the West Bank to me, if not all of it.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Keep in mind I was responding to a person that said religion had nothing to do with current Israeli's claims to the land.  And people claiming the right to return because they are Jewish have been blocked from that on suspicion that a family member was a Christian or other religion.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


You have no idea what you are talking about.  Holding strong opinions that are not based on facts is a definition of bigotry.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


It is a free country with the laws it has Exactly because of the history Christians and Muslims have chosen to write in the past 1700 years.

And you.....are trying to tell Jews that they do not have the right to choose who they want to let move into their Nation,  that it should accept anyone.

As a matter of fact, it accepted back relatives of Arabs who stayed in Israel after 1948, only to be attacked.

No other country has as neighbors two groups which have in their charters the destruction of that one country.

When you have managed to make Hamas, PLO, Fatah and others burn their charters, then you can talk about who is allowed or not in Israel.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


It is always on an individual case.  Israel has the right to implement the laws which keep the country safe.

Exactly what Christians and others have been blocked?  Do you have a link, or are you simply assuming what you wrote?


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Your use of the word "magic" is rather suspicious.  

Let us get back to the subject of the thread.

Yes, it is about time Israel does annex area C to the rest of Israel.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Here's a quick example: Israel deporting Swedish Holocaust survivor's daughter - because her father allegedly converted

I suspect you will deny it.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Suspicious?  What word would you like me to use to describe the magical beliefs people have spent millenia slaughtering each other over in the "holy" land?  But sure Israel can annex whatever they want.  I hope the U.S. doesn't get roped into anything stupid because of it.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


The thing to keep in mind is you made a false statement.  You said people who were not seen a Jewish were blocked from citizenship, and that is not true.  Now you are saying that if some relative was not Jewish you have no right of return, and that is not true.  If your mother is Jewish by birth and has not formally renounced Judaism before you were born, you are Jewish and have th right of return to Israel.  When you continue to make hostile false statements about Israel you are defining yourself as an ignorant bigot.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


I posted a link but just take a look at the law itself if you want.  The Law of Return


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


We got it.  You are anti religion and pro the US spitting Israel out as an Ally.

And surely you have the very same reasons that others like you have given.

And the reason is:

You Have No Idea Of What You Are Talking About !!!


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Start your own thread about it.

Read what the subject of this thread is and stick to the topic.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


I posted a link to the Jewish daughter of a holocaust survivor being denied the right of return because her father was suspected of having converted to Christianity.  I also posted the law of return itself for you to review.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


I am not anti-religion until there start to be consequences from people acting on stupid magical nonsense.  I also think Israel invites problems to their situation, and that shouldn't be reinforced.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Her application was rejected because she had been baptized, not because her father converted.  

"The Law of Return allows for anyone with a Jewish grandparent to make aliya, but excludes those who have voluntarily changed their religion. The Population and Immigration Bureau rejected her application on the grounds that she was baptized when she was one week old.

Swedish daughter of Holocaust survivor faces deportation from Israel


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Did he mention all of Judea and Samaria?  Or just Area C?
> ...


Ugh.  Please do not say West Bank. It is like saying Palestine only because the Romans and the British named the area that.

The Arabs can call their areas what they want to call them.

To me, always Judea and Samaria


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


You steered the conversation this way when you claimed religion had nothing to do with the Israeli claim to Israel.  I think you can drop that facade now.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


That supports my point.  Remember when I said "unless they are Jewish without suspicion of loyalty to any other magic?" You called me a bigot for that.  Remember?  Well this woman was under suspicion of possible loyalty to other magic.  So bam, citizenship blocked.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> " [The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 June 1982.
> 
> "When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle." Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.
> 
> ...



Who knows if any of these "quotes" are accurate.  Looking over them, some appear to be hearsay or secondary sources.  This book "You Gentiles" that you quoted seems to be a sequel to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.  Please don't clog up my thread with anti-Jewish tropes.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Baptism is a renunciation of Judaism, so while she could apply to become a citizen of Israel, she could not claim to be a Jew.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


A one week only baby cannot renounce anything.  But anyways, thank you for supporting my point that magical beliefs are central to Israel's current existence.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Here's a quick example: Israel deporting Swedish Holocaust survivor's daughter - because her father allegedly converted
> 
> I suspect you will deny it.



I remember that story.  Wasn't she a Christian missionary?  

Also, she wasn't blocked from immigrating.  She just has to apply under the correct law.  She doesn't qualify as an oleh.  Those laws exist for reason.  

Anyway...back to the subject.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Obviously, religion is central to your hostility towards Israel, but since she never made an effort to renounce that baptism, even after living in Israel for several years on a tourist visa, she cannot now claim she is a Jew.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Here's a quick example: Israel deporting Swedish Holocaust survivor's daughter - because her father allegedly converted
> ...


Again, you folks don't seem to realizing you are making my point for me.  Magical beliefs as a determinant of candidacy for citizenship.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


I don't think you realize what point I am making.  I suspect you rarely realize much of anything.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Unless your point is that you are an ignorant bigot, you have no point.  Anyone can become a citizen of Israel regardless of their religion.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Your "magical beliefs" belong in the religion community and not here.

You are the one making your own points because you are the only one who believes in them around here.  Reality says otherwise and you may not be a fan of it.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> I believe he mentioned all of the major settlement blocs as well as isolated settlements.  He also said there would be a military presence in the Jordan Valley, and no Palestinian state because that would be a danger to Israel.  Sounds like a pretty hefty chunk of the West Bank to me, if not all of it.



Sounds very much like the plan is to annex all (or most) of Area C.  It think its inevitable.  

I feel sorry for the Arab Palestinians stuck in Areas A and B.  They are in for a rough time.  But then, I support their right to self-determination and self-government.  If they choose a rough time, like Gaza did, well, its on them.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


I would certainly be a bigot if I demanded my government add a religious test for determining citizenship.  Which one of us has argued in support of that?


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


WHAT point are you trying to make?   
Would you give citizenship, after proper research about the person, to anyone who is anti American? Or could be a danger to the country or the population? Or does not fall into any of the points written in law as to who can become a citizen of the USA?

So, why is only Israel not allowed to have her laws and follow them?


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Remember when you said this:


Sixties Fan said:


> it is not about some "magic book"



All I care about here is that you now know it is.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


The USA and Israel are two different countries, two different histories, two different everything .

Get it?


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Would you give citizenship, after proper research about the person, to anyone who is anti American? Or could be a danger to the country or the population?


If I did research and found a person was _not_ anti-American or a danger to the country or population, I certainly wouldn't claim they were anyways.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Did he mention all of Judea and Samaria?  Or just Area C?
> ...


All of the settlements are in area C, so he was talking only about some portion of area C, not any of area A or B.  The actual amount of land he was talking about is very small.


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > " [The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 June 1982.
> ...




I don't require your permission to post here @ USMB, do I? No, I don't.

If you don't care for how other members post then you could contact your friendly, neighborhood moderator & ask them about your problem.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


What does annexing Area C to Israel has to do with your obsession about citizenship in Israel and all other things Israel you have no business about?

You want to be an agnostic, atheist, etc, no one is stopping you .

You have no business with the laws of Israel, or its history, culture or people.  You do not even care what happens to the USA.  You are just repeating everything you have read or heard which has clearly turned you into a useful idiot in the hands of those who want to see the Jews lose their country and go back to being dhimmis, stateless people whom they can continue to impose the Inquisition on and do whatever the Christian and Muslim mind can come up with to dump on them.

Israel exists for a reason.  You are ignorant of the why's .....that is your problem for you to solve.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Suspicious?  What word would you like me to use to describe the magical beliefs people have spent millenia slaughtering each other over in the "holy" land?



I agree there are aspects to religion to this.  Conquesting, colonizing Arabs usurped and appropriated the indigenous Jewish religion intentionally as another weapon to maintain their colonization.  There is no equivalency between those who are trying to keep their religious and cultural traditions alive in their own homeland and those who have stolen them.  

That said, the only solution to the problem is Israeli sovereignty.  Under Israeli (Jewish) sovereignty all peoples have a right to worship according to their religious faith both in law and in practice.  The Arab Muslims have demonstrated they are utterly incapable of this.  (This is possible because Judaism allows for this while Islam not so much.)


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?
> ...


You mean the way moving the US Embassy was supposed to start WWIII?


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...


Actually you do need permission to post against what the thread is about.  And you do know that the moderators will come down at some point and ask you nicely or not....to stop.

What you posted has nothing to do with the thread, and you and one more poster keep going off the topic.

Shall we start a thread for each topic you both started on this thread?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 7, 2019)

Hmmm...
Jordan attacks.
Jews kick Jordanian ass.
Jews take land.
Arabs go apeshit and threaten to stop selling oil.
Jews bad.
Is there something wrong with this flowchart?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



Why don't you stick to the subject of this thread instead of posting anti-Semitic crap?


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


I have no problems to solve.  Israel has plenty.  I have no obsession, the conversation went that way because you introduced something fundamentally wrong into the conversation, and we couldn't move on until you accepted it.  Now you can move on.  I already said Israel can go ahead and annex Area C.  If there are any consequences over it, well they've never minded that before.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


What to say to someone who has authoritarian issues.

Yeah.....we accepted your totalitarian view of the world.

Thank you so much, master.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Shusha said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Suspicious?  What word would you like me to use to describe the magical beliefs people have spent millenia slaughtering each other over in the "holy" land?
> ...


"Separate but equal" doesn't typically end well.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Did he mention all of Judea and Samaria?  Or just Area C?
> 
> Annexing Area C, and applying Israeli law over all of it, is just good for everyone.  Start giving growth and building permits to the Arab Palestinians.  Load them up with goodies.  All the goodies.
> 
> The problem with this is that we would be creating another Gaza in Areas A and B.  An island of Arab Palestine which would in all likelihood be required to be cut off and isolated as Gaza is.  The question is whether or not people think that is a manageable problem.  And how people think other Arab countries may respond.


There are significant differences between areas A and B and Gaza.  The IDF and other security agencies operate throughout areas A and B and Israel has continuing working contacts with the PA.  Annexing the settlements would in no way infringe on the free travel and diplomatic relations the PA has with other countries.  I don't see how annexing the settlements in area C or even all of area C would change anything on the ground.  It would make clear that there would never be a Palestinian political entity based on the 1949 cease fire lines.  Nothing more.


----------



## BlackFlag (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


I have issues with authoritarianism and totalitarianism, yes.  For example, I don't think magical beliefs should be used to discriminate against people.  It typically leads to problems.  But ignore the advice if you like.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


The fact that you continue to claim there is a religious test for citizenship when there is none confirms that you are an ignorant bigot.


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 7, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...




Here is the OP quote:


ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?



Many of the quotes I posted do apply to your OP. If you take those quotes as being 'anti Israeli' then that is not my problem; is it?

Now, try growing up & drying your tears.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



I am certainly not crying over your post.  I don't think you are doing your cause, whatever it is, any good by posting this Mein Kampf type of junk.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


The Jews were separate and unequal in ALL the Muslim conquered lands.  And the Christian lands as well.

History has shown the Jewish People that they had the right to rebuild their Nation ON their ancient homeland and they did so.

You come up with nothing but nonsensical, ignorant ideas and only because it is about Israel.

Israel will annex area C, hopefully ALL of it, and it is none of yours or any other country's business.

And it will NOT start WWIII, because the Muslims know they would lose much more than they could win.  WWI and their war against Israel taught them that.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...


Nothing you posted from those phony quotes has to do with Netanyahu and the possible annexation of area C.

And you are yet to check on Ben Gurion's actual quotes.
But.....you will never do that, we already know that.  Because, like all others who post this as you did, you cannot find it anywhere online or anywhere else in the world.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...


Sure, if you make believe that it is the Jewish people doing it.

But if it is Christians and Muslims doing it to Jews and all other non Christians and Muslims.....you are more than ok.  You will keep silent.

Yes, we do ignore Judeophobic, Antisemitic, Jew hating advices which are only given to make the Jews stop defending themselves from one such as you.


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 7, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...




So, you found it required to reply to my post twice; interesting.

Many of those quotes I posted pertain to the Israeli's  annexation of lands that belong to others, just as the potential for Israel's annexation of area C.

Having a hard time keeping up, I see.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...


Land Israel annexed belonging to "others"????

Who are those others, and what part (if not all of the Mandate for Palestine) did you fail to read and simply jumped to the "Israel stole the land" argument?

Your intent at being condescending does not work on us  

But I will take your view of history and where you got it from so that we can all clarify it for everyone.  

I am ready whenever you are to find out whose land Israel stole, when, how and why.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> I don't see how annexing the settlements in area C or even all of area C would change anything on the ground.  It would make clear that there would never be a Palestinian political entity based on the 1949 cease fire lines.  Nothing more.



Personally, I think the message, backed up with annexation of territory, that there will never be a Palestinian "political entity" is a HUGE change on the ground.  

You are of the opinion that, unlike with Gaza, Israel will be able to effectively prevent smuggling of weapons into the PA and border riots and other things of that nature? How?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...



Wow.  Colossal reversal of what I just said. Israel has a history of ensuring access to Holy Places for people of ALL religions.  You know that anyone can go pray at the Western Wall, right?  You can even wear a gold-sparkled "JC loves me!" shirt and no one will bat an eye. The polar opposite of separate.  Islam, on the other hand, insists on special privileges and exclusive access and threatens violence if their privilege is not recognized. 

And, "separate but equal" is the STANDARD for today's world with respect to self-determination and self-government of independent "separate but equal" States.


----------



## flacaltenn (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...



Massive recurring land grabs huh?  Like WINNING the entire Sinai peninsula in the '67 war and then making peace and returning it all to Egypt with a comprehensive peace treaty??  Or making peace with JORDAN -- the former "landlord" of the West Bank and having the King of Jordan RELINQUISH all Jordanian claims to the West Bank because Jordan was tired of dealing with the Palestinians???? 

That's right.  It was Jordan's land.. THEY decided the military attacks and terrorism from the Palis was not worth the price of administering it any more.  Made it Israel's problem.. And the Palis had a good deal going in Jordan prior to Arafats attempt to invade the capital city.. 

Or kicking every last Jew out of the Gaza Strip and GIVING IT to the Palestinian Authority??? 

Where exactly are you seeing "all this annexed land" Daffy?


----------



## flacaltenn (Apr 7, 2019)

As far as any plans that Netanyahu has for annexing the West Bank, I'd need to see the details.  It WOULD work if all the major Pali city centers were granted complete autonomy and there was a loose "federation" of all these "city states" to provide uniform customs, diplomacy and immigration.. 

In fact, I've written an article about a "city state" solution that adds some connectivity of these autonomous cities to Egypt, Israel and Jordan without adding a lot of security burden on Israel...


----------



## flacaltenn (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...



There IS no religious test for citizenship.. It's more of an "immigration policy".. The Knesset is about 11% Arab. They enjoy full citizenship and exemption from serving in the IDF, tho MANY choose to serve. 

Same with Christians. Israel does multi-culturalism better than the US does in that regard. Only place in the Mid East with Gay parades. It's NOT a religious conflict. It's a REFUGEE conflict. And the Palestinian cities in Israel have MUCH higher standard of living for Pali refugees than the SQUALID refugee camps left in Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon.. THOSE Palestinians are suffering far greater than any in Israel proper. 

In fact, the World Bank and several other INtl agencies rank Palestinians in Israel as "middle class" lifestyle.. While MOST of the Palis in neighboring Arab countries live in poverty and on the dole...


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 7, 2019)

flacaltenn said:


> As far as any plans that Netanyahu has for annexing the West Bank, I'd need to see the details.  It WOULD work if all the major Pali city centers were granted complete autonomy and there was a loose "federation" of all these "city states" to provide uniform customs, diplomacy and immigration..
> 
> In fact, I've written an article about a "city state" solution that adds some connectivity of these autonomous cities to Egypt, Israel and Jordan without adding a lot of security burden on Israel...




You wrote an article about city state solution? Where was it posted; in the Ladies Home Journal?

You brought it into the thread so, why not post it here, unless it is not in line with the thread topic.

Why not post it, instead of bragging about it?


----------



## flacaltenn (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > As far as any plans that Netanyahu has for annexing the West Bank, I'd need to see the details.  It WOULD work if all the major Pali city centers were granted complete autonomy and there was a loose "federation" of all these "city states" to provide uniform customs, diplomacy and immigration..
> ...



I'm negotiating for publication, putting it HERE would jeopardize my ability to give exclusive rights. Go Away if you're not interested in the concept of City States or something similar to United Arab Emirates.. This is not a place to get personally pokey...


----------



## flacaltenn (Apr 7, 2019)

BlackFlag said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...



Well that does suck.. Because her Dad after being a Conc. Camp survivor was AFRAID to identity as Jewish and became Atheist with a Christian wife... 

But it ALSO SUCKS because she wants to escapes the hell hole of Jew persecution in Sweden that the LEFTISTS created with their bleeding heart acceptance of cities full of Arab refugees with their intent to PRESERVE all of their homeland 1000 yr old bias and ancient culture.. 

Got news for you -- Israels' "immigration system" may have issues, but it's not ENTIRELY BROKEN like the one here in the USA...


----------



## Kondor3 (Apr 7, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ...If Bibi wants to start WWIII this is a great idea...


Who will be the major combatants on each side of your version of WWIII ?

Who will care enough about the expulsion of the raggedy-assed Palis to want to go to war over them?

1. Golan
2. West Bank
3. Gaza

...and then modern-day Eretz Yisrael is complete.

Send the Muzzies packing across the Jordan to the East Bank where they now belong.

There will never be a better time.

After all, who's going to stop the Israelis nowadays?

Syria? They're still picking shell fragments out of their backsides.

Egypt? They've got enough trouble on their hands without the crazy-as-bat$hit Palestinians.

Saudi Arabia? They can't even knock off pi$$ant Yemen, never mind a serious player like Israel.

Lebanon? Perhaps, but, turned completely loose, the IDF will slaughter Hezbollah to the point of extinction within a fortnight.

Libya? Maybe in some alternative universe, but not this one.

Iraq? Not for another couple of generations, and, by that time, it will be wwaaaaayy too late.

Turkey? They can't even knock off the Kurds, and they routinely do business with the Israelis. It would be unprofitable.

Afghanistan? They couldn't find their arses with both hands in a well-lit room surrounded by mirrors... never mind Israel.

Iran? The Israelis would make mincemeat out of them in 48 hours.

Indonesia? Too far away, and too detached. They might send a sympathy card, though.

I'm sure I've omitted a handful of $hit-iz-$tans but they don't count for much.

There is no Arab-Muslim cavalry coming over the hill to rescue the dumb-ass Palestinians...

Far cheaper and safer to let the Israelis ship them to the East Bank of the Jordan and then (try to) spank them in the General Assembly.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 8, 2019)

Shusha said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > I don't see how annexing the settlements in area C or even all of area C would change anything on the ground.  It would make clear that there would never be a Palestinian political entity based on the 1949 cease fire lines.  Nothing more.
> ...



I believe this for a few reasons.  First, where would they come from?  Areas A and B are completely surrounded by Israel and Jordan and neither country wants to deal with armed Palestinian militias.  Hamas was able to smuggle weapons and just about everything else from Egypt.  The IDF and other security agencies operate throughout areas A and B they never had that kind of control in Gaza except for a short period after the Six Day War when Sharon was southern commander.  Finally, were it not for the IDF and other security forces operating in A and B, Abass would have been overthrown long ago by Hamas and others, so while he might favor an occasional upsurge in stabbings, he will not want to see riots that might get out of hand and give Hamas a chance to take over the rioters.


----------



## rylah (Apr 8, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think it is a good idea.Why bring so many potential terrorists into Israel and change the dynamic vis a vis Jewish and Arab?
> ...



We're talking about 1.2 million Arabs.
Though Netanyahu did mention Gaza as well,
it is Jerusalem and Judea that have always been the main priority.


----------



## rylah (Apr 8, 2019)

Dogmaphobe said:


> I don't think it is a good idea.Why bring so many potential terrorists into Israel and change the dynamic vis a vis Jewish and Arab?
> 
> The last thing Israel needs right now is a greater percentage of  Arabs living within its borders.



No-one is suggesting giving citizenship to terrorists.
The choices are simple:

1. Loyalty to Israeli sovereignty and obligatory civil service as a precondition for citizenship.
2. Leave with compensation if can't bear living with Jews.
3. Fight.

In spite of all the horror forecasts there's no demographic danger,
most of terror threats come from Arab villages under Hamas and PA rule,
while on average Jews have more kids than Arabs.


----------



## rylah (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> So, you found it required to reply to my post twice; interesting.
> 
> Many of those quotes I posted pertain to the Israeli's  annexation of lands that belong to others, just as the potential for Israel's annexation of area C.
> 
> Having a hard time keeping up, I see.


Every single grain of soil we discuss was vested with the sovereignty of the Jewish nation,
there's not other nation to whom it belongs under international law. The US too, ratified the law under Constitution as US law, can't infringe on the rights of the Jewish nation to any land that was assigned to it.

Liberation forward.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 8, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  percent, Dogmaphobe, et al,

Well, to a degree, I agree in part with Dogmaphobe.  It is an unacceptable risk to (at this time and foreseeable future)  allow the inhabitance of the West Bank _(including Jerusalem)_ and the Gaza Strip _(≈ 5+ million people)_ Israeli citizen access and benefits.   Even if the number of potential Jihadists _(including Insurgents, Radicalized Islamic Troublemakers, Adherents, Guerrillas and Asymmetric Fighters)_ if only one percent (0.01) of one percent (0.01) that would be ≈ 50 to start.  Remember what we refer to as the 9/11 attacks were carried out by 19 terrorist hijackers.  And if there is a successful attack, that means that there was a support base.  Jihadist do not live in isolation and they cannot live for long in one place too long when their own culture is on watch.



rylah said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think it is a good idea.Why bring so many potential terrorists into Israel and change the dynamic vis a vis Jewish and Arab?
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

And while these three choices sounds reasonable, it is unrealistic that and hard core Jihadists _(including Insurgents, Radicalized Islamic Troublemakers, Adherents, Guerrillas and Asymmetric Fighters)_ are going to color within the lines.  They are going to use the opportunity to infiltrate Israel.

My estimation of one per cent (0.01) of one percent (0.01) is undeniably too conservation.  You see many more time that number just on parade in Victory Marches in Gaza and pro-Jihadist gatherings in the West Bank.  And that is not counting the numbers of people that support the terrorists incarcerated in Israeli Prisons OR the $48 million the Ramallah Government paid to "released terrorist prisoners."  And it does not consider all the Arab Palestinians that promote the celebration and remembrance of long-dead terrorist.

I'm not saying it could never happen, but the Arab Palestinians are known to bite the hand that feeds them.  It will take several generations after the cessation of hostilities before the Israelis are going to be "relatively safe" to lift restrictions on the inhabitance of the West Bank → given the current progress being made towards peace.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah (Apr 8, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  percent, Dogmaphobe, et al,
> 
> Well, to a degree, I agree in part with Dogmaphobe.  It is an unacceptable risk to (at this time and foreseeable future)  allow the inhabitance of the West Bank _(including Jerusalem)_ and the Gaza Strip _(≈ 5+ million people)_ Israeli citizen access and benefits.   Even if the number of potential Jihadists _(including Insurgents, Radicalized Islamic Troublemakers, Adherents, Guerrillas and Asymmetric Fighters)_ if only one percent (0.01) of one percent (0.01) that would be ≈ 50 to start.  Remember what we refer to as the 9/11 attacks were carried out by 19 terrorist hijackers.  And if there is a successful attack, that means that there was a support base.  Jihadist do not live in isolation and they cannot live for long in one place too long when their own culture is on watch.
> ...



Of course, that way, criminals will inevitably receive Israeli citizenship.
But so were the considerations before declaring independence, then too the US leadership thought it was unrealistic and that Israel would not survive the pressure.

70 years ago - security was already brought up as an argument against sovereignty.
Yet in spite of all the mess, Israel is one of the safest countries, its centers of population among the safest metropolitans, certainly more safe than many American cities, Paris and London.

The framework that was used for the last 30 years since Oslo has led only to inspiring hope among the Jihadis, and passed the problem to next generations. No practical alternatives have been suggested otherwise, that could out weight the benefits of sovereign control and Israeli citizenship for both sides of the conflict.

I don't see how keeping military control in Judea helps either Israeli politics, economy or security in the long run. Aside for the govt expenses and daily inconvenience, it leaves the too many open ends in an already unstable situatio, makes us look uncertain and fuels the same hope that prolonged the conflict for a whole century.

Fortunately demographics will leave Israelis no options because the center of the country is already overpopulated. Therefore for the next generation, which has more kids than previous and becomes more and more traditional, the main question is already on the table-  *Negev desert or the green hills of Judea?
*
The amount of US repatriates and investments moving to Judea, compared to the tech booming Be'er Sheva leaves no doubts as to the actual trends and priorities for the short term future.


----------



## rylah (Apr 8, 2019)

RoccoR, excuse me for the confusion, I had to add several points to the last response,
 please read it again.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> BlackFlag said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...



Another stupid remark from a Pro Palestinian. Those areas were Legally considered part of Egypt and Jordan who initiated the 67 War


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 8, 2019)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > BlackFlag said:
> ...



Not, "Pro Palestinian" here but believe whatever you like. 
After WWII there was a message, 'never again.' Well, I find it ironic that those that got it during WWII are now & have been fucking over others for DECADES. They have done this with the blessings of many nations, mostly the US.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



How do you figure that?  What have they done to "others"?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 8, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?



Probably not but yet I am still all for it.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



"Roaring Terrorist Lion"...so just for comparative purposes what would you call Iran?

Thank you.  I am serious with this question.


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 8, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...




Yes, keep pretending you don't see the tragedy that Israel has put the ME through, for many decades. Keep your head buried like one of those funny looking birds that don't fly; then you can keep asking that question the rest of your life.


----------



## rylah (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...


What tragedy, Arab failure at complete domination of the entire middle east?


----------



## caddo kid (Apr 8, 2019)

rylah said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...




I'm sure you have enjoyed seeing hundreds of thousands of Pali children being starved, slaughtered, displaced from their homes, having no real economic opportunities, etc., for decades & decades. Very enjoyable, huh?
I bet you claim to be a Christian too; amirite?
Yep .........


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



I agree. Fatah and Hamas should be ashamed of themselves for doing so to the poor children. Maybe the children should tattle tale to the UN?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



rylah is a brave Jew who lives in Israel.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...





ForeverYoung436 said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > ILOVEISRAEL said:
> ...



Israel is surviving


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...


How can the #3 richest terror organization with $700 Million to its name afford building facilities only for itself, and feeding only its members and those loyal to it?

I ask:  why are there no Shelters for the people built for the population but only built for Hamas, PLO, Fatah  and Islamic Jihad members?

Forbes Israel:The Richest Terror Organizations in the World 2018

Why indeed.

By the way, no Palestinians have starved in all of these decades you mention.  There are truckloads of food being delivered to the people on a daily basis.  Where does it all end up? Ask Hamas the elected government of Gaza.

Here is how "poor Gaza is" and that is the last we should talk about Gaza:




Who has a nice shelter from Israel's attacks, after rockets fly into Israel?

Hamas Builds Itself an Underground Lair

Here is Area A in "West Bank"


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...


No one can see  these things because they only happen in your troubled imagination, however, it is clear you enjoy fantasizing about suffering Arabs.


----------



## rylah (Apr 8, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...



Honors were given in with bonus in advance,
 just in case I don't get the chance to pass my expert opinion next time


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Apr 8, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > caddo kid said:
> ...




Have you ever considered basing your opinions on something real instead of psychotic fantasies like these?


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Apr 8, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


This forum has quite the pronounced pro- Islamic bias so no surprise, either.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 8, 2019)

Dogmaphobe said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Yeah well. I am neither pro or against per se but facts are facts. In that ideology apostasy is punishable by death.


----------



## Lipush (Apr 8, 2019)

Or lookie. I see that time passes but wackos always are pulled back in here.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 9, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Did he mention all of Judea and Samaria?  Or just Area C?
> ...


Annexing all of area C (part of Trump's deal of the century) can't work.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 9, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Israel has the technology to send an unmanned ship to the moon; annexing area c is child’s play.


----------



## rylah (Apr 9, 2019)




----------



## Coyote (Apr 9, 2019)

Whether or not annexing works depends on how it is handled in terms of citizenship and rights.

I think what is of greater concern is Netanyahu aligning himself with extremist rightwing parties in order to maintain his hold on power.  These are groups formerly marginalized in Israeli politics for good reason.  They are associated with terrorism, racist policies and policies which would endanger Israel's ideal as a democratic nation with western values.  

I think annexation under the auspices of those groups could go very badly.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 9, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Whether or not annexing works depends on how it is handled in terms of citizenship and rights.
> 
> I think what is of greater concern is Netanyahu aligning himself with extremist rightwing parties in order to maintain his hold on power.  These are groups formerly marginalized in Israeli politics for good reason.  They are associated with terrorism, racist policies and policies which would endanger Israel's ideal as a democratic nation with western values.
> 
> I think annexation under the auspices of those groups could go very badly.


Billionaires from around the world are buying state of the art homes and apartments in Israel.
They aren’t excited about Arabs blowing themselves up.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 9, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Whether or not annexing works depends on how it is handled in terms of citizenship and rights.
> ...


It’s actually a serious problem and is even posing issues for non-wealthy Jews who want to go on aliyah and can’t afford it.
Homes are in the 4 million dollar range.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 9, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> caddo kid said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


Where are they going to work?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 9, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Whether or not annexing works depends on how it is handled in terms of citizenship and rights.



Israel has laws governing those things.


----------



## Lipush (Apr 9, 2019)

Yes.

Hopefully later on tonight, we'll know where this state is going.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 9, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Whether or not annexing works depends on how it is handled in terms of citizenship and rights.
> 
> I think what is of greater concern is Netanyahu aligning himself with extremist rightwing parties in order to maintain his hold on power.  These are groups formerly marginalized in Israeli politics for good reason.  They are associated with terrorism, racist policies and policies which would endanger Israel's ideal as a democratic nation with western values.
> 
> I think annexation under the auspices of those groups could go very badly.


Surely, politically it would be a problem. i was looking at it from a practical standpoint. Cities are centers of regions. Moving out from the urban centers there are industrial zones and agriculture. If a city is cut off from its resources it cannot survive. Area C cuts the resources off from the cities.

For example: the Bethlehem district goes from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea. Right now, Bethlehem only controls 18% of its land.  That can't work.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 9, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Whether or not annexing works depends on how it is handled in terms of citizenship and rights.
> ...


Based on the many Jewish publications following the election, one of Netanyahu’s major issues is housing affordability.
He wants to start building affordable homes in what are considered “less attractive” areas.
It’s no coincidence that many national leaders are visiting Israel.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 9, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Whether or not annexing works depends on how it is handled in terms of citizenship and rights.
> ...



What laws specifically?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 9, 2019)

Lipush said:


> Yes.
> 
> Hopefully later on tonight, we'll know where this state is going.


What do you want to see?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 9, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Too many.
Israel goes way too far in protecting the rights of hostile residents.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 9, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Such as what laws in regards to annexation?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 9, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I don’t know the laws because every time I read the explanation given by the “Right Wing” Jewish Press, I realize I’m not a lawyer.
Jews are really into protecting everybody’s right so it’s very difficult to take anything away from someone who isn’t caught red handed committing murder.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 9, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  Coyote, Shusha, et al,



			
				MG Danny Efroni (Ret) Former Judge Advocate General said:
			
		

> *“The challenge,” says Efroni, “is maintaining the status quo while guarding the interests of civilians in the area.”*



Without saying it, I believe that MG Efroni may be eluding to the recently passed "Nation-State Law," which in my opinion does not do anything to clarify the status of the (non-Jewish) inhabitants in territory subject to Annexation.

I think this does little (at least as I see it) to clarify the concept of "defensive annexation."  And although the law does not specifically deny the (non-Jewish) inhabitants their "right to self-determination," in the absence of expressions to the contrary, it certainly circumvented the question of their autonomous destiny.



Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



*(COMMENT)*

The answer I usually get when I ask this question is that the Act of Annexation extends the Basic Laws of Israel into the territory annexed.  And the inhabitants that become subject to the law are _de facto_ citizens to that law.

It will be very important as to how the nation of Israel applies those laws.  The answer is nowhere near obvious.

Most Respectfully,
R
ANNEX (As I understand it from The Time of Israel)
*Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People*


----------



## rylah (Apr 10, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  Coyote, Shusha, et al,
> 
> 
> ...



First of all the Nation Law does define all citizens of Israel as subjects of the Jewish state, specifically mentioning self determination. Jewish settlement is as well defined a national priority to be encouraged, promoted and its establishment strengthened.

Second, all lexicon of "Annexation" is wrong, and has a false connotation that Judea is not land belonging to the Jewish nation. Though media uses that term, the policies discussed in the Knesset refer to application of Israeli law, in terms of Sovereignty, International Law and Indigenous Rights.

Liberation forward.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 10, 2019)

rylah said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



I absolutely agree that the term "annexation" is incorrect.  You can not annex what is already legally yours.  Israel is simply going to apply Israeli law to territory it has legal right to and control of.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 10, 2019)

RE:  West Bank
⁜→  Coyote, Shusha, et al,

Yeah, I thought I would get some pushback here.

]





rylah said:


> First of all the Nation Law does define all citizens of Israel as subjects of the Jewish state, specifically mentioning self determination. Jewish settlement is as well defined a national priority to be encouraged, promoted and its establishment strengthened.


*(COMMENT)*

I totally understand what you are saying.  I was addressing the "Basic Law: Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People → 1 — Basic principles:

A. The land of Israel is the historical homeland of the Jewish people, in which the State of Israel was established.
B. The State of Israel is the national home of the Jewish people, in which it fulfills its natural, cultural, religious and historical right to self-determination.
C. The right to exercise national self-determination in the State of Israel is unique to the Jewish people.​
It goes out of its way to specifically state "Jewish People;" not Israeli People and not inhabitance of a non-Jewish status.

This is what some people are afraid of.



rylah said:


> Second, all lexicon of "Annexation" is wrong, and has a false connotation that Judea is not land belonging to the Jewish nation. Though media uses that term, the policies discussed in the Knesset refer to application of Israeli law, in terms of Sovereignty, International Law and Indigenous Rights.


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, that is what the conflict is all about.  It is a territorial dispute.

•  The Arab Palestinians say that Judea belongs to them.  

•  So when the Israelis extend Israeli Basic Law to cover that territory, it is a case of "Annexation" by sovereign extention by other means.​
It should be noted that many Arab Palestinians argue that the same territory is their territory and constitutes part of their state.



Shusha said:


> I absolutely agree that the term "annexation" is incorrect.  You can not annex what is already legally yours.  Israel is simply going to apply Israeli law to territory it has legal right to and control of.


*(COMMENT)*

This is only one perspective.  The State of Israel, pre-1948 did not exist.  I know that both sides have claims of history in depth of time; but neither claim is any more valid then if the Shawnee, the Chippewas, or the Ojibwa natives, attempt some claim to territory in Ohio.  Ancient history simply does not figure into the matter.  If Israel expects to defend itself in any legal confrontation → here →  in the 21st Century it can not expect to win using 21 BC history.

*(NOTE)*

I support Israel on the basis of the need for such a state as having such sovereign laws that would insure the protection and preservation of the Jewish people and their culture from further abuse under the color of law. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha (Apr 10, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  West Bank
> ⁜→  Coyote, Shusha, et al,
> 
> Yeah, I thought I would get some pushback here.
> ...




I am not in any way arguing for ancient history. I'm arguing for legal claims built post WWI.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 10, 2019)

Hone


Shusha said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Honestly I think you are just playing with words here trying to make it sound righteous.

It was first occupied territory.  Then it was white washed into “disputed” territory.  Now the final phase....”it is rightfully ours”.

Let’s have some honesty for a change and call it what AND what Israeli leaders are calling it.  Annexation.

That is not a bad thing.  And it finally brings a light on to the fact that for a certain portion of Israeli leadership...a two state solution was never going to happen.  And not because of security reasons.

So let’s call it what is, annexation, and move on from there.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 10, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  West Bank
> ⁜→  Coyote, Shusha, et al,
> 
> Yeah, I thought I would get some pushback here.
> ...



And there is good reason to be afraid.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 10, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Hone
> 
> 
> Shusha said:
> ...




The only time it was occupied territory is when the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan crossed their international boundary into the Territory of the Jewish Homeland (Israel). It has never ever been Territory which belonged to any other State. Time for the lies to end. It is part of the Jewish homeland. Always has been. 

We spent a hundred years trying to give parts of it away to the Arab Palestinians. Peace deal after peace deal after peace deal. Still the Arab Palestinians absolutely refuse to do what it takes to accept a two state solution. 

Time is up. Israel is going to make a unilateral decision to force a boundary. Good.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 11, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Hone
> ...



I don't know what you find so funny, Tinmore.  It was you and your Palestinian friends continuously refusing every peace deal that led us to this.  So now all of Eretz Israel will become the State of Israel.  Gd's plan, perhaps?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 11, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Hone
> ...


Israel seems to be the only one with that peculiar definition of occupied.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 11, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  et al,

Yeah, I don't think those that promote any portion of the West Bank have thought this out very well.  Although it would be a BONANZA for the Arab Palestinians, they will not appreciate it and they will become Israel's worse security problem ever.



ForeverYoung436 said:


> [I don't know what you find so funny, Tinmore.  It was you and your Palestinian friends continuously refusing every peace deal that led us to this.  So now all of Eretz Israel will become the State of Israel.  Gd's plan, perhaps?


*(COMMENT)*

Right now, Israel can cordon-off the West Bank (Jerusalem included) and Gaza Strip because it is not part of Israeli Sovereignty.  But once you annex, the cordon effectively stops and barriers must come down. 

Right now, only the Arab Palestinians can make a case for apartheid relative to settlements in Area "C."  But even the barriers around the Area "C" settlements will have to come down.   Right now, the settlements are like little Forts in hostile Indian country, or Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo (90+% Muslim).

But, it is up to them, the Israelis.  But in the end, it would be much better if the Israelis did something spectacular:  _(Just for starters!)_

◈  Build the Mother of all Water Purification Plants and just pump like hell into the West Bank so that Arab Palestinian can have FREE water.

◈  Build a supter-series of small modular reactors alone the inside of the Israeli sovereign boundry, but providing FREE electricity to the Arab Palestinians.

◈  Setup a huge B2B ComercialTrading Center so that the Arab Palestinians can become a productive member of the global community.

◈  Works Progress Administration (WPA) to completely reoganize the public utlities  and thoroughfares → tooth to tail.  Put everyone to work.

✦  Speicalized training -
✦  Career tracking -
✦  Business oportunity center -​
◈  Finally, Set-up free education center program (totally secular) putting every teach on the job, new schools from scratch.  Start in Jerusalem and fan-out in every direction.​
But I'm not the PM's Chief of Staff.  But someone needs to get a plan together before it is too late. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 11, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Israel has the correct definition.  Why Jordan would not give the Arabs in the "West Bank" "their" land?  Because it never belonged to them, and they have no claim to it.

The Jewish People were given the legal right to build their own State in ALL of the Mandate of Palestine, but as we know, 78% was immediately given by the British, for a reason, to the Arab Hashemites and NOT the Arab Palestinians and their leader Al Husseini.  Think about it.

Why did Jordan want to enter the 1967 war with the other Arab states?  Not to help them, or the Arab Palestinians but to take even more land from Israel if not all of it. It was a second attempt to destroy Israel.  They lost.
Attacking a country and losing a war have consequences, especially when one loses the land one did not have any rights to according to International Law.

It was Jewish Land, it is Jewish land.  Israel was ready to give it up for a peace treaty, as it had done with Sinai.  The Arab Leaders said, NO DEAL.

Actions have consequences, and the consequences of TOO MANY rejections of peace, is that enough is enough.
Israel gave what it could, even what it should not have given away, part of Gaza.


The land is Jewish Land.  It is being returned to its rightful owners, if indeed parts of Judea and Samaria are ever incorporated , annexed, call it what one will.........


----------



## Taz (Apr 11, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?


He said he would annex the "illegal" Jewish settlements. He did it.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 11, 2019)

Taz said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?
> ...


He did not at all say "illegal", and it has not yet happened.

Wrong on all accounts.


----------



## Taz (Apr 11, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


Bibi doesn't like brown people.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 11, 2019)

Taz said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Taz said:
> ...


You do not like Jews.  And you know nothing about Jews.
Your words and posts are worthless to the discussion on this thread.


----------



## rylah (Apr 11, 2019)

Taz said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Taz said:
> ...



Netanyahu doesn't like the majority of his voters?


----------



## Taz (Apr 11, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


Some of my best friends are Jews!


----------



## Taz (Apr 11, 2019)

rylah said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


I meant arabs. Jews aren't brown.


----------



## xyz (Apr 11, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?


He would have to give all the Palestinians there Israeli citizenship and full rights.

I think eventually Israel will have to do it if they want to keep that territory, not that I think they will under Netanyahu.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 11, 2019)

Taz said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Taz said:
> ...


Here  !!!

Educate yourself:

Sephardic, Ashkenazic, Mizrahi and Ethiopian Jews | My Jewish Learning




Now you can rest


----------



## Taz (Apr 11, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


Those are the exception. They become Jews because they’re hungry.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 11, 2019)

Taz said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Taz said:
> ...


Those are not exceptions.  And your prejudice towards Jews ends here.

Take a nice vacation.....to Israel


----------



## Taz (Apr 11, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Taz said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


I like Israel actually, they fuck up Muslims on a daily basis, so what's not to like?


----------



## rylah (Apr 11, 2019)

Taz said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Taz said:
> ...



No You meant to define people by skin color, 
that's all I need to know.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 11, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Israel seems to be the only one with that peculiar definition of occupied.



No, its the standard definition of occupied.  It is the same definition used everywhere in the world and by all nations.  Oh, except when it comes to Israel.  Because, you know, Israel.

Territory either belongs to a State or it is terra nullius (belonging to no State).  There has never been a category of "territory to be held indefinitely under sovereignty of a state which doesn't exist but might be there one day". 

There is absolutely no legal provision in any documents for any territory recognized under the reconstitution of the Jewish Homeland (Israel) to be removed and placed under the sovereignty of another state.  The international boundaries were set in the Mandate for Palestine, just exactly as they were for Jordan and Syria and Iraq and Lebanon.  The international boundary between Israel and Jordan is the Jordan River.  Legally, its one territorial unit.  (And yes, Tinmore, you can call the whole territory Palestine, if it makes you feel better.)  It is one territorial unit under Israeli sovereignty with defined international boundaries recognized as the Jewish Homeland (Israel).  This was true right up until Oslo.

Then Oslo came about, due to the expressed wish of the Arab people for self-determination.  It divided the territory into three temporary zones and recognized the impending sovereignty of the Arab Palestinian people.  Areas A and Gaza are under full control of the government(s) of Palestine.  Area C is under the full control of the government of Israel.  By treaty.  Israel has effectively ceded the territory of Area A and Gaza (and Area B) to Palestine.  Israel has not ceded Area C, and it remains under her control.  It is legally impossible to call Area C "occupied".

The eventual international border between Israel and the impending State of Palestine was to be determined in negotiations between the governments of Israel and Palestine, with Israel ceding the territory to Palestine in a treaty.  The border can end up falling anywhere, though the likely assumption is that it will be somewhere in Area C. But it still hasn't been determined.

Here's the problem.  A peace treaty is highly unlikely and growing more unlikely every day.  But a state has every right to exert sovereignty over her own territory and has every right to abandon territory. So, since there isn't going to be a negotiated border, Israel is going to force one by exerting sovereignty over much of Area C and by abandoning Areas A, B and Gaza.  (At least that is what I assume Netanyahu plans.  He would be CRAZY to try to take Area A and Gaza.)  There are absolutely no legal impediments to this.  And no annexation.  Israel is not exerting sovereignty over territory to which she has no legal right or claim.  Indeed she is doing exactly what was expected to happen in a peace treaty.  She's just doing it unilaterally.  Which she has every legal right to do.

Now, of course the Arab Palestinians are going to complain.  But there are no legal grounds for saying that Area C is sovereign Arab Palestine.  Thus, no grounds for saying it is occupied.  

If you, or RoccoR , have anything at all to contradict this, please show me.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 11, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


The term, occupied, as it is  applied to Israel is an expression of bias, nothing more.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 11, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



How would you describe it then?  As of now, Judea and Samaria are still not officially a part of Israel, yet Israel collects the taxes, patrols the area, supplies them with electricity, etc.  It doesn't only apply to Israel though.  Turkey occupies Northern Cyprus, China occupies Tibet, Syria occupied Lebanon for about 30 years, etc.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 11, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I'd describe it as the US State department does, Judea and Samaria are under Israeli control.  

For hundreds of years it was under Ottoman control and then under British (UN) control and then under Jordanian control and now it is under Israeli control.  When Jordan had control annexed Judea and Samaria, only two countries, the UK and Pakistan recognized the annexation so when Israel took the land in the Six Day War, it could hardly be called an occupation since no one recognized Jordan's right to it.  All the examples you provided of occupations arose from one country invading and holding the land of another, but Jordan had no more right tot the land than Israel has and since the Palestinians have never had a state on that land, there is no rational basis in history, logic or law for calling Israel's control of the land an occupation.

Calling it an occupation implies you think the land should belong to some one else, but that is just an expression of bias.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 11, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



I don't think it matters if Jordan's annexation was recognized by the world community or not, since Jordan renounced all of its rights to that territory in 1988.  I say this because I recognized Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, though the international community does not, and I will recognize Israel's annexation of Judea and Samaria in the future, though I'm sure that will not be the case by the international community.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 11, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


Ok, so let's scratch all of that and in answer to your question, I would describe Judea and Samaria being under Israeli control and not under Israeli occupation.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 11, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


They haven't been offered peace. They have only been offered partition.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 11, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> They haven't been offered peace. They have only been offered partition.



Yeah.  Because until the Arab Palestinians, no peoples wanting self-determination have ever demanded self-determination over the entire sovereign territory that they found themselves in.

It would be like Catalonia demanding sovereignty over all of Spain.  Or First Nations demanding all of Canada.  Pakistan demanding all of India.  Serbia demanding all of Yugoslavia. Its ridiculous.

Partition is the NORM.


----------



## rylah (Apr 11, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  West Bank
> ⁜→  Coyote, Shusha, et al,
> 
> Yeah, I thought I would get some pushback here.
> ...



I appreciate Your point of view, but let me clarify several things.

Our line of discussion is international law, and I think that I've made it clear that one of main legal arguments lay directly in both the UN Charter and US Constitution.

Ancient history was not brought up at this stage, yet, but let's not exaggerate or oversimplify that argument as well. Historic and indigenous rights are indeed recognized in this conflict as well, one can say a precedent, therefore the more significant from a legal point.

What You referred regarding the term "Jewish people", from any applicable legal point of view is the same potato-potato. The 'people' there is the same as nation, it's singular in Hebrew. As well there's no distinction or mention of ones ethnicity in the Israel ID's/passports exactly to prevent distinction. Israel is the Jewish nation, all citizens of Israel are subjects of the Jewish nation and Israelis.
This is done so specifically to give Israel a backup for the possibility of eventually providing another 800,000 - 1.2 Arabs in Judea with Israeli citizenship, without endangering the future of the whole community, from downgrading to anything like we see in the region.

How this could be implemented is discussed in a variety of political plans suggested.
From architects of the Greater Jerusalem, to the Decisive Plan of Bezalel Smotrich, Emirates of Dr. Mordechai Kedar etc, and of course don't forget what Netanyahu might suggest and the Trump Plan.

Until those are actually on the table, we cannot be specific, but I think I have already discussed my idea of application of Sovereignty and the process of providing citizenship, quiet in detail.

What we are lacking is a discussion on obligations upon receiving Israeli citizenship.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 11, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Honestly I think you are just playing with words here trying to make it sound righteous.
> 
> It was first occupied territory.  Then it was white washed into “disputed” territory.  Now the final phase....”it is rightfully ours”.



I'd argue it is you playing with words.  It was not "first" called occupied territory.  It was first called "the reconstitution of the Jewish Homeland'.  Then it was the Jewish State and (another) Arab State in the failed partition plan.  Then it was "Israel" and "Jordan".  Then "occupied territories" (which should have ended with the 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan).  But then it morphed into "Occupied Palestinian Territories".  Now its "Occupied Palestinian Territories including East Jerusalem".  There was a fascinating article I read a few years ago about how the language of the territory has changed over time, especially in UN documents.  I can't seem to find it now.

But let's do go back to what it was first called, in modern times:  the Jewish Homeland.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 11, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  Shusha, Coyote, et al,

Let's try to find out where we are :




​


Shusha said:


> If you, or RoccoR , have anything at all to contradict this, please show me.


*(COMMENT)*

As you can see by the timeline _(supra)_ the on 1 August 1988, the Jordan relinquished all ties to the West and (including Jerusalem) and there was no Palestinian Government_ (the All Palestine Government dissolved and reincorporated into the Military Governorship by the Egyptians in 1959)_ and the Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt (1974) set a new International Border that encapsulates the Gaza Strip inside the sovereignty of Israel.

I ask you to notice that during the period 1 August → 15 November 1988, there was no actual government in either a claimant standing with any International Agency or the United Nations for that territory left to the last government standing, Israel.




​
•  I submit to you → that in 1988, the only sovereignty holding authority over the West Bank was Israel.

•  I submit to you → that the prior sovereignty extending governmental claim to the territory, relinquished that claim on 31 July 1988.

•  I submit to you → that Israel is, the only sovereign nation since the departure of the Jordanians, to oversee governmental activity in the West Bank.​
I think, that Israel is quit benevolent in its agreement with the Oslo Accord.  And since the Palestinian Authority, by a public announcement:



			
				Othman Abu Gharbieh said:
			
		

> The Oslo Accords are dead and the Palestinian Authority leadership is about to ask the UN Security Council to recognize a Palestinian state in the pre-1967 lines, a senior Fatah official said on Tuesday.
> SOURCE:  Jerusalem Post •
> * The Palestinian leadership is about to ask the UN Security Council to recognize a Palestinian state and says there will be no return to the previous peace process with Israel. *By Khaled Abu Toameh April 1, 2015


This means that, if the Arab Palestinians ever had a real functioning government, it again sets the conditions back to a time before the Oslo Accords when the government of record was the Israelis.

But maybe I'm wrong.   But what I've presented here are very hard facts etched into the history of the region.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah (Apr 11, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Baruch Hashem Jerusalem is growing in all directions and densely populated.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 11, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  Shusha, Coyote, et al,
> 
> Let's try to find out where we are :
> ...


Again you base your conclusion on false premise.

A state or a government are not required for a people to have the right to self determination and sovereignty.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 11, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> A state or a government are not required for a people to have the right to self determination and sovereignty.



A government is absolutely required to HAVE sovereignty.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 11, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> This means that, if the Arab Palestinians ever had a real functioning government, it again sets the conditions back to a time before the Oslo Accords when the government of record was the Israelis.



Can you clarify what you mean by this?

If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting:

1948 to 1967 Sovereignty was held by Israel and by Jordan
1967 to 1988 Sovereignty was held by Israel and by Jordan, with Israel occupying Jordanian territory
1988 to present Sovereignty is held by ?Israel?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 11, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> A state or a government are not required for a people to have the right to self determination and sovereignty.



Also, again, NO ONE is claiming Arab Palestinians have no rights to self-determination and sovereignty.


----------



## Ria_Longhorn (Apr 11, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



"Palestine" meets none of the four requirements under international law for a state. Under the Montevideo Convention (1933), a state "should possess the following qualifications": (1) a defined territory; (2) a government; (3) capacity to enter into relations with the other states; and (4) a permanent population.
"Palestine" lacks a "defined territory." To have a defined territory, "Palestine" has to negotiate it with Israel; until then, its self-definition of territory is not a "defined territory" under the law; it is simply a negotiating position.

"Palestine" lacks a "government." It is ruled half by a terrorist group and half by an unelected administrative entity whose last election [was thirteen] years ago. The government of each half considers the government of the other half illegitimate, and both are correct.
"Palestine" lacks the "capacity to enter into relations with the other states." Abbas has no capacity to bind the rulers of Gaza, nor even to implement his own commitments in the area in which he rules, with no capacity to bind "Palestine" to anything.
"Palestine" lacks a "permanent population." Most of the population considers themselves perennial "refugees" who seek to "return" to a different state, not to be permanent residents where they currently live. 

“Palestine” Does Not Qualify as a “State” - Commentary


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 11, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  Shusha, et al,

At the current time, with the exception of Area "A" no sovereignty has been established.  And even Area "A" is arguably only a drone of a nation.  Many do not see even Area "A" as having a fully functioning Government.



Shusha said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > This means that, if the Arab Palestinians ever had a real functioning government, it again sets the conditions back to a time before the Oslo Accords when the government of record was the Israelis.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

OK, I could do better in explaining this.  

The Oslo Accords _(the titles say a lot)_:

◈  Oslo I  → Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements (1993)
◈  Oslo II → Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip (1995)​
Just looking at the titles, you can tell that the Arab Palestinians _(for all intent and purposes → it means the Palestine Liberation Organization)_ did not have sovereignty _(meaning they did not have exclusive authority to rule → the authority of a state to self-governance)_ otherwise they would not need the agreements.

Now, this means that for all the meaning aspects of Israel is in the driver's seat.

•  Israel assumed effective control _or _Occupation Authority_ (even though no government likes to be stuck with the title of "Occupation Power")_ in 1967.  But the Hague Regulation is quite clear on the matter.  That is to say that the applicability of "occupation law" definitely covers conditions of effective foreign control over territory.

•  The counter-argument is that political condition, the belligerent nature of the population, the unacceptable risk of just turning over control to the inhabitants are simply to complicated to expect anything but desaster.​
The glue that kept the conditions for an emerging country was an effective control. 

While the people of Palestine have the "right to sovereignty,"  they have yet been skillful and savvy enough to achieve it. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 11, 2019)

Ria_Longhorn said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Palestine is a State: A Horse with Black and White Stripes is a Zebra - viewcontent.cgi


----------



## Shusha (Apr 11, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> •  Israel assumed effective control _or _Occupation Authority_ (even though no government likes to be stuck with the title of "Occupation Power")_ in 1967.  But the Hague Regulation is quite clear on the matter.  That is to say that the applicability of "occupation law" definitely covers conditions of effective foreign control over territory.​



So here is where I'm having trouble with your argument.  You say that "occupation" is defined (through Hague Regulation) as "foreign control over territory". 

If Israel is the "foreign control" then who is the "local" control?  One Party to the "occupation" is Israel.  Who is the other Party?  Who is Israel occupying?



Edited to add:  as an example to make my point: is Spain occupying Catalonia?​


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 12, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  Shusha, et al,

The

First, the Hague Regulation says (to be exact):




​
I sincerely apologize if I did not accurately quote the Hague Regulation or expressed myself clearly.

Israel was a "foreign Army" in June 1967 relative to the Jordanian sovereignty; up and until the end of July 1988.  Then it became an Army in a non-self-governing territory involved in a non-international armed conflict (NIAC) with Jihadists, Insurgents, Radicalized Islamic Troublemakers, Adherents, Guerrillas and Asymmetric Fighter.


Shusha said:


> ​So here is where I'm having trouble with your argument.  You say that "occupation" is defined (through Hague Regulation) as "foreign control over territory".
> 
> If Israel is the "foreign control" then who is the "local" control?  One Party to the "occupation" is Israel.  Who is the other Party?  Who is Israel occupying?


*(ANSWER)*

Actually, the control has two components to be an occupation:

•  It must be a Hostile Army _ (it is not necessily a foreign Army)_.
Example:  If a country is subject to a military coup d'état, and the national Army is used.​•  The Army must be "hostile."

•  The occupation extends to "direct" territorial control _("where such authority has been establish")_.
Extended Example:  If the Army used by the coup d'état only controls the Capitol City and not the entire Province, then only the Capitol City is under Occupation.​


Shusha said:


> ​So here is where I'm having trouble with your argument.  You say that "occupation" is defined (through Hague Regulation) as "foreign control over territory".
> 
> If Israel is the "foreign control" then who is the "local" control?  One Party to the "occupation" is Israel.  Who is the other Party?  Who is Israel occupying?


*(ANSWER)*

Israel is attempting to maintain full civil and security control over Area "C."  Israel has some responsibility for Security Control in Area "B."   In contemporary times it is generally construed that, Occupation Law → "applies in all cases of total or partial occupation of foreign territory," whether or not the occupation meets with armed resistance.

It should be said here that in June 1967, the West Bank was under total effective control by the Israelis.  That control has been unilateral reduced and restraints lifted base on Israeli discretionary powers.

◈  The Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) includes:

•  The Hague Regularion (1907) (HR), Section III;

•  Geneva Convention (GC) IV, Part III, Sections I, III and IV;

•  Addition Protocal I;

•  The Human Rights activist have also incerted themselfs in the mix.​
The Occupation ends when effective control by the Army is released back to the National Authority → or lesser local authorities Provincial, District, Municipal, etc.



Shusha said:


> One Party to the "occupation" is Israel.  Who is the other Party?  Who is Israel occupying?


*(ANSWER)*

It can be the elements of the prior sovereign of the territory, or some lesser authority down to the level of non-self-governing.

In the case of Israel and Palestine, on 1 August 1988, the territory was non-self-governing; falling to the responsibility of the Occupation Power.

*(OTHER)*

This leads directly into the question of:  When is a Government → a Government → in the West Bank and Gaza Strip?  What constitutes a government?  And what are the liabilities and responsibilities when releasing authorities to known terrorist organizations.



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 12, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  Shusha, et al,
> 
> The
> ...


So, what about the 1948 occupation?

Edit
Or should question be moved here?
The NEWER Official Discussion Thread for the creation of Israel, the UN and the British Mandate


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 12, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



Enough about the supposed 1948 "occupation.'  No one cares about that anymore.  The only debate now is about Judea, Samaria and Gaza.  The more you continue to beat that dead horse, the more of the remaining land of your beloved "Palestine" you will continue to lose.  Hmmm, on the other hand, continue on with that, so soon all of Eretz Israel will be ours!


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Apr 12, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



Yawn...,, Here we go again. He’s never heard of the U.N.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 12, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Honestly I think you are just playing with words here trying to make it sound righteous.
> ...


I am not playing with words in the least.  I am using long established terms.  It is you who are creating new definitions.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 12, 2019)

Annexation is the appropriate term, it is time to quit trying make something through a form of "political correctness".  Killers of civilians are murderers not martyrs, and annexation is annexation not reclamation.

I DO think it is the only path forward at this and not only because the Palestibians have been incapable of forming a functional government or promoting peace but because the Israeli's under Netanyahu never had any intention of allowing for a Palestinian state.

IMO, in order for annexation to work (among many other factors) everyone must have a vested interest in the state.  They must feel a part of it and they have a stake in its future.  It is the difference between the renter and the home owner.

One reasons I think this could be problematic is the Basic Law defining Israel exclusively as the nation state of the Jewish people with its detailed points.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

Coyote said:


> I am not playing with words in the least.  I am using long established terms.  It is you who are creating new definitions.



Not so.  One can easily trace the changes in language used in the UN documents over time.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Annexation is the appropriate term, it is time to quit trying make something through a form of "political correctness".



It not "political correctness", its a legal truth.  Israel is not annexing territory.  It is laying claim to territory already under her sovereignty.  There is absolutely no legal argument to be made that Area C is sovereign territory belonging to any State but Israel.  

And using terms like annexation supports the incorrect idea that Israel is stealing someone else's land.  Which is just demonizing Israel and minimizing a complicated issue.  All Israel is doing is unilaterally setting a boundary which should have been set in negotiations. 



> I DO think it is the only path forward at this and not only because the Palestibians have been incapable of forming a functional government or promoting peace but because the Israeli's under Netanyahu never had any intention of allowing for a Palestinian state.


Again, I think that is unnecessarily claiming that Israel always intended to "pig the place" for itself.  I don't think Israel, including under Netanyahu, had any reason to show the restraint it has with respect to the "West Bank" if it just intended to exert sovereignty over the whole area.  

The reason Netanyahu couldn't imagine a Palestinian State is because the incapability of forming a functional government was pretty clear.  The lack of a negotiating partner was pretty clear.  The motivations were simply that there wasn't anyone to create a Palestinian State.  Not some plan for "Greater Israel".  



> IMO, in order for annexation to work (among many other factors) everyone must have a vested interest in the state.  They must feel a part of it and they have a stake in its future.  It is the difference between the renter and the home owner.



As I've said before, Israel would be crazy to try to take in 4 million (hostile) Arabs.  But taking in the couple hundred thousand in Area C would not be a problem.  



What do you think Israel's goal is in exerting its sovereignty over Area C?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 12, 2019)

Analysis: Does Netanyahu's Win Maintain Status Quo Or Push Israel Further Right?

The 69-year-old Netanyahu won even though he has already been in office for 10 years straight, on top of serving an earlier term in the 1990s. And he won despite expectations that his own attorney general will indict him for alleged bribery and fraud.

Most attribute his success to the expanding Israeli economy, his tough reputation on security, his ties with President Trump and other world leaders, and his comfortable fit with the right-wing direction the country has taken.

A decade under Netanyahu has seen the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict become more remote. Religious Jewish lawmakers hold more sway over law and society as they block initiatives to expand LGBT rights and allow for secular marriage ceremonies. And democracy has been put to the test with a new law that could weaken the standing of non-Jewish citizens and Netanyahu himself saying the country is the nation state "not of all its citizens, but only the Jewish people."

Now the question is, what Netanyahu will do with his new term? Here's what to watch.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 12, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Annexation is the appropriate term, it is time to quit trying make something through a form of "political correctness".
> ...



Israeli-occupied territories - Wikipedia

The International Court of Justice,[3] the UN General Assembly[4] and the United Nations Security Council regards Israel as the "Occupying Power".[5] UN Special Rapporteur Richard Falk called Israel's occupation "an affront to international law."[6] The Israeli High Court of Justice has ruled that Israel holds the West Bank under "belligerent occupation".[7] According to Talia Sasson, the High Court of Justice in Israel, with a variety of different justices sitting, has repeatedly stated for more than four decades that international law applies to Israel's presence in the West Bank.[8] Israeli governments have preferred the term "disputed territories" in the case of the West Bank.[9][10] Officially Israel maintains that the West Bank is disputed territory.[11]

Occupied or Disputed.

Annexation:  the act of annexing something or the state of being annexed *: *the addition of an area or region to a country, state, etc. 

I think those terms are accurate.  The problem is, there is a concerted effort to "soften" what Israel is doing - not demonize it.  It is annexation.

If we are going to play with words to make harsh realities sound "nice" and "righteous" then hell, let's call the Pali terrorist "freedom fighters" and "martyrs".


> > I DO think it is the only path forward at this and not only because the Palestibians have been incapable of forming a functional government or promoting peace but because the Israeli's under Netanyahu never had any intention of allowing for a Palestinian state.
> 
> 
> Again, I think that is unnecessarily claiming that Israel always intended to "pig the place" for itself.  I don't think Israel, including under Netanyahu, had any reason to show the restraint it has with respect to the "West Bank" if it just intended to exert sovereignty over the whole area.
> ...



I totally disagree with you on Netanyahu.  Look at the people he's partnered with, look at his rhetoric - sure, he's said it's about "security" but he has said a hell of a lot else that is not about security.  More important - name one thing Netanyahu has done towards realizing a 2-state solution.  Seems to me most of his actions are provocative.  You ignore the fact that there is a significant group - not a majority - but a politically powerful minority - that feels the entire region belongs by right to the Jews and Israel.  Netanyahu's terms in office have seen a gradual realization of that ideal whether it's the expansion of (primarily) Jewish only settlements or the erosion of a two state solution.  That erosion has long been blamed in entirety on the Palestinians, and while I think they take some significant responsibility, Israel and Netanyahu's government certainly bears some as well.

So what has Netanyahu done to support, promote peace or move towards a two state solution?




> > IMO, in order for annexation to work (among many other factors) everyone must have a vested interest in the state.  They must feel a part of it and they have a stake in its future.  It is the difference between the renter and the home owner.
> 
> 
> 
> As I've said before, Israel would be crazy to try to take in 4 million (hostile) Arabs.  But taking in the couple hundred thousand in Area C would not be a problem.



That doesn't really address what I said.



> What do you think Israel's goal is in exerting its sovereignty over Area C?



Consolodating it's hold on the area, bringing it under one law and governmental services, ending any possibility of a two state solution and alleviating the severe housing crunch it suffers from.  At least for the Jews.  The Arabs are not allowed much lee way in building.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 12, 2019)

1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.

2) How are the Palestinians going to live when they are stuck in bantustans cut off from the required resources to develop an economy?


----------



## Hollie (Apr 12, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> 1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
> 
> 2) How are the Palestinians going to live when they are stuck in bantustans cut off from the required resources to develop an economy?



The dictatorships that the Arabs-Moslems currently live in have done quite nicely with their dedicated, exclusive UN sponsored welfare fraud. 

What makes you think the Arabs-Moslems want to change that?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 12, 2019)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > 1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
> ...


More proof that we need a stupid post button.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Apr 12, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> 1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
> 
> 2) How are the Palestinians going to live when they are stuck in bantustans cut off from the required resources to develop an economy?



Yawn..,  Something they should have thought of before 1967


----------



## Hollie (Apr 12, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



You’re using up your usual catalog of pointless slogans. 

But really, Chuckles, when you consider that the Arabs-Moslems masquerading as “Pal’istanians” have managed to con the UN into providing a dedicated welfare fraud for their exclusive use and abuse and when you consider that the Arabs-Moslems parading around as “Pal’istanians” are, per capita, the highest paid “refugees” on the planet, well yeah, why do you think these laggards and layabouts would want to change that?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 12, 2019)

ILOVEISRAEL said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > 1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
> ...


What did the Palestinians do in 1967?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 12, 2019)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Where is that stupid post button?


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 12, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Yeah,  I know that we all have heard this claim several hundred times if we heard it once.  Most people, sloppy in the way they interpret the Law, condense it to this phrase as written here.  But that is not what the International Law actually says.



P F Tinmore said:


> 1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.


*(COMMENT)
*
Here is the Law...



			
				Article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention ••  Inviolability of Rights said:
			
		

> “Protected persons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived, in any case or in any manner whatsoever, of the benefits of the present Convention by any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power, nor by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory.”
> *SOURCE*: * Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949*. ••



It does not say that the Occupied Territory cannot be annexed.  It says that the Occupying Power cannot use "Annexation" to change the rights of the protected person.

Let's bring this down to the lowest common denominator:

Protected persons → shall not be deprived, → of the benefits of the present Convention → by any annexation  → of the occupied territory.​This makes it a bit more clear.

I have yet to see any International Law that clearly states that "occupied Territory cannot be annexed."  I would appreciate it if, someone who makes this claim, knows that actual citation.  Yes, I would be very interested.



P F Tinmore said:


> 2) How are the Palestinians going to live when they are stuck in bantustans cut off from the required resources to develop an economy?


*(COMMENT)*

How is this part of the question _(I'm not sure)_?

It takes at least 2 countries to completely cut-off either the West Bank or Gaza Strip.

To cut-off the West Bank requires the cooperation with Israel and an overt act on the part of Jordan.

To cut-off the Gaza Strip requires the cooperation with Israel and an overt act on the part of Egypt.

*IF* Israel is an obstructionist in this manner _(cut off from the required resources to develop an economy)_ *THEN* so are the cooperating Arab League Members.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 12, 2019)

I support anything and everything that angers terror states like “Palestine”. Bibi won because Israel knows that “Palestine “ doesn’t want peace. They want all Jews dead. Which is fine. Stop whining and attack and see what happens?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> 1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
> 
> 2) How are the Palestinians going to live when they are stuck in bantustans cut off from the required resources to develop an economy?



1)  There is no occupation of any State's territory by Israel. 

2)  The Palestinians *can choose to live any way they wish* when bordered by other States.  

They can hold weekly riots.  They can fly firebombs.  They can toss some rockets and mortars around.  They can try to cross the border with knives and suicide vests.  They can even strap those vests to their children.  

If they wished to develop an economy, however, I'd suggest they play nice in the sandbox.  And take care of their own people as priority with any resources they had.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



But what is Israel doing?  She is NOT taking territory which doesn't belong to her.  She is not performing an act of aggression.  She is not ending the chances of Palestine to become a state.  She is not denying self-determination to the Arab Palestinian people.  She is simply making a unilateral move to declare a border. On territory she already controls. What is the big deal?


Also, with respect to language, you looked up "occupied territories" and, entirely unsurprisingly, got a bunch of stuff about occupied territories.  Not my point.  Look back at the language used in UN documents from 1948 until 2019 and see how the language used to describe the conflict, especially the rights of the Arabs living in Palestine, has changed over time.  My point is that the change in language itself is an erosion of Jewish rights, even though legally nothing has changed since 1922 when the Jewish Homeland was reconstituted.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

Coyote said:


> So what has Netanyahu done to support, promote peace or move towards a two state solution?



Compared to who?  Abbas?  Haniyeh?  

I would suppose the question would depend on what you would consider that Israel CAN do to "move toward a two state solution".

Let the March of Return through the fences?
Have open borders with Gaza?
End the blockade?
Restrict all building for everyone in Area C?
Provide more funds for the Martyrs?
Prevent Jews from visiting the Temple Mount?


What do you want Israel to do that will create the conditions necessary for a two state solution?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

Coyote said:


> That doesn't really address what I said.



Sure it does.  You think that if Israel just made the Arabs feel "welcome" that there would be peace.  I'm calling bullshit on that.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Consolodating it's hold on the area


Check.  Formalizing sovereignty over the territory it already controls. 



> bringing it under one law and governmental services


Check.  So, not apartheid, but equality.  Actually better than equality since the Arabs in Israel will end up FAR better off than those stuck in Palestine or Gaza.  In any way you could possibly care to measure.



> alleviating the severe housing crunch it suffers from


Check.  Sure.  Bonus payment.



> ending any possibility of a two state solution


Not at all.  Unless we are discussing Israel exerting control over ALL of Areas A, B and Gaza (which I've already stated is a ridiculous idea and it would be crazy for Israel to do it), taking control of key areas of Area C, or even most of Area C, would not in the slightest prevent an eventual one-more or two-more states solution. 

There is nothing inherent in Israel's formalizing its control over territory it already controls which will irrevocably deny Arab Palestinians self-determination.  Nothing.  All this is nonsense.  Its a smokescreen -- deliberately burning tires -- to "poor me" the Arab Palestinians and shift the blame to Israel.[/quote]


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

Coyote 

You seem to be supporting a two-state solution here.   So how is creating a border between those two, eventual, states problematic.  Isn't it a step in the RIGHT direction?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 12, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> ... when they are stuck in bantustans cut off from the required resources to develop an economy?



What is the difference between a bantustan and a sovereign, independent nation?  Serious question.  How will Palestine know that it is a State and not a "bantustan"?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 12, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Maybe for your posts. Muslims do not want peace with Jews or Israel. Period. End of story. To call Israel the villain here is insanity.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 13, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Yeah,  I know that we all have heard this claim several hundred times if we heard it once.  Most people, sloppy in the way they interpret the Law, condense it to this phrase as written here.  But that is not what the International Law actually says.
> ...





> Article 47 of the Fourth Geneva Convention •• Inviolability of Rights said:
> “Protected persons who are in occupied territory shall not be deprived, in any case or in any manner whatsoever, of the benefits of the present Convention by any change introduced, as the result of the occupation of a territory, into the institutions or government of the said territory, nor by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power, nor by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory.”
> *SOURCE*: * Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War. Geneva, 12 August 1949*. ••



You really need to read that again.

No change into the institutions or government of the said territory,

No change by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power,

No change by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory.

Of course this applies to the 1948 occupied territory and the 1967 occupied territory.


----------



## K9Buck (Apr 13, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?



Absolutely.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 13, 2019)




----------



## Hollie (Apr 13, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


>



Bringing a modern, educated society to the Islamic terrorist enclave of Abbas’istan would certainly help to improve the place.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 13, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Yeah,  ※  I knew there would be some push-back.

In more contemporary times, the Arab Palestinians fail to recognize that:

❖  It is one thing to say you've instituted some form of government that can stand on its own organizational tradecraft.

❖  It is a completely different matter to actually make that declaration a reality.​
It does not matter if one starts in the pre-1947 era, the era between 1948 and 1967, or moving into the remainder occurring into the present;  absolutely and completely failed to institute any reasonable system by which a collective group of people was able to effectively exercise executive authority in the territory.
Instead, a "parliament in which the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank were equally represented" approved a motion to unite the two banks of the Jordan River, → constitutionally expanding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.  This is not an agreement between a territory with a government with an occupying force.  This was the Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank accepting a new form of government.



P F Tinmore said:


> indent]
> 
> 
> 
> ...





P F Tinmore said:


> No change into the institutions or government of the said territory,


*(COMMENT*)

In Aug 1988, all formal institutions of government abandon the West Bank.  Installing any form of government would not represent a change to an existing form of government.



P F Tinmore said:


> No change by any agreement concluded between the authorities of the occupied territories and the Occupying Power,


*(COMMENT*)

There was no agreement between any authorities until 1993.  Palestinian Arabs of the West Bank



P F Tinmore said:


> No change by any annexation by the latter of the whole or part of the occupied territory.


*(COMMENT*)

You cannot change what is NOT there, to begin with.

It is also important to remember that as early as 1923 the Arab Palestinians rejected a third offer of help in the establishment self-governing institutions through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government.  This refusal to participate was a decision that not only remained in place through the entire Mandate Period but extended well into the 1990s.



			
				In January 1948 said:
			
		

> “ARAB HIGHER COMMITTEE IS DETERMINED PERSIST IN REJECTION PARTITION AND IN REFUSAL RECOGNIZE UNO RESOLUTION THIS RESPECT AND ANYTHING DERIVING THEREFROM. FOR THESE REASONS IT IS UNABLE ACCEPT INVITATION”



There were not governing institutions in place → NOT because it was prevented → but simply because the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank rejected it.



P F Tinmore said:


> Of course this applies to the 1948 occupied territory and the 1967 occupied territory.


*(COMMENT*)

In 1948, the Mandate ended and the system of government departed.  The trusteeship did not object to the new body of self-governing institutions (ie. the State of Israel) established under the right of self-determination.

In 1967, the Occupation of the West Bank was a result of victorious activity while in pursuit of retreating Arab Legion Forces.  Annexation did not occur until the Sovereignty "cut all ties" with the West Bank.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

We are debating in circles. “Palestine” is a backward terror regime(s) and they need to be eliminated and the people who do want peace need to move to Egypt and Jordan.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 13, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  ForeverYoung436, K9Buck, et al,

Huge Mistake*!*



K9Buck said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

This decision would represent a commitment on revenue of an unprescidentedand inestimatelable proportions.  There are just an insanely number of latent pitfalls in the administration.  And everthing becomes Israels responsibility if Annexed.

If annexed, that effectively is a self-imposed requirement to drop all impositions posed by border controls.  The new citizens, because they are citizens, are free to roam anywhere.  That includes the terrorists.

The Israelis cannot maintain the border controls because that would be TRULY a case of apartheid.



			
				International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights said:
			
		

> _*Article 9*_
> 
> 1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law.
> 
> ...



Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 13, 2019)

RE: Annexing West Bank
⁜→ AzogtheDefiler, et al,

Morally, you cannot simply transfer the burden away _(in addition to it being totally illegal)_.



AzogtheDefiler said:


> We are debating in circles. “Palestine” is a backward terror regime(s) and they need to be eliminated and the people who do want peace need to move to Egypt and Jordan.


*(COMMENT)*

It is Israel's problem.  And the Israelis have to solve it.  It is possible and I have suggested it many times.  But the Israelis must really want to change the face of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ AzogtheDefiler, et al,
> 
> Morally, you cannot simply transfer the burden away _(in addition to it being totally illegal)_.
> ...



How can they solve it? How would you solve it? I know how I would and it would be ugly


----------



## José (Apr 13, 2019)

Go ahead... carpet bomb the West Bank, Gaza...

Do it and watch the rest of the world finish the job Hitler started...


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 13, 2019)

n RE: Annexing West Bank
⁜→ AzogtheDefiler, et al,

As the Secretary-General said, some number of year ago (≈ 2013) → No Policy to Fight Terrorism Can Succeed without Addressing Conditions Promoting Its Spread.

No matter what Israel does:

•  Do nothing.
•  Nation Build (doing something).
•  Create the new and necarry commercial and economic trading superstructure. (doing it right).​
A necessary start is to kick-off one, then another and then another, see Post #148 of this Thread until the entire face of West Bank has changed (assuming that our friend "P F Tinmore does not find this change in → contrivention with International Law. 



AzogtheDefiler said:


> How can they solve it? How would you solve it? I know how I would and it would be ugly


*(COMMENT)*

Programs (ex Post #148 _supra_) like this, we all know, will cost big bags of money (BBM).  If Israel just unilaterally annexes the whole seen, the consequences are going to cause pain and BBM.  If Israel simply builds infrastructure, it is going to have to maintain the new infrastructure and the border _status quo_.  This too will mean BBM. 

But if we make a nothing place like al-Ayzariyah (WB) and turn it into a huge regional central Exchange for the B2B Centers and Partnerships it will be like a putting a match to kindling. 

Just one example and why,
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 13, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ AzogtheDefiler, et al,
> 
> Morally, you cannot simply transfer the burden away _(in addition to it being totally illegal)_.
> ...


Indeed, Israel has created quite a problem for itself.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Annexing West Bank
> ...


Israel is doing fine, but the Palestinians have created apparently insurmountable problems for themselves by focusing all their energies on hostility toward Israel and now the only solutions to the problems the Palestinians have created for themselves involved working with Israel which they are simply not capable of doing.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 13, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> n RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ AzogtheDefiler, et al,
> 
> As the Secretary-General said, some number of year ago (≈ 2013) → No Policy to Fight Terrorism Can Succeed without Addressing Conditions Promoting Its Spread.
> ...


Jerusalem was the religious, economic, and cultural center if the West Bank.

Virtually all cities and villages have lost some or all of their land to Area C. For example: Bethlehem has lost all but 18% of its land. Where is the space for residential, industrial, and agricultural zones?

Trump's "deal of the century."

The Palestinians will live in bantustans cut off from the resources needed to develop an economy.
All travel, trade, and tourism would have to pass through Israel.
All imports and exports would have to pass through Israel.
Israeli factories will be placed along the wall. Palestinians who pass background checks can get permits to get low level employment. These factories would not be "in Palestine" so they would not be subject to Palestinian laws, unions, or taxes.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Again, how would you solve this? You complain and never provide a solution.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



They are run by a terror regime. Par for the course for majority Muslim nations.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Annexing West Bank
> ...



LOL they are in power. Only problem is yours.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Apr 13, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> ILOVEISRAEL said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Referring to the areas that were OFFICIALLY recognized as being part of Egypt and Jordan?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

IDC what is and is not recognized. Might makes right these days. If the Muslims want Jerusalem back have them try and take it. Diplomacy is lost on them.


----------



## Ropey (Apr 13, 2019)

And the Bnei Manasseh are back ...






Tribe of Manasseh

Lost no more...


...and Golan is only part of their home.


----------



## Ropey (Apr 13, 2019)

_Mənaššé_, "who makes to forget....

MIGA

Their return is the beginning of remembrance.

And yes, many of the tribe of Dan are black for Jacob spread his seed well.


----------



## Ropey (Apr 13, 2019)




----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> 1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
> 
> 2) *How are the Palestinians going to live when they are stuck in bantustans cut off from the required resources to develop an economy?*



I think that is a legitimate point.

Area C is 60% of the West Bank.  Under Oslo it was put under Israeli *Administration*. While the peace process was worked through.  

So question one (RoccoR ) is that the same thing as becominng sovereign Israeli territory or was the intention that the future of Area C as well as A and B be determined through negotiations?  Suddenly it seems to have become rightfully part of Israel being “reclaimed” rather than “annexed” and changing terminology designed to make it rightful.  Has Netanyahu done anything at all towards the realization of a two state solution or have his actions been designed to block and provoke towards the goal of making it an impossibility?  There has been plenty of blame levied on the Palestinians actions....but what about Israel’s own action under their increasingly rightwing government?  They seem to get a free pass.

Question two (Shusha maybe this addresses your post?)...a two state solution.  I no longer believe that is possible.  Area C represents 60% of the West Bank.  It contains most of the resources and agricultural areas.  Arabs are largely prohibited from building there.  Economically and agriculturally it is important to any potential state.


West Bank and Gaza: Area C and the Future of the Palestinian Economy - World Bank study (2 October 2013)
_*Restrictions on economic activity in Area C of the West Bank have been particularly detrimental to the Palestinian economy*. Area C constitutes about 61 percent of the West Bank territory and was defined under the Oslo Peace Accords as the area that would be gradually transferred to the Palestinian Authority within a period of 5 years, except for the parts to be agreed upon within the final settlement agreement.' The gradual transfer has not yet taken place and, in the meantime, access to this area for most kinds of economic activity has been severely limited. Yet, the potential contribution of Area C to the Palestinian economy is large. Area C is richly endowed with natural resources and it is contiguous, whereas Areas A and B are smaller territorial islands. The manner in which Area C is currently administered virtually precludes Palestinian businesses from investing there._​

Under the Oslo agreements Area C was to have been given to the Palestinians with milestones towards peace and negotiations for certain areas.  What continual settlement expansion and building over many years has done is made it it increasingly impossible.

That leaves Area A and Area B.  
 

I am curious as to how a viable Palestinian state can occur that doesn’t resemble resource poor “Bantustans” dependent on Israel for agriculture, water and power.

I am curious as to how anyone can claim that keeping Area C and it’s access to the resources of the Dead Sea and agricultural lands has not been Israel’s intention for some time.  It would enlightening to actually discuss Israel’s policies without ... but but but the Palestinians.  We already know the Palestinian have made a tradition of repeatedly shooting themselves in the foot.


----------



## Ropey (Apr 13, 2019)

Palestine found!


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote
> 
> You seem to be supporting a two-state solution here.   So how is creating a border between those two, eventual, states problematic.  Isn't it a step in the RIGHT direction?



It rather depends on what that border looks like....if it leaves hundreds of isolated discontinuous Palestinian pockets....what is the point?

I no longer believe a two state solution is even possible, due  to Israeli policies over the years and the inability of the Palestinians to coalesce behind a single national goal.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > n RE: Annexing West Bank
> ...


The only real problem the Palestinians have is that they are cut off from reality.  The slim possibility there could ever be a Palestinian state ended with the second intifada, and now because of their refusal to negotiate realistically, they no longer have any voice in what happens to area C.  Their continued violence and refusal to negotiate realistically, has so eroded Israeli support for the support of a two state solution that now the chief proponent of two states, the Labor Party, is on the verge of disappearing.  The only way the Palestinians can improve their quality of life and the futures of their children is to accept this reality they have created and learn to live peacefully within the framework laid out by Israel.  What's past is past and will never come again.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Ropey said:


> Palestine found!
> 
> View attachment 255687



LOL

Awesome


----------



## Hollie (Apr 13, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > n RE: Annexing West Bank
> ...




Indeed, you are, as usual, looking for excuses with which to sidestep Arab-Moslem ineptitude and incompetence.

Arab-Moslem “bantustans” as you incompetently attempt to describe them, would be a function of Arab-Moslem willingness toward retrogression.

When Israel unilaterally left Gaza to full Arab-Moslem control, investors (including Jewish ones) pledged to transition the successful businesses left behind to help jumpstart the Gazan economy as well as create new businesses, even resorts. Instead, Islamism trumped opportunity, Hamas theocracy squashed democracy; and Gaza, which could have shown the Arab-Moslem potential to create a peaceful state and economy if Israel would retreat from occupied land, instead became just another armed islamic terrorist camp espousing the elimination of Israel and attacking with thousands of rockets year after year.

It was quite clear that when given the opportunity to build a functioning, stable government that could have promoted a functioning, stable economy, the usual illness of islamic ideology that poisons so much of the islamic Middle East was the disease that Hamas has always had.  


There are two extremes in the response to terrorism: Capitulation or Conquest.

Machiavelli wrote in The Prince, _"Since love and fear can hardly coexist together, if we must choose between them, it is far safer to be feared than loved."_

A more relevant question is: “what is the appropriate response to Islamic terrorism”?
What would keep Islamic terrorists from murdering civilians and instead adopt "moral standards" and peacefully resolve differences?

Is this even possible with Islamic terrorists? The obvious answer that Islamic terrorists have delivered is: No.  

Hamas used “democratic elections” as a sheep pelt, not only for those seeking a greater role for Islam and Islamic terrorism in governance but for a gretaer piece of the UNRWA welfare fraud as well. They have done nothing to promote Gaza as an entity capable of drawing investors to build an economy. Instead, Hamas has jumped into bed with the Iranian Mullocrats for no other purpose than to continue their war against Israel.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



I agree up to a point, and that point is Israeli political right has also engineered a situation that contributes the the demise of a two state solution.

Agree that the Palestinians must accept a new reality.  So must the Israeli’s.  The Palestinians are going to conveniently go away and the status quo is both expensive to maintain and unsupportable long term in terms of human rights.  Creating a multi tiered system of rights, freedoms and citizenship is not very sustainable for peace.   I think Israel’s new National Law is problematic as well.

Probably some form of federation is what is needed


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Some form of relocation...50+ mostly Islamic countries only one Jewish one.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 13, 2019)

RE: Annexing West Bank
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

You just enamored with this term "bantustan."



 ​


P F Tinmore said:


> The Palestinians will live in bantustans cut off from the resources needed to develop an economy.


*(COMMENT)*

Before you add this word to your vocabulary, I think you first need to know what is means and how to apply it. 

A territory set was aside for every country grown out of the Mandates in the aftermath of WWI and breakup of the Ottoman Empire.   More than a dozen countries emerged out of the breakup of the former Soviet Union.  And in the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, only Serbia survived and the new countries of Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro, Macedonia and most recently Kosovo.    The Arab Palestinians should not feel singled out, or that the evolution of the outcome was any different than what happened before the Class A Mandates and what was to come after the time of the Class A Mandates.   

The Arab Palestinians are not now in any particular set aside territory as they had rejected every single overture or offer made sign early 1920's.   Where as the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and the early Israel were all offered and established on set aside territories.  The Arab Palestinians could not have botched their independence up so bad if it were done the Lord of the Underworld.

So I repeat, the Arab Palestinians declined in the effort to establish for them any semblance of functioning self-government.  So they can not claim to be in a "Bantu." 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Worrying that the two state delusion may not be possible is like worrying that the dinosaurs may become extinct.  The reality is that the Palestians are free to govern themselves in area A and B and carrying out 95% of the functions of a sovereign state, but there is no political entity among the Palestinians that can credibly offer peace to Israel, so there can not be a Palestinian state and Israeli security forces will continue to operate throughout Judea and Samaria.  

The Palestinians destroyed the confidence of Israelis in a peaceful two state solution with the second intifada, although it took a few years before some Israelis realized it, and today, there is no right or left on this issue - the left destroyed itself by hanging on  to the two state delusion long after most Israelis realized it was not possible - and today few in Israel object in principle to annexing the Israeli settlements in Judea and Samaria but while some have confidence to do it right away, others are anxious about what the result will be.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > 1) It is illegal to annex occupied territory.
> ...




I'm not buying this. There are 32 states with territories smaller than the "West Bank". Many with absolutely no agricultural land and no natural resources.  Not all economies are based in agriculture. 

If we are arguing contiguity, it is still possible. And I would argue for Israel ensuring that whatever border Israel sets should ensure a contiguous Arab Palestine.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


In fact if the money and diplomatic support were available, large numbers of Palestinians would leave today.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Bingo. Many people immigrate to other countries when they are unhappy. Why can’t the “Palestinians”?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 13, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> You just enamored with this term "bantustan."
> ...





RoccoR said:


> You just enamored with this term "bantustan."


Would you prefer that I use the term reservations?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 13, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> You just enamored with this term "bantustan."
> ...





RoccoR said:


> So I repeat, the Arab Palestinians declined in the effort to establish for them any semblance of functioning self-government.


Israeli bullshit talking point.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Why can’t the Jews?

To forceably expel people from their homeland is wrong whether Jews or Palestinians.  Ask the Armenians and Rohinga how great it is.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Would they if diplomatic opportunities and economic support were instead used to improve the local economies?  The embargo ended?

What “large numbers” want to leave?

What people don’t seem capable of understanding is that just because a country is Islamic it is culturally similar.

America and Russia are Christian majority, as is Germany and Greece.  I guess they are all the same huh?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


No one is talking about forcibly expelling the Palestinians, but only of providing them with the opportunity to leave.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



True.  Not all economies are based on having agricultural land but having some land and resources is pretty damn important for viability.  Why should Israel take it all?

If a contiguous border is possible ... already they have extreme difficulty accessing different parts of their farms or between home and work because it is so chopped up.

I think, and this is my opinion only, that if Israel isn’t careful it WILL look like Bantustans with Palestinians relegated to small resource poor enclaves.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


I guess that depends on what “providing them an an opportunity” means.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



Because Jews aren’t the ones complaining. And they DID leave. Like my parents left the old Soviet Union. IDC about the Armenians we are discussing “Palestinians” and their constant whining. If you don’t like it then leave!


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


It wasn’t just the Palestinians that destroyed confidence in a two state solution.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



US policy = don’t negotiate with Terrorists. “Palestine” is run by Terrorists. What’s good for the US is good for Israel.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


*Percentage of those wishing to emigrate stands at 41% in the Gaza Strip and 24% in the West Bank.*
*
Palestinian Public Opinion Poll No-58 | PCPSR*


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ AzogtheDefiler, et al,
> 
> Morally, you cannot simply transfer the burden away _(in addition to it being totally illegal)_.
> ...


That is an interesting statement, what do you mean by it?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Meaning other Muslim countries giving them a road map. Problem is other Muslim countries don’t want them either.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Why would the world want another mostly Islamic country? You cannot name one that shares Western values of humanity that is mostly Muslim? Please explain that one.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Gaza is being destroyed between Israel’s embargo and Hamas’ malfeasance, the economy is a wreck.  I think they would not want to leAve if they had a better future.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


No, it was entirely the Palestinians.  In the midst of negotiations, they launched the second intifada and since they have again and again refused to negotiate with Israel.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Why would I care?  I don’t much like any strongly religious countries.  The more fundamentalist the worse it is for women, human rights, religious freedoms.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Life was rough for Jews in the old Soviet Union. They didn’t commit acts of terror and whine. They either assimilated or left. Same true for many Irish, Italians, Asians, etc. Why is immigration not the answer?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



What is good for Israel is not necessarily good for us.  We are two different countries with different priorities.  People seem to forget that.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


You forget the never ending settlement construction.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



You just made my point. So it’s best to not have a two state solution. Thank you. It’s best to displace most of the “Palestinians” and have Israel annex all of the West Bank and Gaza for itself.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Israel has offered to lift the blockade if Hamas disarms, so the Palestinians have created their own problems.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



We are both Republics with strong human rights laws and ideals. We are allies. Israel is the only country in the ME that actually holds elections. Safest place for a Muslim woman in the ME is in Israel. Free press, free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of sexual preference, etc. We share those values with Israel. No Muslim country does. Not one. Yet you and people like you just gloss over it. Why?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Israel is a strongly religious country.  Displace no one.  Once you go down that road you are no different than other monsters.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



Hamas the internationally recognized terror group, whose charter calls for the destruction of Israel and all Jews? That Hamas? LOL

Yeah they are real solid citizens.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 13, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Immigration is fine.  When it is voluntary.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Yes and their politeness is costing them. Israel is most kind and tolerant. If Mexico treated the US how the “Palestinians” treat Israel we would have eviscerated Mexico by now. Most tolerant are my people and to their own detriment IMO.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Sounds like it would be for 40% or so? If they leave many would follow. My parents didn’t necessarily want to leave but life was very difficult so they took a gamble. They didn’t ask for handouts and whine like the “Palestinians” do.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Israel is probably no more religious than  the US but is clearly more religious than some European countries.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 13, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Hamas was created by the Palestinian people and it is up to them to take back control of Gaza if they want the benefits of peace.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> True.  Not all economies are based on having agricultural land but having some land and resources is pretty damn important for viability.


32 countries with territory smaller than the West Bank.  



> Why should Israel take it all?


Where have I ever suggested Israel take it all?

If a contiguous border is possible ... already they have extreme difficulty accessing different parts of their farms or between home and work because it is so chopped up. [/quote]
Even if that's true, and I'm not at all convinced.  Again.  Normalization and a proper contiguous border between two states will fix that.  So what's the problem?



> I think, and this is my opinion only, that if Israel isn’t careful it WILL look like Bantustans with Palestinians relegated to small resource poor enclaves.


Of course, everyone is going to call it Bantustans, no matter how ridiculous that claim is.  Because ... Israel.

But here's the thing.  Israel can realistically only do one of two things with respect to Arab Palestinian sovereignty.  1.  Abandon territory to Arab Palestinian self-determination or 2.  Assert Israeli sovereignty over 4 million hostile Arab Palestinians.  (Actually there is a third option here, but it unconscionable.)

The first creates a significant security problem.  The second creates a significant security problem AND ends Jewish self-determination.  There is no decision as to which of the options Israel has to choose.  

The only question is how much territory to abandon.  My answer is that you abandon the least possible amount of territory while incorporating the absolute fewest numbers of hostile Arab Palestinians as Israeli citizens, while protecting every single Israeli citizen. Then you just contain the problem.  Its the only reasonable option.  

Eventually, as with Gaza, they will implode by their own failures.  Is it pretty?  Not at all.  Is it Israel's responsibility?  Not in the slightest.  You can't force a people supposedly seeking self-determination to act responsibly toward that goal.  Clearly.  Arabs Palestinians have been failing for 100 years.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Gaza is being destroyed between Israel’s embargo and Hamas’ malfeasance, the economy is a wreck.  I think they would not want to leAve if they had a better future.



And how do they get a better future?  What do they need to do to achieve a better future?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 13, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



I agree.  

Coyote is trying to argue that if wife would just make dinner the right way, husband would stop beating her.  Nope.  Husband needs to stop beating her.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> You forget the never ending settlement construction.



The presence of Jews in territory is only an impediment to peace and a two state solution if you reject the idea of Jews being present in an eventual Palestine.  Sounds like apartheid to me.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 13, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Displace no one.  Once you go down that road you are no different than other monsters.



Good.  So we can get rid of this ridiculous notion that the "settlements" will be dismantled, right?  

That leaves Arab Palestine with the choice to either abandon territory (because ... Jooooos live there).  Or to accept Jews into their territory.

Do you see a problem with requiring this choice of the Arabs?


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 14, 2019)

RE: Annexing West Bank
⁜→ Coyote, et al,

"There are no secrets to success. 
It is the result of preparation, hard work, and learning from failure." 
_Colin Powell_​Read more at: Search Results

Right now, the face or → how we see and interpret the cultural image of the Arab Palestinian _(of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip)_ is characterized _(nation-state personality)_ as a belligerent Arab Subculture with a very deep propensity for violence. Many people, just on hearing the name "Palestinian" are struck by an uneasiness.  For many people conjures a mental picture.  In your computer, *query the name "Palestinian"* and ask for images.

Query for Images - down to *"Palestinian Terrorist"* and you will see:

◈   *Palestinian Terrorist*  •​
◈   *HAMAS*  •​
◈  *FATAH*  •​


Coyote said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > *(COMMENT)*
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Everyone understands that to change the image of the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip; requires a sincere (and maybe a very expensive) effort from both Israel and the Palestinians.  And being that the Israelis are much higher on the scale for Human Development, initially _(at least - probably a little longer)_ they will have to commit to the Lions share of the effort (*Posting #148*). 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 14, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> "There are no secrets to success.
> ...


Your usual smear piece.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 14, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Annexing West Bank
> ...



Your hurt feelings regarding Israel being higher on the human development index vs. Arabs-Moslems in the disputed territories is not a smear. Don’t let your hurt feelings get in the way of cutting and pasting your usual slogans.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

I have Asked Tinmore for his solution like 10x and he always dodges. And he will again. He just likes to complain.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 14, 2019)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


With what Israel has stolen and mooched, Haiti would be a prosperous country.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 14, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> I have Asked Tinmore for his solution like 10x and he always dodges. And he will again. He just likes to complain.


The United Nations and Decolonization - Declaration


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > I have Asked Tinmore for his solution like 10x and he always dodges. And he will again. He just likes to complain.
> ...



I want Your opinion not a link. Don’t be a coward. Man up. Come on. I have Shared mine.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 14, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


I agree with that.

What would be your solution?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Displace no one.  Once you go down that road you are no different than other monsters.
> ...


Here is the thing Shusha.  We both strongly disagree on settlements and their impact on the peace process and we have gone down that road many times so I doubt we will change each others minds.

No...I do not think existing ones should be dismantled.   And you forget...Jews will also have to accept Moooooslims living amongst them as well.  How many Arab settlements are there in Area C?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Who says they are?  Hamas is part of the problem.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Gaza is being destroyed between Israel’s embargo and Hamas’ malfeasance, the economy is a wreck.  I think they would not want to leAve if they had a better future.
> ...


It is complex but likely you and I see it the same way.  They need to hold elections, choose new leadership, and cease the violence.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> "There are no secrets to success.
> ...


Well said...and I agree.  I noticed that when I was seatching for positive articles on Palestinians for my thread.  They are out there, and are fascinating and surprisong but they dont recieve anywhere near the visibility of the negative ones.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



When you answer me in your own words I will do The same.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



I would Say 70% of the problem. You and I both know that only war will settle this.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Conquest is not theft. So you believe the Colonists
Stole the US? Only solution is war and winner take all IMO.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Here is the thing Shusha.  We both strongly disagree on settlements and their impact on the peace process and we have gone down that road many times so I doubt we will change each others minds.
> 
> No...I do not think existing ones should be dismantled.   And you forget...Jews will also have to accept Moooooslims living amongst them as well.  How many Arab settlements are there in Area C?



Depends on where you get your stats, and how you count them, but, in all of Area C?  About 250 Arab settlements.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 14, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



More of your usual whining. As usual, your comments are absent any specifics. Provide specifics regarding what you claim Israel has “mooched or stolen”. I expect your usual denial and deflection... or a PressTV YouTube video, but here’s your chance.

The facts remain that the Arabs-Moslems in the disputed territories have been the beneficiaries of billions of dollars in welfare payments and have not been able to cobble together either a working government or a viable civil society.

While the primary islamic terrorist organizations in Gaza and Fatah in the West Bank have accumulated incredible wealth, you folks have accomplished little more than breeding generation after generation of self-hating Cultists with an insensate death wish.

Have you ever thought about why it is that societies such as Israel, Hong Kong, South Korea, Vietnam and others have flourished while so much of the Islamic Middle East languishes in the malaise of poverty, ignorance, early death, and of course, leadership toward those goals?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> No...I do not think existing ones should be dismantled.



Right.  We agree.  So, they will end up being under Israeli control, or maybe, eventually if the Arab Palestinians get their shit together, under Palestinian control.  We agree that either of these scenarios are fine, right?  Its okay for Jews to live in Palestine, just like its okay for Arabs to live in Israel, right?

The problem, as I see it, is the safety of both the Arabs in Israel and the Jews in Palestine.  I don't believe that the Arab Palestinians are even close to wanting equality and safety for Jews, let alone being committed enough to achieve it.  BUT I believe Israel is perfectly capable of ensuring safety and full equality for their Arabs.  

It just makes so much more sense for Israel to just exert full sovereignty over the Jewish "settlements" and some of the Arab ones.  Keeping in mind, I'm arguing for Palestine to be left with a contiguous area.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> It is complex but likely you and I see it the same way.  They need to hold elections, choose new leadership, and cease the violence.



Israel can't do anything about any of these things.  The Arab Palestinians have to.  And that was my point.  Everyone keeps talking about how Israel must make peace.  She can't.  Not until Palestinians have at least done the three things listed above.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 14, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > I have Asked Tinmore for his solution like 10x and he always dodges. And he will again. He just likes to complain.
> ...



Okay, so you "believe" in this.  I get it.  The problem is that it doesn't give any specifics about what should be done practically.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



Bingo!


----------



## Shusha (Apr 14, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Well, I KNOW what Tinmore wants to happen, practically.  He wants the "right" of return to be granted to (only) Arab Palestinians and all their descendants and to flood Israel with said return.  He then wants elections to be held with that new population.  He expects it would result in an Arab majority and thus another Arab nation.  

Thus when he claims to believe in the UN Declaration on Granting Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples including this statement:

_2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development._

he means all peoples except the Jewish peoples.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 14, 2019)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



Late edit: in furtherance of the post by Shusha, above, a show of hands please. Who expects that the “Pal’istanians” would be willing and able to abide by the UN declaration?

While I prefer that PF Tinmore not feel the need to dump YouTube videos into the thread, there are some obvious problems with implementation of the goals in the UN declaration.

“_Conscious of the need for the creation of conditions of stability and well-being and peaceful and friendly relations based on respect for the principles of equal rights and self-determination of all peoples, and of universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion,”_

With regard to the section above, can anyone identify an Islamic majority nation on the planet where those values as noted are practiced?

Anybody?

Principles of equal rights, respect for rule of law and observance of human rights are not the principles of Islamist sharia.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Shusha said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Thank you. So he wants something that will never happen.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

I will add that every majority Muslim nation is a humanitarian nightmare. We don’t want anymore. Although UK and France seem to be moving that way.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 14, 2019)

RE: Palestine Today
⁜→ Coyote, et al,

You would have thought I would have bookmarked this by now...



Coyote said:


> Who says they are?


*(COMMENT)*

Although a lower Court Ruled that HAMAS was erroneously placed on the Europen Union List as a Terrorist Organisation, earlier last month the JUDGMENT OF THE GENERAL COURT (First Chamber, Extended Composition) 6 March 2019, In Case T‑289/15, dismissed the HAMAS complaint the the EU placed them on the Terrorist List.



Coyote said:


> Hamas is part of the problem.


*(COMMENT)*

HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement) is certainly part of the problem, but also damn near every organization involved, and some not involved, had its part to play.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Saying Hamas is the problem is the same as saying the Palestinians are the problem.  Consistently, Hamas has the support of about 50% of the Palestinians.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 14, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> I will add that every majority Muslim nation is a humanitarian nightmare. We don’t want anymore. Although UK and France seem to be moving that way.



And Sweden, Belgium, Holland, etc.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Palestine Today
> ⁜→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> You would have thought I would have bookmarked this by now...
> ...


That is why I said "who says they are" (solid citizens)...


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 14, 2019)

Hollie said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



That is precisely why I don't understand how the Muslims became the darlings of liberals.  Muslims seem to go against everything liberals believe in, such as equal rights for all, including women and gay ppl.  Yet liberals love them and always champion their cause.  An oxymoron.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



They aren't the darlings of all liberals, at least those still capable of critical thinking.  But they became a 'protected class' of much/most of the liberal progressive movement for no other reason than they oppose Israel, as do most progressives, and modern American conservatives oppose much of what Islam preaches and practices and thinks we should protect ourselves against the intentions of Islamic radicals and terrorists.  And apparently whatever conservatives believe must by default be opposed by the liberal progressive movement.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Maybe, becsuse like Jews and Christians they arent all the same.  Why does the right feel it is so importent to demonize them?

Let me point out fundamentalist sects, Christian, Muslim, Hindu and even Jews, suck for women and rights.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Conservatives demonize Islam plain and simple lumping all in one stereotype.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Do you honestly believe that?   How many of us even on this forum do that?   I don't lump you in with the batshit crazy, looney tune component of progressivism.  Why would I lump all of Islam in with the terrorist, subversive element of it?  Why would anybody?

Whenever we go to automatic guilt by association, we become part of the problem and join the ranks of the intolerant and unjust that are the problem.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Apr 14, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


There are two reasons.  First, liberals are people who just can't bear to hear stories that don't have happy endings.  Two states for two peoples living side by side in peace is a happy ending, so liberal will cherry pick facts to try to give the story that happy ending.  Second, liberals are essentially racists.  They don't believe Arabs can be held to the same standards of conduct westerners are held to.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



If the shoe fits...


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



They share their hatred of Jews equally


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



I am a Jew and my wife has the same rights as I do...more if you ask her. Plus we can leave the religion at any time with zero repercussions. Don’t conflate Judaism with Islam. Ever.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Do you blame them? Honestly. You cannot name one mostly Muslim country that is not a humanitarian  nightmare. Bill Maher is a Liberal. And he agrees as well. Google it.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 14, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



Or the vast majority of Christians for that matter.  And I don't recall any Hindu group EVER referring to the USA as the 'great satan' and plotting to destroy as many of us as possible, all of us if they could.  And just as Christian and Jews profess their faith voluntarily and observe it voluntarily however unorthodox or traditional as they be, so do Hindus.  Coincidentally, Hindu 'scriptures' pronounce men and women to be equals.

All the primary religions are nowhere near as restrictive and violent/punishing as is much of Islam.  And none of them require anything remotely close to Sharia Law.

To say that all or even most Muslims are violent, hateful, terrorist, or dangerous is foolish.  But to deny that more than a few of them are all of that and worse is much more foolish.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


 Exactly


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I don’t think you know much about Hinduism  if you think they are no where near as restrictive, violent or punishing as Islam.  For Christianity it is mostly historic, but it was there.  In Islam, like Christianity conversion is not supposed to be by force and like Christianity it often was.   I also question what you think Sharia is?  For most Muslims it is Halal, prayer, charity, not the criminal code.  How Sharia is observed differs widely across cultures.  Hindu women are certainly not equal, in many parts of India they must still cover their heads.  Child marriages are endemic (iIndia and Nepal have amongst the highest rates) and widows are treated abysmally.  The British banned the barbaric practice of Suti thigh it still occasionally occurs, where the widow is burned on the funeral pyre of her husband.  Of course if the wife dies first there was no expectation that the man would join her. Woman have been disfigured by acid for inappropriate relations, ruining the families honor, not producing a boy child, but no one seems to notice.  The caste system is alive and well keeping millions of people stuck in perpetual poverty at the mercy of higher caste cruelties.  High caste men feel it is their right to rape low caste women who are then “ruined” for marriage.  That is Hinduism along with the pageantry and exotic gods.

Hinduism states men and women are equal?  Oddly, so does Islam.

Equality of Men and Women in Submission (Islam)

So why the hell is it that with these religions and Christianity and Judaism in their conservative sects, women are most decidedly not equal?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



On the other hand, a Hasidic Jewish woman follows many of the same social strictures as a conservative Muslim woman.  She must pray seoerateky, cover her limbs and hair, ride in th3 back of the bus, submit to the man, and if she were to leave or marry outside her faith she would be caste out of her community.  

There is a lot of variety within a faith that you ignore.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



You are right and by far a better person than I at the moment.  I am fed up.


----------



## Slyhunter (Apr 14, 2019)

Time for Israel to remove the kid gloves and get dirty.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > No...I do not think existing ones should be dismantled.
> ...



I largely agree with all your points except that while Israel is *capable* of ensuring safety and full equality for their Arabs I question whether they actually will given the current politics.

So while annexation might end up being for the best a lot depends on how it is handled.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > It is complex but likely you and I see it the same way.  They need to hold elections, choose new leadership, and cease the violence.
> ...



Yes.  Israel can do something.  They can cease the provocative settlement building, though in reality that horse is long gone.  But Israel has some responsibility there as well.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 14, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Here is the thing Shusha.  We both strongly disagree on settlements and their impact on the peace process and we have gone down that road many times so I doubt we will change each others minds.
> ...


Settlements or previously existing villages?  Can you provide a link?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Define the difference between a settlement and a previously existing village. Objectively.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



In other words, there would be peace if Israel just deliberately and indefinitely held territory free of Jews and Israelis in case another Arab state arises, but Israel is not permitted to declare where that territory is?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



My suggestion for handling it, and I'm sure Israel is in the same page, is to give citizenship to all Palestinians who choose to remain. Seems the only right way to do things. It's not going to eliminate discrimination. But it will give them equality.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 14, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  Coyote, et al,

Remembering that both Judaism and Christianity have their roots as Abrahmic in common.  Thus much of the basic foundations are similar.



Coyote said:


> So why the hell is it that with these religions and Christianity and Judaism in their conservative sects, women are most decidedly not equal?


*(COMMENT)*

Liberation theology leads to Feminist theologians start changing biblical traditions that affect all three Abrahamic Religions.  It not only had an impact on religious matters but other sciences as well,  Both Hypatia of Alexandria and Emilie du Chatelet → 13th centuries later, fell in against educated females with an opinion and a voice.

It is my opinion that women in the 20th Century, are just coming of age.   From the time of Marie Curie, to the present day Michelle Haupt has really come of age in the last two centuries in science and well as the Ordination of women deacons, priests and bishops are relatively new in the history of humanity.

The similarities in the three Abrahamic Religions are advancing with Islam lagging far, far, behind.  And this lag is representative of the kind and type of critical thinking that creates barriers in political and philosophical understanding (including the recognition of women)  Generally speaking, the closer any particular sect is to fundamentalism or application of following the 6th Century Islam, the more likely the women are relegated to non-leadership roles. 

Just my thought as a layman on the subject. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



Coyote enough of this BS. There are 16 mil Jews. There are 1.8bn Muslims if only 1% is radical and Pew says its closer to 50%, but if only 1% then there are 18 million radicals. Even Bill Liberal Maher sees this. You’re either trolling or not opening your eyes. When have Hindus or Jews committed an act of Terror in the US? And you have yet to name one mostly Islamic country that is not a humanitarian nightmare.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



When was the last Hasidic Jewish bombing in the US? Every Mostly Muslim nation is a nightmare for women, gays and apostates. Not so in Israel. Keep trying.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 14, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


----------



## Ropey (Apr 14, 2019)

Tehillim - Psalms


----------



## Ropey (Apr 14, 2019)




----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 14, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


They did, but back then conquest was not illegal. There was no international law. Conquest was illegal when Israel conquered Palestine.

Before 1948 the colonies were funded by foreign money. Israel conquered a country with a fully functioning economy. Israel stole the entire country including robbing the banks. Since then, Israel continues to live off of foreign money.


----------



## Andylusion (Apr 15, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?



Yes absolutely.  Sooner the better.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 15, 2019)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Actually it is quite specific as to what should be done.

1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation.

2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence.

4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.

5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.

6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

7. All States shall observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of all States, and respect for the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity.​


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



There was no international law? 
Try lesser lies, maybe You'll have one foot left to stand on.

Cannot conquer what is rightfully Your, only liberate it.
Especially cannot conquer an non-existent country
The economy was wholly a fruit of the Zionist enterprise
The banks as well belonged to them.
No foreign aid to Israel exceeds 10% of its economy, while aid to Your jihadi brides exceeds the budget to rebuild the whole of Europe once again.

Your Jihadi impotents who's only innovation is children's suicide bomb vests,
are slime of the earth and the biggest welfare frauds in history.


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



To be "decolonized" the Jihadi frauds have to at least learn how to pronounce the name of the land.
Not to mention stop self identifying as the foreign invaders of the Caliphate.

Come back when You have that fixed.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 15, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Intermarriage is forbidden to both ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic women AND men.  A Hasidic man who marries outside the faith would likely also be cast out of his community.  Also, I have known men who left their Hasidic community because the laws and rules were too restrictive and strict for them.  That is the subject of Potok's novels "The Chosen" and "My Name Is Asher Lev", which were based on his own life experiences.  When my father cut off his Peyot (very long sideburns) as a child, he was beaten by his parents.  So it's not a gender issue.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



What country did Israel conquer?

Link?

What entire country did Israel steal?

Link?

Do you expect such nonsensical, emotional outbursts to be taken seriously?

Link?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 15, 2019)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


A million Palestinian citizens living in Palestine with no need for foreign aid. And Israeli bullshit says there was no Palestine.


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Did You lose the ability to compose coherent sentences
after spending time with Your Jihadi welfare frauds?

Relax, and no need for rage tantrums, we're only laughing at You.
I'm sure in another 100 years Your frauds might eventually learn to pronounce the name of the countries they squatter, who knows Arabs might eventually even learn to pronounce the word "Palestine".


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 15, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,

This list comes from the application of *General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960* pertaining to Declaration on the *Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples*.  


*• Committee of 24 (Special Committee on Decolonization) •*​

The Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (also known as the Special Committee on decolonization or C-24), the United Nations entity exclusively devoted to the issue of decolonization, was established in 1961 by the General Assembly with the purpose of monitoring the implementation of the Declaration (General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960).


The Special Committee annually reviews the list of Territories to which the Declaration is applicable and makes recommendations as to its implementation. It also hears statements from NSGTs representatives, dispatches visiting missions, and organizes seminars on the political, social and economic situation in the Territories. Further, the Special Committee annually makes recommendations concerning the dissemination of information to mobilize public opinion in support of the decolonization process, and observes the Week of Solidarity with the Peoples of Non-Self-Governing Territories.​



P F Tinmore said:


> 1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and co-operation.
> 
> 2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
> 
> ...


*(AND NOW FOR THE REST OF THE STORY)*

If you actually go to the *Committee 24 List of NSGTs*, you will not find Palestine, the Occupied Territories, or the West Bank - Jerusalem - Gaza Strip listed.  You will notice that there are 4 Colonial Administrating Powers remaining in the world _(US, UK, France, New Zealand)_.  At one point, the territories were held in trust under *Article 77a of the UN Charter*; but not since the creation of Committee 24.  It is correct to say that "Israel" is not _(identified by Committee 24 as)_ a Colonial Power over the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt).  Further, the oPt are not listed as a colonial holding of any nation.  There are a number of reasons for this _(which I won't go into here)_, and a key point you should take away from this is that when the pro-Arab Palestinian advocates bring this up, they are quite deliberately injecting "misinformation" for propaganda purposes. 

Now I have had pro-Arab Palestinian advocates imply that they know better than Committee 24 as to how to apply the Decolonization Program.  You be the judge.

*(COMMENT)*

Items #1 thru #3 cited by our friend PF Tinmore, are relatively close to the intent of the Charter and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (CCPR).   But it is important to note that:

◈  Israel is not involved thin the exploitation of the Arab Palestinians of the _(socalled)_ oPt.  Israel is not exploiting Arab Palestinians labor, or denying any fundemental human rights.   However, Israel does attempt to meet the International Requirement to  take such measures as may be necessary to restore, and ensure public order and safety, to the extent to such territory where Israeli authority has been established. (Hague Convention 1907) 

◈ Israel has not denied the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, Jerusalem, or Gaza Strip the right to self-determination and establish such a state able to stand by itself under the strenuous conditions of the modern world.  Nor does Israel actually deny the Arab Palestinians the right to establish a corrupt government.



			
				The Palestinian Policy Network said:
			
		

> As many as 81% of the Palestinians living in the occupied Palestinian territory believe there is corruption in Palestinian Authority institutions according to a recent survey, perceptions reinforced by the recently launched annual report of the Palestinian Coalition for Accountability and Integrity (AMAN), the Transparency International chapter in Palestine. These perceptions persist despite former Prime Minister Salam Fayyad’s much-touted state-building efforts to root out corruption - and are at variance with international reports finding that suggest improvement in good governance.
> *SOURCE*:  *Corruption in Palestine: A Self-Enforcing System*, by Tariq Dana



Item #3 is absurd.  Freedoms and the recognitions of those freedoms are not a "suicide pact;" no matter how traditional the suicide is to the Islamic culture.  It is simply insane to suggest that any responsible patron for Palestinian would suggest the creation of another failed state.  You simply don't do that; there must be a reasonable chance for success.

Item #4.  Wrong*!*  →  Articles 42 and 43 of the Hague Convention.  It is especially wrong when the proposed state in question has, imbedded within the governement, know terrorist sympathizers and government sponsored terrorist and terrorist organizations.

Items #5 thru #7 are merely variations on the theme already discussed, _supra_.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Really? Who was the President of “Palestine” in 1946? The Soviet Union conquered quite a few countries post WW2...no one said anything. Conquest is not theft.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Again who was the President or PM of “Palestine” in 1946? What was the currency? Where was the capital building? You claim it was a sovereign nation and I disagree.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Their passports said “Palestine”? Who was their elected President or PM?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 15, 2019)

1946 in Mandatory Palestine - Wikipedia

Nothing Tinmore states is remotely factual.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 15, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  Coyote, et al,
> 
> Remembering that both Judaism and Christianity have their roots as Abrahmic in common.  Thus much of the basic foundations are similar.
> ...


What is noteworthy is this advancement seems to go along with education, the adoption of western values, and the decline of religious influences on government.  For example Muslin attitudes towards women and homosexuals in the US is in line with other religious demographic groups and even more toletant tban some.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 15, 2019)

Ropey said:


> Tehillim - Psalms


slight off topic digression but love that song!  Bony M....


----------



## Coyote (Apr 15, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Settlements HAVE a definition, we dont get to make up our own.

Here is one definition from a pro-Israrli source:  Facts About Jewish Settlements in the West Bank

_The term “Settlements” usually refers to the towns and villages that Jews have established in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and the Gaza Strip since Israel captured the area in the Six-Day War of 1967. In many cases, the settlements are in the same area which flourishing Jewish communities have lived for thousands of years._​
And one from more of a pro-Palestinian view: Israeli settlement - Wikipedia

_*Israeli settlements* are civilian communitieshttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_settlement#endnote_descinhabited by Israeli citizens, almost exclusively of Jewish ethnicity,[1][2] built predominantly on lands within the Palestinian territories, which Israel has militarily occupiedsince the 1967 Six-Day War,[3] and partly on lands considered Syrian territory also militarily occupied by Israel since the 1967 war. Such settlements within Palestinian territories currently exist in Area C of the West Bank and in East Jerusalem, and within Syrian territory in the Golan Heights.

_​_
If we tried for an objective definition it would be something lime this:

A deliberate program where one nation created settlements of foreign nationals in territory it took and occupied as a result of war who's status is not yet resolved.  The time frame would be 1967 to present._


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 15, 2019)

Coyote said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



Do you know any Muslim women?  I do.  And yes,  while their lives are somewhat less restrictive in the U.S.A. than they would be in say Saudi Arabia or Iran, don't make the mistake of thinking that Islam does not intend for the U.S.A. to be under the authority of Allah.  You are unlikely to find any practicing Muslim who will say that.

I am NOT saying that my Muslim neighbors, friends, associates, and my gastroenterologist are not lovely people.  They all are.   And I am not afraid of any of them personally and enjoy their company.  But I know and they know that there is a long term agenda at work that will be achieved, they say, more likely peacefully than not, but it will be achieved that the whole world be under the  authority of Allah.

Tawfik Hamid, a former aspiring terrorist, accurately observes that “the proliferation of the hijab is strongly correlated with increased terrorism…. Terrorism became much more frequent in such societies as Indonesia, Egypt, Algeria, and the U.K. _after_ the hijab became prevalent among Muslim women living in those communities.”

The reason for this correlation is clear: Islamic Sharia commands jihad (“terrorism”) against unbelievers no less than it commands Muslim women to don the hijab. Where one proliferates—evincing a societal adherence to Sharia—so too will the other naturally follow.

In other words, Muslims who adhere to non-problematic aspects of Islam also tend to adhere to problematic aspects of Islam.  Why? Because the selfsame source—Sharia—contains both “moderate” and “radical” teachings (distinctions that exist only in the Western mind).

In this regard, consider the findings of an important 2011 Arabic language article titled (in translation), “The Truth about the Moderate Muslim as Seen by the West and its Muslim Followers.” Its author, Dr. Ahmed Ibrahim Khadr writes:

Islamic researchers are agreed that what the West and its followers call “moderate Islam” and “moderate Muslims” is simply a slur against Islam and Muslims, a distortion of Islam…  They also see that the division of Islam into “moderate Islam” and “radical Islam” has no basis in Islam—neither in its doctrines and rulings, nor in its understandings or reality. . . .
Does the Hijab Reflect “Adherence to Sharia Law”? - Raymond Ibrahim​Hopefully if the Israelis do annex the West Bank, they will be able to accommodate a much less restrictive situation for the Palestinians that live in the West Bank.  About 20% of the Israeli population is Arab and they are full Israeli citizens with representation on the Knesset.  But they will never be allowed majority status or majority representation on the Knesset because the result would result in the destruction of Israel no matter how good citizens they are at present.


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Jews are foreign nationals in Judea? Objective?!



No really, we don't need new definitions,
just spare us the privilege of turning the original ones on their head.


----------



## The Original Tree (Apr 15, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?


*Absolutely.  Neither Gaza, or The West Bank should be squatted on by the so called Palestinians.  Their so called homeland has been declared to be The East Bank for the last 100 years.....or Transjordan.*


----------



## Ropey (Apr 15, 2019)

Saar falls... in Golan. Saar?

Hebrew for the noun, "Storm." And in its male equivalent. An ancient name for an ancient time that is returning.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 15, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This list comes from the application of *General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960* pertaining to Declaration on the *Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples*.
> ...


Considering that the denial of the inalienable rights of the *Palestinian*
*people* to self-determination, sovereignty, independence and *return to*
*Palestine *and the repeated acts of aggression by Israel against the peoples of the region constitute a serious threat to international peace and security,

2.   Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle;

 3.   Reaffirms the inalienable right of the Namibian people, the *Palestinian people* and all peoples under foreign and colonial domination to self-determination, national independence, territorial integrity, national unity and sovereignty without outside interference;

12.  Strongly condemns the continued violations of the human rights of
the peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, the continuation of the illegal occupation of Namibia, and South Africa's attempts to dismember its Territory, the perpetuation of the racist minority regime in southern Africa and the denial to the *Palestinian people* of their inalienable national rights;

12.  Strongly condemns the continued violations of the human rights of
the peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation  the continuation of the illegal occupation of Namibia, and South Africa's  attempts to dismember its Territory, the perpetuation of the racist minority  regime in southern Africa and the denial to the *Palestinian people* of their inalienable national rights;

18.  Strongly condemns those Governments that do not recognize the right to self-determination and independence of all peoples still under colonial and foreign domination and alien subjugation, notably the peoples of Africa and the *Palestinian people;*

A/RES/37/43.  Importance of the universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination and of the speedy granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples for the effective guarantee and observance of human rights


----------



## Hollie (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



Just another rubber stamp UN opinion. Odd how the UN opinion speaks to "Israeli aggression", never defined or identified as to what that is, but the opinion never mentions continuing acts of islamic terrorism and acts of war aimed at Israel by multiple islamic terrorist franchises.

The UN similarly never addresses the failure of the Arabs-Moslems to make any concerted attempt at self-determination.

It's almost as though the UN opinion is just an exercise in wasting time.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 15, 2019)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...





Hollie said:


> never defined or identified as to what that is, but the opinion never mentions continuing acts of islamic terrorism and acts of war aimed at Israel


Yes it does.

2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle;​


----------



## Hollie (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



I understand you want to insist the above grants an allowance for acts of war aimed at Israel and murderous acts of islamic terrorism but nothing prevents the Israeli government from affirming its right to self defense in the face of armed aggression. 

Neither your korans, the Hamas charter nor a UN opinion will cause the Israeli government to abandon the protection of its citizenry.

Gee-had denied, sweetie.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 15, 2019)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


Your gee-had canard is the Palestinians defending themselves from Israeli aggression.


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...









And what was the excuse for Jihad before Israel?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 15, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



The existing definition is problematic.  And so is your "objective" definition.

Your time frame is arbitrary.  No, I take that back.  Your time frame is chosen to deliberately to place responsibility solely on Israel.  What about the 1948 occupation of the territory by Jordan and all the Arab settlements which resulted from that occupation.  Such as "East" Jerusalem.  

If the status of the territory is not resolved -- as in it has no nationality -- then all people would be foreign nationals.

What constitutes a "deliberate" program?  For example, if a European country provides materials and labour to build a school, would that be considered deliberate?  


Your whole premise starts at the wrong place.  You should be starting with "there is territory which permanent status has not been established.  Who is permitted to live there?  Who is permitted to build there? Who is permitted to purchase property there?"  Then at least you will have a CHANCE at building an objective definition.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



The Hamas charter contains the term "jihad" 11 (eleven) separate times.

The border gee-had being waged is not defensive. Islamic terrorist attacks aimed at Israel are not defensive, not when directed by an islamic terrorist franchise with a stated goal of destroying the Jewish State.

I couldn't help but notice you made no attempt to represent any positive steps taken by the Arabs-Moslems to achieve self-determination. 

Would a functioning, viable government be a first step?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



Exerting sovereignty over parts of Area C and declaring a boundary between Israel and Palestine is a step toward Palestine's self-determination.  You should fully support this.


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

Instead of "Annexation",
wouldn't it be more correct if we used 'Liberation'?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 15, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



My time framework isn't the least bit arbritrary because the definition is related to specific events.

*How many Arab settlements have been permitted to be constructed in Area C since Israel gained control of it*?  If it should be open to anyone then....why no new Arab settlements?  What you want to do is create a definition so open as to be meaningless.

Settlements = communities - village, town, etc., housing for people to live in, the bringing in of human beings into that area from outside that area for the purpose of residing there.


----------



## José (Apr 15, 2019)

> Originally posted by *Shusha*
> Exerting sovereignty over parts of Area C and declaring a boundary between Israel and Palestine is a step toward Palestine's self-determination. You should fully support this.



The annexation of large chunks of the West Bank is indeed a big step toward palestinian self-determination, just not in the way the zionists of the US Message Board think it will be.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 15, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Shusha*
> > Exerting sovereignty over parts of Area C and declaring a boundary between Israel and Palestine is a step toward Palestine's self-determination. You should fully support this.
> 
> 
> ...



Explain.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 15, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh, what foolishness.



P F Tinmore said:


> Yes it does.
> 
> 2. Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle;​


*(COMMENT)*

There is no International law that contains that passage.  Why?  Because the Doctrine clearly says, the  - *Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation* 24 OCT 1970.



			
				✦  A/RES/25/2625 (XXV) ✦ said:
			
		

> Every State has the duty to *refrain in its international relations from the threat or use of force* against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations. Such a threat or use of force constitutes a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations and shall never be employed as a means of settling international issues.
> 
> In accordance with the purposes and principles of the United Nations, States have the duty to *refrain from propaganda for wars of aggression*.
> 
> Every State has the duty to *refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries* of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.



This concept the Arab Palestinians cling to armed struggle by any and all means comes from:



			
				✦  Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Charter of 1968 ✦  Permanent Observer Mission of the State of Palestine to the United Nations  ✦  July 1 said:
			
		

> Article 9: *Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine.* This is the overall strategy, not merely a tactical phase. The Palestinian Arab people assert their absolute determination and firm resolution to continue their armed struggle and to work for an armed popular revolution for the liberation of their country and their return to it. They also assert their right to normal life in Palestine and to exercise their right to self-determination and sovereignty over it.



There were several attempts to make the use of terrorism (any and all means) legal.  During the period 1974 thru 1978, Palestinian Terrorist made:

◈  1974 Kiryat Shmona Massacre at an apartment building by the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine Palestinian terrorists
◈  1974 Maalot Massacre at the Maalot High School in Northern Israel by Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine Palestinian terrorists
◈  1974 TWA Flight 841
◈  1975 Tel Aviv Savoy Hotel guest attacked by Palestinian PLO terrorists
◈  1976 Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine Palestinian terrorists Hijacking of Air France Flight 139
◈  1977, October 13 Lufthansa flight LH 181 was kidnapped by a group of four Arabs around the leader "Captain Martyr Mahmud".
◈  1978 Palestinian Fatah terrorists _ (including the recently honored Dalal al-Maghribi)_ on the Tel Aviv - Haifa highway killed 38.​This was a clear and successful effort by elements with the UN to incite Palestinian Terrorist into making additional attacks under the color of law.

◈  A/RES/3246 (XXIX) • Armed Struggle - All Means • 29 November 1974

◈  A/RES/33/24  •  Armed Struggle - All Means  •  29 November 1978​
The Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza Strip are overwhelming a collection of lawless groups held together by a common theme.  The Arab Palestinians support Criminal Acts directed against Israel (and allies) with the intention of - or calculated to - cause death or serious bodily injury to the civilian population, or to any other person not taking an active part in the hostilities, the purpose of such act, by its nature or context, is to intimidate the Israeli population and to compel the Israeli government  to do _(or to abstain from doing)_ some act that furthers the criminal objectives of the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, Jerusalem and Gaza Strip.



			
				✦  Article 1 • UN Security Council Resolution S/RES/1624 (2005) ✦ said:
			
		

> Calls upon all States to adopt such measures as may be necessary and appropriate and in accordance with their obligations under international law to:
> 
> (a)  Prohibit by law incitement to commit a terrorist act or acts;
> 
> ...



I (personally) consider pro-Arab Palestinian activist that promote, suggest, or encourage Arab Palestinian tto pursue "armed struggle by any and all means" to be → un*indicted* co-conspirators in the violation of the "Prohibition by International Law against incitement to commit a terrorist act or acts."

Just My Thought as a Layman,
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



This is indeed what the word settlement means, at least in Hebrew.
A community in a village, one from a year ago and one from time immemorial, same word.

The ancient Jewish community in Israel before the Zionist immigration was as well called a settlement, I guess because of lack of a better comparable term, the connotation of being a foreigner comes only from English.

A village is indeed what a settlement means when Israelis use the term.


----------



## José (Apr 15, 2019)

> Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> Explain.



For 40 years the South African government desperately tried to convince the rest of the world that the small, shambolic, disjointed sprinkling of areas that constituted the Bantu Homelands were real, legitimate national territories where the black population of South Africa could exert their "right to self-determination".

For 40 years the world replied that the only thing the impoverished black enclaves represented was the territorial expansionism of the white supremacist state, the "self-determination" of racist South Africa to impose on the black population a series of disconnected ethnic corrals ruled by puppet regimes and under strong international pressure the country ended up in the trash can of History before the century was out.

Israel will soon find itself in the same situation as South Africa, desperately trying to prove to the international community that the small, patchy territories in the West Bank constitute a legitimate political entity.

So the annexation of all or at least some settlements in the West Bank is another nail in the coffin of the jewish racial dictatorship.

Quite frankly, zionists who value the concept of the jewish safe haven more than they do the territorial integrity of the area established by the british mandate should be crying not celebrating the annexation.


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> > Explain.
> 
> 
> ...



So You try to make it about skin color?
Let's see You dance around that for a while...


----------



## Shusha (Apr 15, 2019)

Coyote said:


> My time framework isn't the least bit arbritrary because the definition is related to specific events.


But why THAT event.  Why not the 1948 event which removed Jews from places where Jews lived and to which Jews wish to return?



> What you want to do is create a definition so open as to be meaningless.


Well no.  I want to demonstrate the inherent bias of your thinking.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 15, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh, what foolishness.
> ...


Unprovoked occupation/colonization is the initial aggression. The Palestinians have been defending themselves for a hundred years.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 15, 2019)

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


I never said that there were no conflicts any time in the past. But, if you have to go back almost a hundreds years to find one, with no context, it does not look like a systemic problem.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



There was little conflict when the Ottoman Empire was able to impose the dhimmi status on the non-Moslems.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



When you whine about “unprovoked occupation/colonization” you mean the Islamic conquest/ occupation/ colonization, right?

Or, do you make an arbitrary allowance for Islamic conquest/ occupation/ colonization and only assign your condemnation when an invitation was extended to the Jewish people to reconstitute their homeland.


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



Unprovoked what??! 

We have already discussed it several times, and You always run like a scared Jihadi duck.
Fact is Zionism was a RESPONSE to a wave of Arab pogroms against Palestinian Jews
and the Jewish communities all around the Caliphate.

How can Arabs claim to be occupied if they can't even pronounce the word "Palestine"?


----------



## Hollie (Apr 15, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> > Explain.
> 
> 
> ...



I guess this would be a bad time to acknowledge your phony contrivances while you celebrate a Jew-free Gaza.


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



*You want to make this thread about the Arab pogroms?*

Great! That's a topic we didn't explore too much. Let's just focus on the 50 year before Zionism.
We can discuss:


The Looting of Safed
The Looting of Tiberias
The Pogrom of Jerusalem
The 33 days of June expulsions from the 4 holy cities
The Damascus Affair and the following Arab pogroms throughout the Caliphate
Jizyah and the institutionalized Trippe Jew Tax
"Protection" tax to local Arab bourgeoisie
Abduction and forced conversion of girls who lost a father
All in the range of *50 years before Zionism*,
Where should we start?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 15, 2019)

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...




B-b-but I thought Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together in "Palestine" in a blissful Paradise before Zionism!  Do you mean to say that myth isn't true at all?


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



My grand grandpa's father had to give away several shops in Jaffa,
just to save a fellow Jew and his daughters because he couldn't keep up with the "protection" payments.
Why? Because a Yahud had to pay to a Muslim for his skull with shame, it was specifically a favored spectacle all over the Caliphate. And it wasn't enough for our elders to receive that privilege on behalf of the community, but some just couldn't give up on the opportunity to "own" a family only for that specific humiliation, it wasn't even about the money, because they were all mostly starving poor.

I guess this sounds like P F Tinmore's  socialist paradise...


----------



## José (Apr 15, 2019)

> Originally posted by *rylah*
> My grand grandpa's father had to sell several shops in Jaffa



The poor, oppressed, downtrodden Jew was the owner of several shops in Jaffa.

Good to know...


----------



## José (Apr 15, 2019)

> Originally posted by *rylah*
> Because they were all mostly starving poor.



Most palestinian Jews were ultra-orthodox so of course they were poor...

Oh my God!!!! 

The big, bad, racist Ottoman Empire didn't want to pay Jews a good salary for them to spend all day reading the Torah...

This must be the worst case of apartheid ever!!!!


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *rylah*
> > Because they were all mostly starving poor.
> 
> 
> ...



If a Tripple Jew Tax isn't an example of an apartheid then nothing else could ever be.
Coincidently this is exactly what the Hamas leadership just declared as their *short-term national plan:*

Cleanse Palestine of the "filth of the Jews" by 2022
From the River to the Sea - establishment of Caliphate

Now You can start doing the Jihadi duck dance...

 .


----------



## rylah (Apr 15, 2019)

Anyway You look, there're only 3 natural choices:

Recognition of Jewish Sovereignty, national service and citizenship
Compensation if can't live in a Jewish country
Fight
Jewish sovereignty over Judea is inevitable.
There's no better match for that marriage, the bride already bears the groom's last-name.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 15, 2019)

Israel is the Jewish homeland and its time IMO to kick out the squatters in Hamas and Fatah.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 15, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *rylah*
> > Because they were all mostly starving poor.
> 
> 
> ...



Why are we discussing ancient history? How many wars has Israel lost?


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 16, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh this is just so sad.  But I have to be honest I can't give you a good summary on the causes of the Great War.  Yes, everyone knows the trigger was the assassination of the _(Austrian)_ Archduke Franz Ferdinand _(and the__ Duchess of Hohenberg)_.  But the causes of the Great War are not the key issue in this misinformation.  All that immediately needs to be understood is that the Ottoman Empire _(Central Powers)_ was engulfed in the war opposed by the Allied Powers.  And the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire was the sovereign over the territory you characterize here as the subject of an "Unprovoked occupation/colonization."



P F Tinmore said:


> Unprovoked occupation/colonization is the initial aggression. The Palestinians have been defending themselves for a hundred years.


*(COMMENT)*

But make no mistake, the claim by the Arab Palestinians of today HAVE BEEN defending themselves for a century is → *pure theater*.   The Allied Powers came into direct control of the Middle East as an outcome of the Great War and the  Armistice of Mudros (1918).  Under the Armistice (Clause XVI), documented the "*surrender of all* garrisons in Hedjaz, Assir, Yemen, Syria, and Mesopotamia to the nearest Allied Commander."  It was then, that the Occupied Enemy Territory Administration (OETA) came into existence and included what became known as the territories to which the Mandate for Palestine applies, or just _(short titled)_ "Palestine."

The Jewish immigration and the controlled close settlement by Jews on the land, was pursuant to the agreement between the Allied Powers to put into effect the Balfour Declaration.

*(SUMMARY)*

*❖  The occupation was NOT "unprovoked."*  That is pure fantasy and pure misinformation for propaganda purposes.

*❖  There was NO colonization*.   It was an effort → agreed upon by the Allied Powers → to facilitate Jewish immigration for all Jews who were willing to assist in the establishment of the Jewish national home.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 16, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh this is just so sad.  But I have to be honest I can't give you a good summary on the causes of the Great War.  Yes, everyone knows the trigger was the assassination of the _(Austrian)_ Archduke Franz Ferdinand _(and the__ Duchess of Hohenberg)_.  But the causes of the Great War are not the key issue in this misinformation.  All that immediately needs to be understood is that the Ottoman Empire _(Central Powers)_ was engulfed in the war opposed by the Allied Powers.  And the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire was the sovereign over the territory you characterize here as the subject of an "Unprovoked occupation/colonization."
> ...



Excellent post. Thank you.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 16, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh this is just so sad.  But I have to be honest I can't give you a good summary on the causes of the Great War.  Yes, everyone knows the trigger was the assassination of the _(Austrian)_ Archduke Franz Ferdinand _(and the__ Duchess of Hohenberg)_.  But the causes of the Great War are not the key issue in this misinformation.  All that immediately needs to be understood is that the Ottoman Empire _(Central Powers)_ was engulfed in the war opposed by the Allied Powers.  And the Sultan of the Ottoman Empire was the sovereign over the territory you characterize here as the subject of an "Unprovoked occupation/colonization."
> ...


Balderdash! The occupation/colonization of Palestine was a pre planned event. The Zionists recruited Britain's military to run cover for their colonization.


----------



## rylah (Apr 16, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



And Arabs literally allied with and joined the lines of the British army.
Jews were the ones who kicked the Brits out.

Feel smart yet?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 16, 2019)

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...


Which Arabs? Who?


----------



## rylah (Apr 16, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



The same Arabs who proclaimed to be the subjects of King Faisal of Arabia,
and allied with Britain in hopes for complete Arab domination over the entire middle east.

Even the so called "Palestinian flag" is an invention of the British army.


The Arab Revolt, 1916-18 - The Ottoman Empire | NZHistory, New Zealand history online


----------



## rylah (Apr 16, 2019)




----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 16, 2019)

rylah said:


>



Jordan or 21 other Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, which gave the Arabs their name.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 16, 2019)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



To the best of my knowledge, with the exception of establishing Israel in 1948 as a country intended to be a refuge for Jews persecuted and/or displaced during the WWII years, the UN has been extremely tepid and ineffective, pretty much not recognizing Israel's side in much of anything.   For decades now, most of the UN is increasingly represented by people who resent or hate the Jews and the Israelis cannot look to the UN to look out for its interests in any way.

If we look for resolutions from the U.N. condemning Hamas, Hezbollah, and other anti-Israel organizations and their repeated intended to be deadly aggression toward Israel, we might have to wait a good long while.  But the UN does frequently condemn Israel for responding to such aggression.

Trump must enjoin UN to condemn Hezbollah, UNIFIL and Hamas


----------



## Coyote (Apr 16, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > My time framework isn't the least bit arbritrary because the definition is related to specific events.
> ...


Because the settlement program did not exist prior to that event.  You want an open ended definition, not an objective one.

If you go withyour attempted definition then what all the Pakestinians who were ousted and reside in refugee camps?


----------



## rylah (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


You're trying to make special definitions for Jews, don't blame Shusha for pointing to the bias.
When were the first neighborhoods outside the walls of Jerusalem built?

Arabs refer to their construction projects as 'settlements', but only Jews given that adjective.
Why?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 16, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



What if it was? So what? Let’s say you’re right. You know there is no turning back so why constantly whine and complain. That never achieves anything.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Again I ask. Name one mostly Muslim country that is not a humanitarian disaster? You cannot so why would Israel allow another one to form? It would not. Until we address this issue the rest of the arguments are silly.


----------



## rylah (Apr 16, 2019)




----------



## rylah (Apr 16, 2019)




----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 16, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



I keep on telling him that.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 16, 2019)

rylah said:


>



 Because the majority of the pop consists of filthy Jews...Coyote and Tinmore won’t say it but IMO they think it.


----------



## rylah (Apr 16, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



ISIS and Hamas on usmessageboard.com are against Jewish sovereignty in Judea?
Picture me surprised...


----------



## Shusha (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Because the settlement program did not exist prior to that event.



True only if you continue to frame "settlement" as applying uniquely to Jews/Israelis.  

Example:

In 1931 two farmer families purchase land in what will become Area C and each family builds a village.  One is Jewish.  One is Arab.  

In 1948 the Jews are expelled from their village.  In 1967 the Arabs are expelled from their village.  

Why is it that when the Jews return to their village, they are "settlers" building a "settlement" (with all the negative connotation which has been added to that word over time and has come to specifically mean Jews)?

And yet Arabs are "returning" or "liberating" land which "belongs" to them?


Example:

The JEWISH QUARTER of Jerusalem is considered a "settlement" in "occupied East Jerusalem".  The JEWISH QUARTER.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> If you go withyour attempted definition then what all the Pakestinians who were ousted and reside in refugee camps?



Reside where and what about them?  I don't understand your point.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 16, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Balderdash! The occupation/colonization of Palestine was a pre planned event.



The return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the re-constitution of their sovereignty was ABSOLUTELY a pre-planned event.  Planning began about 2000 years ago.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 16, 2019)

rylah said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Pretty much the entire Arab world and all who take its side against Israel are against Jewish sovereignty, or Jewish presence, pretty much anywhere and everywhere.  The USA is the only reliable friend that Israel has, but so far that friendship has allowed 6+ million Jews (about 75% of the Israeli population) to enjoy the right to live, work, worship as they choose and be who they are in their own country.  The USA had the largest Jewish population in the world until Israel surpassed it just recently.

Jews have been harassed, murdered, expelled, ostracized, and subjected to unimaginable unjustices and indignities throughout their very long recorded history with the worst being the torture, starvation, abuse, and eventually horrendous murder of more than 6 million Jews in the Holocaust.  And it didn't stop there as this incomplete but fairly accurate history timeline reveals:

A History of the Jews, a list of expulsions for 2000 years

The Palestinians could have co-existed peacefully with the Jews in what is now Israel, but almost all chose to leave the country so that a coalition of Arab aggressors could exterminate all the Jews there. 

But when the Israelis prevailed and defeated those aggressors, the Israelis would not allow Palestinians who wanted them destroyed to come back citing that they had forfeited any right of return.  This was unjust?  I don't think so.

The Palestinians who didn't desert them  were allowed to stay and they and their progeny have enjoyed full Israeli citizenship with all rights and benefits.

Look again at that map up there and see how tiny Israel is compared to all the Arabic lands and is only a speck in all the Islamic majority countries.  A teensy little bit of land, smaller than the small state of New Jersey, but that represents 4,000+ years of Jewish occupation and is so important to the Jewish faith, culture, traditions.

Consider how the world has treated the Jews for all these centuries.  Cannot we allow them that tiny sliver of land in peace?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 16, 2019)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Balderdash! The occupation/colonization of Palestine was a pre planned event.
> ...



Religious Jews prayed for it 3x a day, and in every grace after meals.  Soon will be the Passover seder.  When we come to the part about returning to a rebuilt Jerusalem, my family sings and dances like crazy.  There is a story that Napolean Bonaparte once walked into a synagogue on Tisha B'Av, the fast day commemorating Jerusalem's destruction and praying for its restoration.  He said that a people still crying and fasting over a land lost 2,000 years ago, will surely one day return to it.  A glass is broken at every Jewish wedding to commemorate Jerusalem.  "How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?  If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand lose its cunning.  May my tongue cleave to to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember thee, if I do not raise Jerusalem above my chiefest joy."


----------



## José (Apr 16, 2019)

> Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> But when the Israelis prevailed and defeated those aggressors, the Israelis would not allow Palestinians who wanted them destroyed to come back citing that *they had forfeited any right of return*.



Europeans of jewish faith without a single drop of semitic blood running through their veins and with no nationalist attachment to Jerusalem, let alone the rest of Palestine, only a religious, metaphysical one, telling the real "Jews" of Palestine who never left the homeland of their jewish ancestors that "they had forfeited any right of return".

Quite ironic.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 16, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> > But when the Israelis prevailed and defeated those aggressors, the Israelis would not allow Palestinians who wanted them destroyed to come back citing that *they had forfeited any right of return*.
> 
> 
> ...


You never have any evidence of this, but simply repeat what the ones who want to destroy Israel  taught you to say.

There are no "real Jews" compared to any other Jews.
There JEWS.

Nothing ironic.  Only your endless learned hatred of Jews.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 16, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> > But when the Israelis prevailed and defeated those aggressors, the Israelis would not allow Palestinians who wanted them destroyed to come back citing that *they had forfeited any right of return*.
> 
> 
> ...


Except Ancestry.com says you’re full of shit.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 16, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> > But when the Israelis prevailed and defeated those aggressors, the Israelis would not allow Palestinians who wanted them destroyed to come back citing that *they had forfeited any right of return*.
> 
> 
> ...



Oh, so now the Palestinians are the "real Jews"!  Their story keeps changing.  First they were descended from the Canaanites, then the Philistines, and now they're Jews.  You never explained why the poster child for Palestinian "resistance", Shirley Temper, has blond hair and blue eyes.  Or why other blond-haired "Palestinians" occasionally pop up in Tinmore's pictures.  Or why I once conversed with a blond-haired Palestinian at the Tomb of Abraham in Hebron.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 16, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> José said:
> 
> 
> > > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> ...


He meant those Jews who were already there before the "Zionists", aka  "European Jews" came.  The ones who were there, ok.  The ones who call themselves Zionists and came after 1897.... =Jews?

Learned nonsense from Christian and Muslim haters of Jews who cannot stand it that the Jews have escaped their grasp.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 16, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> > But when the Israelis prevailed and defeated those aggressors, the Israelis would not allow Palestinians who wanted them destroyed to come back citing that *they had forfeited any right of return*.
> 
> 
> ...



Don't tell us that we Jews have no "nationalist attachment to Jerusalem, let alone the rest of Palestine, only a religious, metaphysical one."  You're from Spain, probably a Catholic, and you're confusing Judaism with Christianity and your "New Jerusalem" or the "Heavenly Jerusalem."  We have an attachment to the earthly Jerusalem, as well as MANY other cities and towns in Eretz Israel, so none of this "let alone the rest of Palestine" applies to us..


----------



## Shusha (Apr 16, 2019)

José said:


> Europeans of Jewish faith <snip> with no nationalist attachment to Jerusalem, let alone the rest of Palestine...



Wow.  Quite amazing, then, isn't it, that Jews with no nationalism created (actually reconstituted) an actual NATION.  How can you possibly explain how the LACK of Jewish nationalism created a Jewish NATION?  How do you explain that?  What could possibly drive the Jewish people to do ALL THAT WORK for no reason?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 16, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> > But when the Israelis prevailed and defeated those aggressors, the Israelis would not allow Palestinians who wanted them destroyed to come back citing that *they had forfeited any right of return*.
> 
> 
> ...



JoseB that has zero to do with modern day Israel.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 16, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Because the settlement program did not exist prior to that event.
> ...



Because it IS in this case - and it isn't how I define - it is how *ISRAEL *defines it.
*
How many Arab settlements have been built since Israel occupied the land? * - and yes, at that time occupation was the correct term and the term used by the Israeli's themselves. 

Not all or even most of those settlements exist on land previously owned by expelled Jews.  You also forget - Palestinians were expelled.  Where is their right to create settlements if we are going to be defining it so broadly as to be meaningless?  How far back do you go ousting people?  If you go back far enough everyone has a right to be there.

Settlements has a meaning and it doesn't have to be Jewish.  But it does have to have a real definition, not just a convenient one.  It's based on a program - a program with a religiously ordained purpose in this case, but it could be ethnic as well (such as what the Russians did) - of the deliberate settling of people in a region taken in war and under occupation and only that people.  It is a program with an intent and typically government support with a motive of securing the territory.  Not just people wandering in and moving in during natural migrations.  In this case only ONE group gets to create settlements (unless you can give me an actual number of Arab settlements built since the territory was occupied).

It isn't about "right of return" it's about a specific program which has a direct impact on a two state solution.  You can keep pretending it doesn't, but it isn't really up to the Jews to claim it doesn't, it's up to the Palestinians to determine whether or not settlements have an effect on the peace process.  Just like the Palestinians can't claim "right of return" and Israel having to take in uptillion Palistinians should have no effect on the peace process.  It does.  From Israel's point of view, it's not up to the Palestinians to say what effects the peace process for the Israeli's.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 16, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



What a stupid thing to say.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Yet several people agree. Just my opinion based on your and Tinmores posts.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



What would your solution be? Please share.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



And the Jews have no say at all when they withdraw from the land Palestinians claim and Hamas or other militant groups immediate set up their rocket and missile launchers in those areas and fire away at Jewish homes and businesses?   How much danger to you allow to your property and family before you say enough and no longer feel your neighbor has a right to that property?

It got so bad that even the U.N. conceded that the Israelis should control the Golan Heights seized from Syria in the Six Day War and which is critical to Israeli security being high ground that militant Syrians will certainly use to wreck havoc on Israel if they are allowed to have it back.  Recently President Trump acknowledged that land to be Israel's rightful property.

How many mothers and small children have to be blown up on busses and how many crowded markets have to be suicide bombed before you say it is okay for Israel to deny access to those busses and markets by the non-Iraeli Palestinians since there is no way to know who is good and who is bad?

Israel, a teensy little strip of land smaller than the tiny state of New Jersey is all the Israelis want.  It is hardly noticeable in the huge area of the Arab world and much larger area of all the lands controlled by Islam.

Jews have lived in that land--holy land to them as well as Christians but not so much Islam--for more than 4000 years.  Israel has been a country now for 71 years, technically longer than a LOT of independent countries on Earth.

Why is it so important not to allow the Jews that land and the right to order their own affairs?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


They weren’t expelled; they ran to the West Bank of Jordan.
Jordan won’t let them come any further east.
The bottom line is that Jordan lost that land in war and in 2019, Israel is no longer taking bullshit from the UN.
No matter what your *feelings* tell you.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 16, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Because people became accustomed to Jews being homeless; they can’t adapt to reality.
No matter how many wars God wins for the Jews.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> *
> How many Arab settlements have been built since Israel occupied the land? *


But your bias in setting up the question makes it impossible to give an answer other than the one you are using your bias to create.  You insist that the "occupation" of 1967 is the only one which counts, so that any Jews are "settlers" (with the negative connotations of that term), while any Arabs are not settlers.  You have set up the question so as to cheat the results.

Why not include 1948 war and occupation (which was actually an occupation), which also produced refugees and an exchange of populations?

Example:  Before 1948 the Jewish Quarter was largely home to Jews.  Those Jews were expelled in 1948 and a whole bunch of Arabs moved in.  In 1967 the Jewish Quarter was liberated from Arab Jordanian occupation.  Some Arabs were expelled.  And a whole bunch of Jews moved (back) in.

So, in the Jewish Quarter of  "East Jerusalem", which are the settlers?   The Jews? or the Arabs?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 16, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Not all or even most of those settlements exist on land previously owned by expelled Jews.


Link?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 16, 2019)

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Jordan pays Israel to keep West Bank Arabs out of Jordan.
Bad Israel!


----------



## José (Apr 17, 2019)

> Originally posted by *Shusha*
> Wow. Quite amazing, then, isn't it, that Jews with no nationalism created (actually reconstituted) an actual NATION. *How can you possibly explain how the LACK of Jewish nationalism created a Jewish NATION? How do you explain that?* What could possibly drive the Jewish people to do ALL THAT WORK for no reason?



I explain israeli nationalism in the exact same way I explain american and canadian nationalism.

The british colonists created American and Canadian nationalism...

Nobody in 17th century Britain had any emotional, national attachment to the north american landmass...

What created the real, not fictitious American and Canadian nationalisms was decades of european colonialism in North America.

The british colonial project in North America created both nationalisms.

Similarly there was no Jewish nationalism before the zionist movement got going.

Even in 1930 Jewish nationalism was still an exotic idea to most Jews as Uri himself pointed out.

ForeverYoung... listen to grandpa Avnery and learn that your own people (askhenazis as well as sefaradis and mizrahis) never had a nationalist attachment to Palestine:

MY FATHER was a Zionist. When he married my mother, a pretty young secretary, one of the wedding presents was a printed document stating that a tree had been planted in the name of the couple in Palestine.

At the time, *the Zionists were a tiny minority among the Jews in Germany (and elsewhere)*. Most Jews thought that they were a bit crazy. A current joke had it that a Zionist was a Jew who gave money to a second Jew in order to send a third Jew to Palestine.

Why did my father become a Zionist? He certainly did not dream of going to Palestine himself.

So what about his Zionism? My father was a “Querkopf”, a contrarian. He did not like to run with the herd. *It suited him to belong to a lonely little group. The Zionists.*





​So just like the british in North America, what created the israeli national identity was the Zionist colonization of Palestine...

The zionist colonial movement took a religious identity and a sense of people without nationalist attachment to the territory of Palestine and turned it into a new national identity (the israeli national identity) with a strong nationalist link to the biblical land.

The american, Canadian and Israeli nationalisms are all absolutely real, they do exist, but they are the result of colonialism... they are the result of a violent act through which foreigners moved to a land they were not natives of without the consent of the indigenous population.

They are totally different from, let's say, russian, french and italian nationalisms that are the result of natives developing a sense of national identity in their own historical homelands .


----------



## José (Apr 17, 2019)

> Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> Oh, so now the Palestinians are the "real Jews"! Their story keeps changing. First they were descended from the Canaanites, then the Philistines, and now they're Jews.



And they are right on all counts!!

Palestinians descend from Canaanites, Philistines, Jews and all the other biblical peoples who inhabited their historical homeland.



> Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> You never explained why the poster child for Palestinian "resistance", Shirley Temper, has blond hair and blue eyes. Or why other blond-haired "Palestinians" occasionally pop up in Tinmore's pictures. Or why I once conversed with a blond-haired Palestinian at the Tomb of Abraham in Hebron.



I will let the british poster, Challenger, answer your question about Ahed, aka, Shirley Temper LOL:


----------



## José (Apr 17, 2019)

Palestine was invaded by a small number of Europeans during the Crusades and the Ottomans relocated to Palestine some people from european parts of the empire like Bosnia.

So every now and then a "crusader" or "bosnian" gene pops up and you have a blond, blue eyed Palestinian.

*Big deal.*


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 17, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> José said:
> 
> 
> > > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> ...




So we have no real attachment to Jerusalem, "let alone the rest of Palestine"?  Let me tell you about our attachment to other cities in what we call Eretz Yisrael, and NOT Palestine.  Tiberias (Teveriya) is one of the 4 "holy cities" of Israel, along with Jerusalem, Sefad and Hebron (Chevron).  Many important rabbis are buried there, and that's where the famous Hot Springs of Tiberias are located.  Sefad is where the Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism) was born.  It has a holy aura all its own and an artists' colony.  Hebron is the city where our Patriarchs and Matriarchs are buried, and where King David was anointed.  Bethlehem is King David's birthplace, and where his grandparents, Ruth and Boaz, married (although today it's mostly a Christian site).  The beautiful port city of Jaffa is where the Prophet Jonah sailed out from, and the scene of the popular Israeli musical "Kazablan".  Beersheba is where Abraham pitched his tent and where a modern university is located.  Haifa is where the Cave of Elijah the Prophet is located (he hid there from the wicked Queen Jezebel).  It's atop the majestic Mount Carmel.  Many Israelis camp out at the Kinneret (Sea of Galilee, which is really a lake).  The Dead Sea is also a popular tourist attraction.  Need I go on?  I venture to guess that you have never been to Israel.  It's literally full of Jewish history--every nook and cranny of it.


----------



## rylah (Apr 17, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Shusha*
> > Wow. Quite amazing, then, isn't it, that Jews with no nationalism created (actually reconstituted) an actual NATION. *How can you possibly explain how the LACK of Jewish nationalism created a Jewish NATION? How do you explain that?* What could possibly drive the Jewish people to do ALL THAT WORK for no reason?
> 
> 
> ...



Total nonsense.

Zionism started as a *RESPONSE* to the plight of *native Jews* for protection from the Damascus Affair and the following wave of Arab pogroms throughout the Caliphate.


----------



## Ria_Longhorn (Apr 17, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> > Oh, so now the Palestinians are the "real Jews"! Their story keeps changing. First they were descended from the Canaanites, then the Philistines, and now they're Jews.
> 
> 
> ...



Jose wrote:
"Palestinians descend from Canaanites, Philistines, Jews and all the other biblical people who inhabited their historical homeland."
= = = = = = = = 

Ria_Longhorn replies:

Almut Nebel's 2001 study, "The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East" found that, '[T]he Y chromosomes in Palestinian Arabs and Bedouins represent, to a large extent, early lineages derived from the Neolithic inhabitants of the area and additional lineages from more-recent population movements. The early lineages are part of the common chromosome pool shared with Jews. According to our working model, the more-recent migrations were mostly from the ARABIAN PENINSULA [emphasis mine], as is seen in the Arab-specific Eu 10 chromosomes that include the modal haplotypes observed in Palestinians and Bedouins.'


----------



## Ria_Longhorn (Apr 17, 2019)

José said:


> Palestine was invaded by a small number of Europeans during the Crusades and the Ottomans relocated to Palestine some people from european parts of the empire like Bosnia.
> 
> So every now and then a "crusader" or "bosnian" gene pops up and you have a blond, blue eyed Palestinian.
> 
> *Big deal.*





José said:


> Palestine was invaded by a small number of Europeans during the Crusades and the Ottomans relocated to Palestine some people from european parts of the empire like Bosnia.
> 
> So every now and then a "crusader" or "bosnian" gene pops up and you have a blond, blue eyed Palestinian.
> 
> *Big deal.*



So, blond Suha Arafat, and the blue-eyed Amin al-Husseini are "bosnian".  Got it.


----------



## Ria_Longhorn (Apr 17, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Shusha*
> > Wow. Quite amazing, then, isn't it, that Jews with no nationalism created (actually reconstituted) an actual NATION. *How can you possibly explain how the LACK of Jewish nationalism created a Jewish NATION? How do you explain that?* What could possibly drive the Jewish people to do ALL THAT WORK for no reason?
> 
> 
> ...



Twice a year on their  holidays, the Jewish People in unison, say, "Next year in Jerusalem".  (As a matter of fact, if you cup your ear ever so slightly, you'll hear it in a couple of days.)

During the season when rain was needed in Israel, the Jewish People, in whatever country they were, prayed for rain on their festival of Shmini Atzeret.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 17, 2019)

Ria_Longhorn said:


> José said:
> 
> 
> > > Originally posted by *ForeverYoung436*
> ...



Sherri, a rabid anti-Semite, once mistakenly posted a document here from the British, from the 1920's, that said "Palestine's population is constantly being replenished by nomads from the Arabian peninsula."  Canaanites my foot!  Also, many Arabs from the region flocked to what was then known as Palestine because of the new job opportunities created by the Zionist Jews, after the Jews had drained the swamps and built new cities like Tel-Aviv.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 17, 2019)

Ria_Longhorn said:


> José said:
> 
> 
> > > Originally posted by *Shusha*
> ...



Yes, in addition to scores of other prayers and customs related to the Land of Israel.


----------



## rylah (Apr 17, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Both cover for each other and the Jihadi filth.

One used the term Caliphate several times referring to a  solution,
the other literally posted a Hamas video calling to "Go murder Jews and die together!",
while sharing instructions for FBI investigations.

You know, laugh it off, ridicule, look away..._"Just some people doing something somewhere"_


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 17, 2019)

Ria_Longhorn said:


> José said:
> 
> 
> > Palestine was invaded by a small number of Europeans during the Crusades and the Ottomans relocated to Palestine some people from european parts of the empire like Bosnia.
> ...



Even if that's true about Mrs. Arafart and the others, Bosnian Muslims and their descendants are foreigners to the Land of Israel.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 17, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Ria_Longhorn said:
> 
> 
> > José said:
> ...


Suha Arafat is Christian.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 17, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Ria_Longhorn said:
> ...



So I guess she's descended from foreign Crusaders.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 17, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
P F Tinmore, ForeverYoung436, Ria_Longhorn, José, et al,

Some of this is fascinating, and some of this is very drawl.



P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Ria_Longhorn said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

But somewhere in all this, I lost how this all ties together with the: Question of Annexation.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah (Apr 17, 2019)

José said:


> Palestinians descend from Canaanites, Philistines, Jews and all the other biblical peoples who inhabited their historical homeland.


Yet none know the meaning or even can pronounce the name of the land?


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 17, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  Indeependent,  et al,

I thought I would fall back to a point where I at least understood the contributions.

I am probably slipping here.  I had not heard this.



Indeependent said:


> Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Jordan pays Israel to keep West Bank Arabs out of Jordan.
> Bad Israel!


*(COMMENT)*

I can understand some of this.  I can even see some of this in practice at the Allenby Crossing.   But are the Jordanians really so concerned about what threat the Arab Palestinians of the West Bank represent?

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 17, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  Indeependent,  et al,
> 
> I thought I would fall back to a point where I at least understood the contributions.
> ...


Jordan allowed 1.6 millions Palis in and didn’t realize they were creating a welfare state.


----------



## rylah (Apr 17, 2019)

*Caroline Glick: Prospects of Israeli Sovereignty*


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 17, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Ria_Longhorn said:
> ...



Perhaps as she was raised Catholic.  But she is on the record as saying that if she had a son, there would be ". . . “no greater honour” than to sacrifice him for the Palestinian cause."  That sounds far more like militant Muslim than Christian.  However though she sometimes wore a headband when she was with her husband, she never wore any Muslim garb, not even the headscarf.  So who knows?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 17, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> P F Tinmore, ForeverYoung436, Ria_Longhorn, José, et al,
> 
> Some of this is fascinating, and some of this is very drawl.
> ...



The discussion went into a tangent of the usual anti-Jewish sentiment, which Jose always gets into, that the Jews who immigrated to Palestine/Israel were foreign colonizers with not one drop of "Semitic" blood.  I couldn't let that pass without educating him.  He also said that the Jews only have a metaphysical, spiritual connection to Jerusalem, which doesn't even extend to the rest of Eretz Yisrael, or what he calls "Palestine."  Again, I couldn't let these false statements pass without correcting his ignorance on these matters.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 17, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Link to a post of mine then.

Stupid people tend to agree with stupid posts.  Yet they never seem to be able to support their claims.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 17, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Why should I go an extra step and answer you when you continuously avoid my questions?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 17, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Solution to what specifically?


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 17, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  Indeependent,  et al,

And this is the greatest danger to Israel.



Indeependent said:


> Jordan allowed 1.6 millions Palis in and didn’t realize they were creating a welfare state.


*(COMMENT)*

If Israel admits the Arab Palestinians on mass; or if Israel annexes the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem and grants citizenship, they will increase the unemployment rolls and the health care rolls by more than:

*Unemployment, youth ages 15-24: total: *40.7%
*male: *36.4%
*female: *60.8%​
This benefits no one.  

The alternative of putting the Arab Palestinians in apprenticeship programs, and various aspects of engineering and construction, will add to the escrow of productive public works, and set the stage for business and commerce within the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and Jerusalem.

The trick will be to keep organized crime, protection rackets and confidence/fraud elements from interrupting the progress or somehow exploiting the positive impact.  It will also require a crash course in law enforcement to stamp-out negative elements. 

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote (Apr 17, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


  I have answered more of your questions then you ever answer of mine.  I will chalk this up to just another unfounded claim on your part.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 17, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



To the debate of what should happen to end the conflict of Israel vs. Palestine. 

Tinmore wants the end of Israel and I say "Palestinians" should leave for one of the other 50+ Islamic countries. What would your solution be?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 17, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Have you? You just now responded to the most recent one. So we will politely agree to disagree.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 17, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


It has nothing to do with my feelings but rather historical records as opposed to popular propoganda.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 17, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...



Absolutely.

Jews have probably been in Europe since Nebuchadnezzar drove Jews out of Judah in the 7th Century bc and most especially after the Romans drove almost all out of Jerusalem and destroyed the Temple the last time in 70 a.d and then drove out those who returned again in the 2nd Century a.d. The displaced Jews settled throughout the Middle East, in both eastern and western Europe, north Africa, eastern Asia.  It was the fact that they did have semitic blood instead of being pure Aryan as Hitler demanded, that made the Jews his primary target to accuse, blame, persecute and eventually murder more than 6 million of them.

Despite all the efforts to destroy them, a remnant of the Jews have continuously occupied the land we now call Israel for more than 3,000 years and the faith and belief that what is now called Israel is the promised holy land given to the Jews by God has been an important component of the JudeoChristian tradition for all these millenia into current times.

The Holocaust is absolutely the justification for Israel as if all the other dark parts of Jewish history weren't sufficient justification enough for a long persecuted people to have a tiny sliver of land to call their homeland.  Jerusalem was not a 'holy site' for the Muslims until the mid 20th Century when it was declared so for political purposes.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 17, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



I just now got on line.  Haven't you figured out that I am not here 24/7?  And I am leaving in five.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 17, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


What historical records?
Any Links?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 17, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...




Well...I've answered that a number of different times in general threads.  No forced expulsions, especially not so Israel can conveniently take their land without the inconvenience of it's people.   I think some sort of federation with the West Bank is the likely answer assuming the Palestinians can get their act together.  A federation ensures a certain amount of autonomy, rights and representative government for each side, and an a seat at the table for national issues that isn't dependent on population proportions - then demographics aren't such a problem. Gaza would be a seperate problem to deal with.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 17, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



Google is your friend.  The problem is I'm going to derail the thread if I do.


----------



## rylah (Apr 17, 2019)

*There's No Demographic Problem*


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 17, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



OK


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 17, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



??? What makes you believe that Hamas and Fatah will get their act together ???

What you call "inconvenience" I call an imminent threat


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 17, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Google will accommodate me with Muslim sites that will agree with you.
I would appreciate knowing 3 sites that you approve of.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 17, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→ rylah, et al,

I think that if anyone has not watched this video provided by our friend "rylah," then take a few minutes to see it.  It is well worth the time.



rylah said:


> Caroline Glick: Prospects of Israeli  Sovereignty


*(COMMENT)*

I find myself caught in a sort-of "Catch 22" by the recent developments in Israeli political developments.  I agree, there are some serious flaws in some of the positions that are being taken what must be agreed upon if one is to be a pro-Israeli. 

I find that I don't understand what it means to be in support of the pro-Israeli position; because I don't understand it.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## rylah (Apr 17, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ rylah, et al,
> 
> I think that if anyone has not watched this video provided by our friend "rylah," then take a few minutes to see it.  It is well worth the time.
> ...



What is the catch? What is unclear?

Indeed, in spite of commonly visible faces from the Baby Boom generation, the country has grown younger and created a significant shift in politics. The old powerful parties that lead the country at the beginning totally diminished in mandates with the recent elections, the left moved center and the religious Zionist parties by being the main punch-bag started to turn the tense focus to unite the nation, especially because they were at the position to challenge both sides, with a growing support from the youth.

The left and right were and still are very divided, while religious Zionist parties manage to find common ground with both sides.

They literally just started talking about sovereignty and in no time it has already become mainstream not only inside the country but on the international arena as well.

Another central issue that they've brought to the mainstream of the current Israeli politics , and I must say with great courage, is the regulation of the boundaries between the judicial and governing bodies.
A theme that is commonly discussed and criticized in western democracies but was virtually made taboo by Aharon Barak judiciary revolution, that basically increased the power of the HJC over the Knesset, enabling it to reach into spheres where it was not authorized so by the representatives of the voters. The HJC has become the least trusted government body to say it gently, and seen as an elitist group of unelected judges appointed by other judges, with clear political bias and social layer, unbound by application from the Knesset and overreaching to an unbearable extent against majority opinion.
As far as I understand it, the direction is towards a more regulated choice of judges by the Knesset.

These two themes were at the center of the elections. And frankly the conduct of the elections was a pinnacle of how far the court got politicized and reaching.

The nation is getting younger, more conservative, and their electoral power is growing. The religious Zionist block who don't vote directly for Likud (a great portion do), if not for sudden strategically unwise split by the New Right, would be the 3rd largest party in the coalition after the Orthodox Aguda/Shas for whom both Arabs and religious Zionists vote on a regular basis.

We are indeed seeing a clear shift in the lexicon, demographics and public opinion contradicting the previous positions of the old generation.
Nothing new goes on the left nothing new on the right, nothing new on the secular or orthodox political spectrum, lots of optics and same old arguments. While there're actually young folks who're busy planting and building Judea, while the left and the right divide the nation.

Hope that didn't confuse You more.
Basic idea - look at the youth.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 17, 2019)

Young Jews are proud Israelis; no apologies necessary.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 17, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



We agree on this one.  The tendency to pile on with agreement when nobody is supporting their opinions is a sad fact on message boards.  You and I can disagree on Palestine and Israel, but the fact that you sympathize with the Palestinians in no may means that you hate the Jews as has been suggested.  I find that extrapolation to be ridiculous. 

And the fact that I think the Palestinians have refused myriad opportunities to compromise on a peace plan and/or have violated agreements and they have pretty well forfeited their claim to that land does not mean I hate the Palestinians.

The best solution now is for the UN to find and buy a nice piece of land approximately the size of Israel and move the Palestinians there.  Islam will never agree to that, however, as it would remove their ability to use the Palestinians for political purposes in their ultimate goal which is to destroy Israel and the Jews.


----------



## rylah (Apr 17, 2019)

*Regavim's First Quarterly Update for 2019*

In just 2 minutes, a taste of Regavim's achievements in the first 3 months of 2019.

*Regavim - Protecting our National Lands*


----------



## rylah (Apr 17, 2019)

*Levy Report translated into English*
Regavim is happy to announce the completion of the English translation of the Levy Commission Report. Especially in today’s challenging environment and as a major contributor to the commission we felt it was important for the details of the Levy Report to be available to as wide an audience as possible. We especially want to thank publicly the anonymous donor who made it possible.





*https://www.regavim.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/The-Levy-Commission-Report-on-the-Legal-Status-of-Building-in-Judea-and-Samaria2.pdf*


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 17, 2019)

rylah said:


> *Levy Report translated into English*
> Regavim is happy to announce the completion of the English translation of the Levy Commission Report. Especially in today’s challenging environment and as a major contributor to the commission we felt it was important for the details of the Levy Report to be available to as wide an audience as possible. We especially want to thank publicly the anonymous donor who made it possible.
> 
> 
> ...



Is there somewhere to get a summary of the basic conclusions so  we don't have to read 75 single spaced pages with subtitles that don't inform us much?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 17, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


It appears as though Coyote uses Arab sites for her “facts”.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 18, 2019)

A two-state solution is not possible with the PLO as it currently exists. They have spent their entire time since Oslo working not to build a state but to destroy one. But maybe, down the road, a Palestinian leadership that no longer fantasizes about destroying Israel can arise. The only way that scenario is remotely possible is if they accept that Israel is not going anywhere, and the only way that could happen is by Israel asserting its rights in a consistent, unapologetic and unflinching way.

Annexation of areas that are unquestioningly going to be part of Israel is more likely to bring peace than pretending that Gush Etzion is on the table could ever do.

And guess what? When Israel acts with pride rather than pandering to liberal American Jewish leaders who are in turn pandering to the New York Times, American Jews who are actually proud of their Jewishness will support them. If these liberal groups want to help Israel, they need to instill pride in their flocks, both in Judaism and in Zionism. These leaders need to learn how to answer the questions that Israel's critics hurl at the Jewish state without acting like frightened shtetl Jews. A big reason Israel is losing the support of young American Jews is because their own Jewish role models are too ignorant or cowed to proudly support Israel unequivocally, and to explain why Israel does what it does.

(full article online)

Why liberal Jews opposing annexing settlement blocs are wrong ~ Elder Of Ziyon - Israel News


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 18, 2019)

https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/dont-worry-about-what-the-neighbors-might-think/


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Foxie, you can not forceably move millians of people who have roots, families and ties to that region going back hundreds if not thousands of years.  It isnt a question of whether Islam would accept but it but whether any decent human being could accept it.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> A two-state solution is not possible with the PLO as it currently exists. They have spent their entire time since Oslo working not to build a state but to destroy one. But maybe, down the road, a Palestinian leadership that no longer fantasizes about destroying Israel can arise. The only way that scenario is remotely possible is if they accept that Israel is not going anywhere, and the only way that could happen is by Israel asserting its rights in a consistent, unapologetic and unflinching way.
> 
> Annexation of areas that are unquestioningly going to be part of Israel is more likely to bring peace than pretending that Gush Etzion is on the table could ever do.
> 
> ...


Or maybe Israel is losing Jewish support because Jews, like any other diverse demographic group are capable of thinking for themselves.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > A two-state solution is not possible with the PLO as it currently exists. They have spent their entire time since Oslo working not to build a state but to destroy one. But maybe, down the road, a Palestinian leadership that no longer fantasizes about destroying Israel can arise. The only way that scenario is remotely possible is if they accept that Israel is not going anywhere, and the only way that could happen is by Israel asserting its rights in a consistent, unapologetic and unflinching way.
> ...


Sure, but where is the evidence to what you just posted?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


It is an opinion, like the article you posted.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


1) The Arabs do not have "thousands of years" of history in the Land of Israel.  That has been established.

2) Muslim Arabs had no problems of forcibly moving a Million Jews 
from 1920 on, be it from their ancient homeland in Gaza, TransJordan, Judea, Samaria, or what is Israel.  Israel is the only place where they failed to do so.

3) All "decent" humans have accepted the expulsion of Jews from their homes and homeland from 1920 on.  No one cried about it.
No one raised their voices to tell the British to stop the Arabs from attacking Jews and expelling them from their homes and cities in Mandate Palestine, and much less from the rest of the Muslim Arab world from 1948 on.


What seems to be indecent for Jews to do, has always been perfectly decent for Christians and Muslims to do.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


But the fact remains, that regardless of your opinion (and that was my point ) Jewish support for Israel has not gone down, especially when Jews and pro Israel non Jews see what the behavior on the other side continues to be and what the alternative to standing strong for Israel is.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



It would be difficult for sure.   But when a people will not compromise, will not agree that the Jews should be allowed to live, and who consistently initiate deadly hostilities with the Jews after seventy years of working to accommodate those same people, it is time to stop trying and do something that will work.  The Jews also have roots, families, and ties to that region going back much further than Islam does.  And it is Islam that objects to Israel, not the rank and file population per se'.  Israel deserves to be left alone and live as who and what they are in peace.  They do not initiate the hostilities but they do finish the fights.  They would like to not have to have the fights.

The Arabs expelled almost all Jews from their countries and have refused to allow the Palestinians to immigrate to their countries and the Israelis would be committing literal suicide if they do.  So we should go for the next best solution to the problem.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



It would not be forcibly. Give them the option.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 18, 2019)

RE: Annexing West Bank
⁜→ Coyote, et al,

There does come a time when the moral value of some argument simply evaporates with time.



Coyote said:


> Foxie, you can not forcibly move millians of people who have roots, families and ties to that region going back hundreds if not thousands of years.  It isnt a question of whether Islam would accept but it but whether any decent human being could accept it.


*(COMMENT)*

Even given that there was 700,000  forcibly moved in the onset of the 1948 War of Independents, like Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion, they have faded into the Sunset.  Even today, the life expectancy of any one of the estimated 700,000 who makes the claim of having been displaced, are walking into the Sunset; even as we speak.

◈  The estimated number of Arab Palestinians of the West Bank, 65 years and over: 3.52% (male 44,662 /female 53,943) (2018 est.)

Current Population Pyramid: 

​
◈  Life expectancy at birth:  This entry contains the average number of years to be lived by a group of people born in the same year, if mortality at each age remains constant in the future. Life expectancy at birth is also a measure of overall quality of life in a country and summarizes the mortality at all ages. It can also be thought of as indicating the potential return on investment in human capital and is necessary for the calculation of various actuarial measures.  



✦  total population: 75.4 years

•  male: 73.4 years
•  female: 77.6 years (2018 est.)​
If you were an infant → to →  7 years old, among the estimated 700,000 displaced, there would be very few still living today.  And in the next decade, the "Right of Return" will be virtually gone. as there would be no Arab Palestinians of the West Bank that experienced the move in 1948.  And in that population group, not all of them were actually displaced persons.

So, of those thousands, and the many children, shown in the pictures of storming the border fencing, how many were (truthfully) displaced persons.  How many persons 70-year-old, or more, were fighting for the "Right of Return?"  How valid _(truthfully and morally)_ is that complaint?

How do were merge the moral and the factual argument?

I think we should consider who is owed what before we determine the compensating package (if any) is warranted.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> There does come a time when the moral value of some argument simply evaporates with time.
> ...


We might talking about two different things...if I am understanding you.

Right of Return vs Forceable Expulsions.  I support the Right of Return for those who were expelled or fled war.  And MAYBE their immediate kids....but that is it, I don’t support it on down the generations,  and I apply that to both Palestinians and Jews.

On the hand I absolutely oppose forced expulsions.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


If it was entirely voluntary sure...if the option were do it voluntarily or we will do it for you or we will make your so miserable you will wish you had...then no.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



During that time there were many expulsions....Arabs expelled Jews and Jews expelled Arabs.  There was also a lot of myth building by both sides.  This occurred close to a century ago....when you think of it.  Ethics have changed.

Would you really support forcing millions of families to leave their homeland?  I wouldn’t.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Should we encourage Jews to leave too?  Voluntarily?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 18, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> There does come a time when the moral value of some argument simply evaporates with time.
> ...


Nationality is hereditary.


----------



## Lastamender (Apr 18, 2019)

The religion known as Islam drives this problem. Someone who is honest knows that. To expect any peace, a fantasy.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...


I think American Jews are more critical of Israel’s political behavior than you think.  There is a disconnect at play...supporting Israel’s right to exist (pretty much strongly supported) vs supporting Israel’s policies.  There is also a disturbing trend that seems to equate anything less than a 100% blind support of the rightwing vision of Israel with a form of treason.


As Israel turns 70, many young American Jews turn away

_Natalie Portman, the Oscar-winning actress, recently kicked off a massive storm of controversy when she pulled out of a prestigious award ceremony in Israel because, she said, she “did not want to appear as endorsing Benjamin Netanyahu.”

The response to Portman’s refusal to appear alongside Israel’s prime minister was intense. She was denounced by right-wing Israeli politicians. One labeled Portman’s decision as borderline anti-Semitic. Another suggested that her Israeli citizenship should be stripped. Born in Israel, Portman is a dual American-Israeli citizen. 

The reaction within the American Jewish community was more divided. Some assailed her for being disloyal, deluded, or, at best, misguided. Others hailed her as a hero for publicly voicing her opposition to Netanyahu and his government’s hard-line policies_.​
This same article also describes the history of American Jewish attitudes towards Israel (interesting as I wasn’t aware of it) and the changing attitudes of young American Jews.  Like any article it has it’s bias’ but it raises good points supported by some pretty hefty polls like Pew.

A Portrait of Jewish Americans

This leads to some interesting questions and conundrums.

Common canards thrown at Jews are that they are more loyal to Israel than what ever country they are a citizen of (note, this same sort of argument is levied towards Catholics regarding the Pope and Muslims regarding Islam, the inference being they can’t possibly be true loyal to their nation)...the arguments being made by the political right here are perversely supporting that canard by attempting to enforce a loyalty against criticism of Netanyahu and the actions of it’s rightwing political powers.  In the end it begs the question...are Jews a monolithic group or a diverse group sharing a common faith and heritage?  I vote for the latter.  It is as big a mistake to paint all Jews as the same as it is for Muslims or Christians.


----------



## Slyhunter (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Should we encourage Jews to leave too?  Voluntarily?


Arabs have plenty of places they can go. The Jews don't.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Slyhunter said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Should we encourage Jews to leave too?  Voluntarily?
> ...


Christians have plenty of places they can go but they invaded America.  Let’s send them back to Europe.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



They are already miserable so leave or live with the status quo and what makes it miserable is not Israel but the corrupt governments of Hamas and Fatah.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Millions have done it. Look at how America was built. This is the only peaceful solution I see.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...


America was built on the back of slavery. 

Forced expulsions are not peaceful solutions otherwise you would have no problem applying it to Jews as well.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 18, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  Coyote, et al,

Maybe this is true.  Maybe not.



Coyote said:


> During that time there were many expulsions....Arabs expelled Jews and Jews expelled Arabs.  There was also a lot of myth building by both sides.  This occurred close to a century ago....when you think of it.  Ethics have changed.
> 
> Would you really support forcing millions of families to leave their homeland?  I wouldn’t.


*(COMMENT)*

There was not that much difference in time between the mass internment of Japanese Americans (1942-1946) during World War II.  →  Then, the mass displacement of various inhabitants in Palestine (1947 - 1949).  Neither of which came even close to the 12 to 16 Million displaced during the 1947 Partition of India and Pakistan.

There is a world of difference when discussing morals and ethics in the academic and hypothetical → and then when it comes down to the experience of the real thing.

What many people think is "unthinkable" today -- is just the way things were done (normal) in that era.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  Coyote, et al,
> 
> Maybe this is true.  Maybe not.
> ...



Exactly!


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Nationality is hereditary.



Absolutely untrue.  Nationality is determined by the laws of the nation offering nationality and citizenship and governed solely by that nation.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Should we encourage Jews to leave too?  Voluntarily?



By placing restrictions on where Jews are permitted to live, you already are.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Slavery was only in the South. Built on innovation and mass immigration. You should take a history class.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> There is also a disturbing trend that seems to equate anything less than a 100% blind support of the rightwing vision of Israel with a form of treason.



I strongly disagree with this.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  Coyote, et al,
> 
> Maybe this is true.  Maybe not.
> ...



And its viewed as normal.  Everywhere but Israel.  Where is the demand for right of return in India and Pakistan?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  Coyote, et al,
> 
> *Maybe this is true.  Maybe not.*
> ...



Well...history is written by the victors and the prevailing narrative has been that they fled at the urging of their leaders.  But the opening of historical archives in Israel painted a different picture.  Many left either through fear of war Atrocities were committed by both sides) or were forceably expelled by militias.  The expulsion of the Palestinians re-examined


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ...


Agree.  Also there are refugees in refugee camps all over....and...silence.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > There is also a disturbing trend that seems to equate anything less than a 100% blind support of the rightwing vision of Israel with a form of treason.
> ...


Well, that is your prerogative but it is what it seems to me.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Should we encourage Jews to leave too?  Voluntarily?
> ...



Where are Jews restricted within the state of Israel?

How many Arab settlements have been built in Area C?

Not allowing foreign nationals to move into a disputed area is not encouraging them to leave.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



I think you missed my point.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


The economic benefits of slavery were felt throughout the nation.  Mass voluntary immigration.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


What was it then?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Well, yes, you are asking the same questions you asked before.  I've written several posts asking for clarifications of what constitutes an "Arab settlement" and "foreign national".  You have refused to address my requests.  We are at an impasse until you address my questions.  

Who are the "settlers" in the Jewish quarter?  Jews or Arabs?  

Who is a "foreigner" in disputed lands?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Slavery ended in 1864. Since then America has been a land of opportunity for millions who decided to leave their ancestral homes. The “Palestinians” are obviously unhappy so why stay and remain unhappy? You know there is zero chance they become a one state country and also zero chance for a two state solution. Only solution is immigration. Adios.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...




That historically in significant conflicts and war between two distinct ethnic groups population exchange was accepted as normal.  The sole exception is Israel.  Israel still carries a demonization for the population exchange which does not exist in any other instance.  Such as India/Pakistan.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 18, 2019)

RE: Annexing West Bank
⁜→ AzogtheDefiler, et al,

Well, I see you are a student of history.  But the description of slavery today and what was justified as critical from the 1800s and forwards is a bit different.



AzogtheDefiler said:


> Slavery was only in the South. Built on innovation and mass immigration. You should take a history class.


*(COMMENT)*

America used a very large number of Chinese to build railways for the rich and powerful.

And even though White Slavery has existed for several centuries, Americans would find it odd to know that it is still a thriving business today in the need for the service of forced prostitution and sex slaves.

It was not all that long ago that there were "sweatshops" and "impress child labor" --- and indentured servitude.  There were many many children forced to work in mines and factories in the North, all the way to mid-1990s.  And up and until the late 1980s, there was still some wide-spread exploitation of migrant workers and illegal immigrants.

You would be correct if you were just talking about the exploitation of Black Labor.  But there is so much more to the meaning of slavery.

Most Respectfully.
R


----------



## Lastamender (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Slyhunter said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...





> Christians





Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...





> America was built on the back of slavery.


Slavery was legal and America was built by the Constitution. Slavery is no longer legal but the Constitution is still the law.

Israel knows what Islam says, any treaty will only last as long as it better for Islam, so it is meaningless.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


I thought I had.

A foreign national is some one not a citizen of the area in question.

An Arab settlement would be a new town or outpost built in the occupied/disputed territories, between the start of the Israeli settlement program and now.  To keep it clear, let’s define settlers as Israeli nationals.

As to who are the settlers in the Jewish Quarter?  I would say neither.  War and subsequent policies caused considerable population shifts.

A foreigner is some one who was not a resident there (or the progeny of) at the time it was occupied.

If you choose to define it broadly than Palestinians in refugee camps would have equal right to enter and settle those areas as well as Israel.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> To keep it clear, let’s define settlers as Israeli nationals.



Only Israeli nationals can be settlers?  

And you can't see the bias in that?  You can't see the lack of objective definition in that?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


I disagree.  Forced Population exchange  (and that must be what we are talking about since no one cares about voluntary population exchanges) may ONCE have been the norm but is now considered a human rights violation. Ethics evolve, and just like slavery is no longer condoned, forced expulsions are not either and it certainly isn’t just Israel.  Look at Myanmar’s expulsion of the Rohinga.  Israel is not carrying the demonization for anything other than attempting to justify a barbaric act that is no longer condoned in the civilized world.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > To keep it clear, let’s define settlers as Israeli nationals.
> ...



How broad do you wish to make it?  Ok.  Foreign nationals then, involved in a governmental program to create transplant it’s citizens into territory occupied by their nation, by creating settlements.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE: Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→ AzogtheDefiler, et al,
> 
> Well, I see you are a student of history.  But the description of slavery today and what was justified as critical from the 1800s and forwards is a bit different.
> ...



True but that is not what Coyote meant


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

What was the President of this “Palestine” in 1946?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: Annexing West Bank
> ...


True...but Rocco makes an excellent point.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> A foreign national is some one not a citizen of the area in question.


The territory in question (Area A) is disputed.  By definition it has no sovereignty and therefore no nationality.  By definition, then, there ARE no citizens.  Try again.  

Either BOTH Israelis and Arab Palestinians are citizens of the territory.  Or neither are.  To say that one group is and one group is not is biased.  



> An Arab settlement would be a new town or outpost built in the occupied/disputed territories, between the start of the Israeli settlement program and now.  To keep it clear, let’s define settlers as Israeli nationals.
> 
> As to who are the settlers in the Jewish Quarter?  I would say neither.  War and subsequent policies caused considerable population shifts.


These to paragraphs contradict each other.  On the one hand, you say that, due to the rules of your game, only Israelis can be settlers.  On the other hand, you claim that neither are settlers.  Please resolve your own contradiction.



> A foreigner is some one who was not a resident there (or the progeny of) at the time it was occupied.


And this is yet another entirely different objective definition.  Please resolve your own contradiction.



> If you choose to define it broadly than Palestinians in refugee camps would have equal right to enter and settle those areas as well as Israel.


Well, I have no idea what refugee camps have to do with anything.  But I agree in principle that Arab Palestinians have just as much right to build in Area C as Israelis.  They just don't have the infrastructure and government and economy to do it.  Largely because they can't focus on the right things.  And since they created a security problem for Israel, well, Israel has to address it.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> How broad do you wish to make it?



I want to make it broad enough to include BOTH parties to the dispute.  Limiting wrong-doing to only one party is biased.


----------



## Slyhunter (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > A foreign national is some one not a citizen of the area in question.
> ...


The group that can take and hold it.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > A foreign national is some one not a citizen of the area in question.
> ...



If both Israeli’s and Palestinians are “citizens” of the disputed areathat has no sovereignty then why are Arabs barred from creating new settlements?

Why are Jewish settlements funded and supported by the political apparatus of Israel but not Arab settlements?

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

And I don’t just mean Arab Palestinians, but Arab Israeli citizens.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> I disagree.  Forced Population exchange  (and that must be what we are talking about since no one cares about voluntary population exchanges) may ONCE have been the norm but is now considered a human rights violation. Ethics evolve, and just like slavery is no longer condoned, forced expulsions are not either and it certainly isn’t just Israel.  Look at Myanmar’s expulsion of the Rohinga.  Israel is not carrying the demonization for anything other than attempting to justify a barbaric act that is no longer condoned in the civilized world.



Again you missed my point.  The population exchange which happened between Israel/Jewish people and the Arab Palestinians WAS the norm at the time.  

To demonize Israel NOW and on a continued basis for something that happened to literally MILLIONS of people at that same time and with that same moral structure in place is just wrong.


----------



## Slyhunter (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I don't see the problem.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> If both Israeli’s and Palestinians are “citizens” of the disputed area that has no sovereignty then why are Arabs barred from creating new settlements?



And THAT is why I want you to resolve your contradictions.  Are both Israeli nationals and Arab Palestinian nationals permitted to build and live in Area C?  Or are neither?

Those are your two choices.  Choosing one and not the other is biased.  Resolve your contradiction.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > A foreign national is some one not a citizen of the area in question.
> ...



You keep asking me for a different definition.  It is not my contradiction, it is your unwillingness to accept the definitions.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > If both Israeli’s and Palestinians are “citizens” of the disputed area that has no sovereignty then why are Arabs barred from creating new settlements?
> ...



In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.

Now how many Arab settlements have been constructed?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Why are Jewish settlements funded and supported by the political apparatus of Israel but not Arab settlements?



Two reasons.  1.  Israel has the ability to do it because they've invested in government and infrastructure and economy and peace for 100 years.  2.  Israel has legal control over the territory by treaty.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



That was true worldwide back then. Rich exploiting the poor. Not just in America. Hence mass immigration to the land of opportunity.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Link?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



No.  It is because your definitions contain internal contradictions.  You need to resolve those internal contradictions first.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why are Jewish settlements funded and supported by the political apparatus of Israel but not Arab settlements?
> ...



Every mostly Muslim country is an utter humanitarian nightmare. Israel is far from it. Only country in the ME that holds fair elections.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why are Jewish settlements funded and supported by the political apparatus of Israel but not Arab settlements?
> ...


So Arab Israeli’s are actively discriminated against when it comes to building settlements?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Arab sites have no contradictions, they have lies.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


People who use their dwellings to make weapons to kill Jews.
The jig is up.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Both Arabs and Jews are discriminated against over building anywhere if they do not get the right permits for building.

And I have read  where more Jewish buildings or even cities/settlements have been demolished than Arab ones.

You ask your questions in such an accusatory way when it comes to Israel doing far worse against its Jewish citizens than it does against the Arab ones who do not have the proper permits to build.

Arab Israelis live in Israel, and not in Judea and Samaria, aka, West Bank.

They must follow the same laws as the Jews, Druze, Bedouins and all others who are citizens or residents of the country.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.



OKAY!  Now we are getting somewhere.  So, regardless of ethnicity or nationality, ONLY those resident at the time of occupation (and their descendants) have a right to live in that territory.  Immigration is forbidden.  See?  THERE is an objective definition.  (As long as we begin with the FIRST occupation and not the second one.)

There are still issues with this, but at least we've narrowed you down to a good objective definition.  And I'll hold you to it.  No more defining settlers as Israeli nationals.  

The first problem, is obviously, this hasn't happened.  On either side.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.
> ...


Does that mean that Syria has to stop taking land in Syrian occupied Lebanon?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.
> ...



When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go?  You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point.  I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go?  You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point.  I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.



You go back to the first occupation since the time the territory ceased to be Ottoman territory.  You go back to the initial dispute.  Otherwise you are saying that if Arabs invade and occupy its fine, but when Israelis(Jews) return the favor its suddenly not okay.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Are you drinking kool aid?
Are you using sites that omit the 7 Day War?
5 nations attacked and lost land.

I asked for 3 sites...where’s your response?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.  

How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?

And for the record it has been well established that Arabs are far more likely to have illegal construction torn down and less likely to get permits.  In addition many illegal Jewish settlements get tacit approval by the government and even investment in infrastructure and schools.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > When was the first occupation though...how far back do you go?  You have to pick a point and since the idea of settlements as a specific program started in 1967 that would be a logical point.  I would not define settlements as part of the natural migrations of people because a government supported plan.
> ...



Why just that far?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


And I asked *you* a question that didn’t get answered.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.
> 
> How many Arab settlements have been created in Area C?



I have been deliberately ignoring the question because you have (falsely, and with bias) set up the question to be nonsensical.  Because, by your old definition, only Israelis can be settlers.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.
> ...


In the meanwhile, Egypt has Israel keeping Gazans out of Egypt and Jordan has Israel keeping Palis out of Jordan.
But that’s ok.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.
> ...


Not to mention Syria occupying Lebanon and trying to blame their attacks on the Lebanese leadership.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Because before that it was all under Ottoman sovereignty and therefore, by definition, not occupied by anyone.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I ask questions that DO NOT get answered.
> ...



It is not nonsensical in the least, it is just uncomfortable.

How many Israeli Jewish settlements have been created?

How many Israeli Arab settlements?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


How many Israeli Arab settlements have been dismantled due to being bomb manufacturing centers?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Jordan however annexed it and gave full citizenship rights to the Palestinians there.  Did they have a program of settlement building in the area?

So who else occupied it?


----------



## Lastamender (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Did you know Israel is a Jewish state. That might answer your question.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Link to details?
When did Jordan get back right to it’s West Bank that it lost in war?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Lastamender said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Coyote is obviously referencing Arab sites because she’s ignoring jeverything that happened since 1948.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> How many Israeli Jewish settlements have been created?
> 
> How many Israeli Arab settlements?



That depends entirely on your definition of "settlements"  By your new definition, anyone who was not a resident in 1948 (and their descendants)  is an illegal settler.  

By your new definition, Israelis have every right to set up a village in the place of their old farmlands.  And to live in the Jewish Quarter.  

We would have to reexamine the entire idea.  No one has this information.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Jordan however annexed it and gave full citizenship rights to the Palestinians there.  Did they have a program of settlement building in the area?
> 
> So who else occupied it?



So wait, what?!  

You don't have a problem with Jordan (a FOREIGN STATE with no rights to the territory) ANNEXES territory which does not belong to it?!  But you have a problem with Israel?!  (Who actually has full legal rights to that territory?!)  What?!

Jordan expelled every single Jew.  Claimed all of the property belonging to Jews.  Destroyed nearly every synagogue.  ERASED the Jewish people in that place.  They then took over the territory and applied Jordanian sovereignty to territory which was OUTSIDE its legal sovereignty.  Then they gave away *I don't even know how many dunams of land* to Arabs, creating the entire system of "but its my land, its been in my family for generations" that haunts Area C today.  

If you are okay with mass expulsion and annexing of territory that does not belong to you then just let Israel do it.  Sheesh.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Jordan however annexed it and gave full citizenship rights to the Palestinians there.  Did they have a program of settlement building in the area?
> ...


You are engaged in a discussion with someone using alternate universe facts.
The only reason she responds to you is because you are foolish enough to fall into the “compromise” trap.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > How many Israeli Jewish settlements have been created?
> ...


You are distorting my definition by omitting  points.

One thing that is distinct in the idea of settlements is that it is a government supported plan to support the building of new communities in order to alter demographics in an area claimed by another people.  And that is a principle source of conflict. That is not unique to Israel either.  

Jordan took, occupied and annexed the territory.  Did Jordan initiate any programs of settlement building while it was occupied?  

In the creation of settlements by Israel, how many settlers are actually those who had lived there from 1967?  Or 1948?  Or their children?

And why does Israel not allow it’s Arabs to build settlements in Area C?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> When did Jordan get back right to it’s West Bank that it lost in war?



When did Jordan EVER have rights to the West Bank?  Oh, yeah.  Never.


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > When did Jordan get back right to it’s West Bank that it lost in war?
> ...


You are engaged in a discussion with a historical revisionist.
Don’t bother yourself.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 18, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Jordan took, occupied and annexed the territory.  Did Jordan initiate any programs of settlement building while it was occupied?



Not my point.  My point was that you are okay with Jordan capturing territory in an aggressive war, expelling its residents based on ethnicity, occupying, then annexing?!


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Jordan however annexed it and gave full citizenship rights to the Palestinians there.  Did they have a program of settlement building in the area?
> ...



No I am not alright with it, and wasn’t intending to imply it is acceptable. And frankly Israel hasn’t been any better in terms of land confiscations so let’s not go there.

I am not and have never been ok with mass expulsions!

Your point is taken, I have not really read that much about what Jordan did then.

Ok,so given that, then Jordan allowed Arabs to take Jewish property and that would qualify as settlements.  Where does that leave us then?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Jordan took, occupied and annexed the territory.  Did Jordan initiate any programs of settlement building while it was occupied?
> ...


No.

Are you ok with Israel expelling residents based on ethnicity during war?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

.





Shusha said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > When did Jordan get back right to it’s West Bank that it lost in war?
> ...


I guess not.  It was supposed be an Arab state from the partition.


West Bank - Wikipedia
In 1947, it was subsequently designated as part of a proposed Arab state by the United Nations (UN) partition plan for Palestine. The resolution recommended partition of the British Mandate into a Jewish State, an Arab State, and an internationally administered enclave of Jerusalem;[16] a broader region of the modern-day West Bank was assigned to the Arab State. The resolution designated the territory described as "the hill country of Samaria and Judea" (including what is now also known as the "West Bank") as part of the proposed Arab state, but following the 1948 Arab–Israeli War this area was captured by Transjordan (renamed Jordan two years after independence in 1946).


----------



## Coyote (Apr 18, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Actually it is because she and Rocco and maybe one or two others are the only ones who attempt discussion.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...




Ditto that.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> I guess not.  It was supposed be an Arab state from the partition.



Well, no.  It was SUPPOSED to be ONE Jewish State and ONE Arab State.  That would be Israel and Jordan.  Beyond that, there was NO authority, ever, at any time, which created a legal foundation for a THIRD State UNTIL the development of the distinct Arab Palestinian identity sometime in the 70s and 80s.

But even if there was supposed to be THREE States created, instead of the two, STILL, Jordan has no right to territory outside its international boundaries  and therefore had no right to other territory, whether it was intended for a Jewish state (which it was) or for another Arab state (which it wasn't).

Its really, really important to address this incorrect information.  The Partition Plan(s) were suggestions, but in no way legally binding.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



In principle, no.  Practically, at the time, shrug, it was the norm.  And, if you are talking 1948, not all of it was "based on ethnicity".  Alot of it is based on military strategy.  You empty a village of the enemy if the location is of strategic importance. And both sides will try to capture territory as necessary. Is it ugly?  Yeah, of course it is.  No question.  

BUT, again, that ugliness happened to MILLIONS of people during and post WWII.  The crazy part is that only Israel is being still villified for acting upon what was normal for the time.  And only Israel is being asked to retroactively "correct" the situation.  It reeks of special rules for Israel.  

So, I don't support the immoral principle.  BUT I also recognize that conflict between ethnic groups usually results in peace when the two groups are separated by healthy borders and mutual respect.


----------



## Billo_Really (Apr 19, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> On Saturday, Netanyahu said he would annex the West Bank (or Judea and Samaria, as they are known in the Bible) to Israel if he would be re-elected Prime Minister on Tuesday.  Do y'all think that this is a good idea?


I think Netanfuckyou is a modern day Hitler.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Nationality is hereditary.
> ...


Not so. Nationality is determined by international law. citizenship is determined by domestic law but must conform with international law.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 19, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Show me the international law which says that nationality is hereditary.  As opposed to determined by the domestic laws of each individual State.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


There is no dispute.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


There was no population exchange.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > In my opinion, and I have stated this before, until the sovereignty is decided, either no one who was not already resident there at the time of occupation should enter and build or ALL should be allowed to with out ethnic bias and if it comes to government funding it should be equatable, not giving preferences to one group.
> ...


Israelis are foreign nationals. Palestinians are the natives.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Indeependent said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Interesting opinion.
What land did Lebanon lose?
What land did Syria lose?
What land did Iraq lose?
What land did Jordan lose?
What land did Egypt lose?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Indeed, nobody talks about the 1948 occupation.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > How many Israeli Jewish settlements have been created?
> ...


Any jew who has family from the Jewish quarter should be able to reclaim their land. Any random Jew, no.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > I guess not.  It was supposed be an Arab state from the partition.
> ...





Shusha said:


> STILL, Jordan has no right to territory outside its international boundaries and therefore had no right to other territory,


Couldn't we say the same thing about Israel?


----------



## Shusha (Apr 19, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...




No. Not even remotely. The dispute between Jewish Palestinians and Arab Palestinians is a civil dispute within an international boundary.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


In international law the people are "married" to the land. The people cannot be removed from their land, i.e. ethnic cleansing. The land cannot be removed from the people, i.e. conquest.

Both are illegal.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Whose international boundaries? The Palestinian's.
Who belongs in that territory? The Palestinians.

You see a dispute where there is none.


----------



## RoccoR (Apr 19, 2019)

RE:  Annexing West Bank
⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,

Yeah, you even answer your own questions wrong.



P F Tinmore said:


> Whose international boundaries? The Palestinian's.
> Who belongs in that territory? The Palestinians.
> 
> You see a dispute where there is none.


*(COMMENT)*

At what time did the Arab Palestinians assume sovereignty over the territory?

→  Never.  And so the Palestinians had no established boundaries.
→  It is not exclusively inhabited by any single entiry.  
→  There is NO territory in which the Arab Palestinians have any exclusive rights; not in the last several centuries anyway.

Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  Annexing West Bank
> ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Yeah, you even answer your own questions wrong.
> ...


There is no Palestine, blah, blah, blah.

You always regurgitate Israel's BS talking points.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Here is the thing, Coyote.

There were Jews and Arabs living in Judea and Samaria in 1948.
With the Arab declaration of war in 1948 and the invasion by the Jordan forces, aided by the British, all Jews lost their homes and lands, and some even their lives.  They had to flee to what is now Israel.

Therefore, no Jews, only Arabs living in Judea and Samaria between 1948 and 1967, with how many more Arabs being allowed to "settle" into those areas without anyone saying anything against it?

The Arabs again declared war in 1967 and again Jordan tried to get more land. Jordan was told by Israel to stay out of the war.  It did not.  Jordan lost the war with the other Arab countries in 6 days and lost the land, the same way as Egypt lost Gaza.

Israel wanted to give Gaza back to Egypt, Egypt said NO Thanks!

After the 1967 defensive war Jews were then allowed to return, not necessarily to the same areas, the same villages where they had been expelled from, but they were allowed to return and build.

Do remember that Hevron is a totally different issue, as Jews were expelled from that city after the massacre in 1929.

So, considering the history of how Arab Palestinians acquired land, not because they fought the Jews in a fair war and won, but because their  Arab tribe brothers fought the wars and at first won, in 1948, and then lost in 1967..........

How many "new settlements" did the Arabs build in a Jew Free Judea and Samaria?

How many new "settlements" have the Arabs been allowed to build, since 1967?

Or better still, how many Arab settlements have been evacuated by the Jews/Israel since 1967 to make way for the Jews who lived there before 1948, as it was done to the Jews?

Arabs are mainly organized in Areas A and B which are mostly under the PA since 1993 with the Oslo Accords.  Not one city or "settlement" has been destroyed or evacuated by Israel since 1967.

When you are talking about new settlements in Area C, are you talking about more Arabs besides the 300,000 living there who live in their own cities and villages?

Arabs, meaning whole clans, moving into area C from areas A and B, and being allowed to create their own villages or cities?  Or are you talking about the villages and cities which already exist there which are allowed to expand with the right permits to build?


Now, put yourself in the place of Israel.

The Arabs went as far as initiating two military wars against your people in order to destroy your country.  They took land, killed Jews, and expelled Jews.

Israel and the Jews wanted none of those wars.  But that is what they got.  They defended themselves and won, survived.

The Oslo Accords was about the Arabs accepting living with the Jews, working towards a peace treaty.  Instead, we are in the constant state of a Hudna.  And you do know what that means.

You want new settlements for Arabs built on Area C ?  In exchange for what?
What does Israel and the Jews who are still expelled from Hebron and many other ancient Jewish cities get in return?

I ask because it has been the Arab, in general, idea, that they will wait, and wait, and wait until the get what they want.  They do not have to sit and talk, sit and negotiate, they just sit and wait.....for the Jews to get tired and give them what they want.  As in the time of Mohammad, when the Jews helped him and got their heads chopped in return.


Israel does NOT occupy land in its ancient homeland, where they were to be allowed to live under the Mandate for Palestine.

78% of that ancient land was TAKEN by 1925 by the newly arrived Hashemites.  Then the Hashemites wanted more and took more.  Then they wanted more and lost what they took the second time.

Judea and Samaria is Jewish land.  Always has been, no matter who invaded, moved in, occupied.  Jews have the Right to live anywhere in that area.  But the chant continues to be that Jews are "Europeans" , "Colonizers", "Invaders", who "took" land from the Arabs.

How many Arab settlements have been built in area C since Oslo?  

I hope ABSOLUTELY  NONE !!!!!

Arabs have already stolen more than they should have from the Jewish people, not allowing them to live in their ancient lands of TransJordan and Gaza.


And I hope that Israel does stay strong in not allowing the PA, PLO and their European friends continue with their attempts to "Make Facts On The Ground", by allowing Millions of Arab and European money be wasted instead of helping the Arabs who really need it with infrastructure and jobs, etc, the PA refused to create.

Area C does need to be annexed by Israel.  It is more than about time.
We do see what Hamas, the PA and others continue to attempt to do in Israel, in Jerusalem to deny any and all Jewish right to any of their ancient homeland.

And all you can come and cry about is "Arabs are not being allowed to build NEW settlements in area C"  ?  Are they allowed to expand on existing settlements as the Jews are?  That is more than enough, then.

History matters.  What the Arab Leaders think they can achieve in place of what they should be achieving, matters.


Are you going to read and reflect on what I have written above, or are you going to come back and simply continue to ask " How many Arab settlements have been created in area C? "


I gave the answer. And the why's.  Now, it is your turn to take some time and think about all the facts on the ground since 1948.  (It would be since 1920 when the first Jews were expelled from Gaza, but.......Should I ask, how many Jewish settlements exist in Gaza now, and how many new settlements are being built in Gaza? If the answer is Zero, should I ask why, when Jews always lived there before the expulsion in 1920 and then the later expulsion in 2005 to give the Arabs what they wanted ? )


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> .
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You seem to have a total lack of understanding that the Arabs, were not interested in a Arab State and a Jewish State.  They were and still are, ONLY interested in ONE Arab State, where there are or (as they would prefer) there are no Jews at all, as we have with Jordan and Gaza right now.

The PA has made it very clear, that there will be no Jews living in the State of Palestine, showing a map which includes ALL of Israel.

Now, if there are NO new Arab settlements in Area C, can you understand why?


----------



## Indeependent (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


They attempt *compromise* on Israel’s legitimate land victories while you bring up out of context, out of chronological order, nonsense.
You just admitted within a few pages that you were incorrect concerning Jordan, but facts don’t seem to matter to you until someone else presents them.
The fact is you will converse with anyone willing to consider Israel giving land to people who attack Israel.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Foxfyre said:
> ...



They did it when they left Israel in the first place.  Hundreds of thousands quietly left the country so that the Arabs could exterminate the Jews.  I don't blame the Jews for not welcoming them back.  They certainly demonstrated they had no intention of living peacefully with the Jews.

And Islam is not about to allow them into their countries where they would no longer be useful to use as pawns to generate sympathy and antipathy for the Jews from even the non-Islam world.   They don't care about the Palestinians.  They put their missile and rocket launcher in the midst of children, women, old men hoping some will be killed or injured when Israel returns fire and thereby eliminate all support for Israel.  I have read accounts suggesting the Islamic militants, when collateral damage doesn't happen or isn't 'enough', actually create some collateral damage to ensure more criticism of Israel.

There is no reason those Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank can't stay there as long as they wish.. I'm sure Israel won't object.  But I'm pretty sure that if a homeland was provided for them--much more land than they currently have even though their new homeland would be roughly the size of tiny Israel, and they had the option to move, a great many, perhaps all, would move.

Will the UN do that?  Probably not as long as so many militant Islamic countries have a say in it.  A solution for the Palestinians is not their concern.  The destruction of Israel is.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



America was NOT built on the back of slavery.  Slavery existed and precious few condoned it then and nobody living does today.  But most of the states were not slave states and America was built just fine.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



That is true.  But America was built on an idea, a concept that did not include slavery.   Yes cotton was important to the industrial revolution and much of that was produced by slaves on plantations.  But it would have happened anyway.

Israel does not and has never had slavery of any form.  In fact many of the Israelis probably descended from slaves in Egypt and Babylonia (mostly modern day Iraq) in their own history.  I can't see what the history of slavery in America has to do with them and the Palestinian situation and it sort of derails the thread to push the discussion in that direction.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



Except neither the Arabs or the Egyptians will allow the Palestinians to immigrate into their countries.  The only solution is for the U.N. to provide the Palestinians with their own land, their own country as they did for the Israelis.  And that won't happen because Egypt and those same Arab countries do not WANT a solution for the Palestinians.  They use the Palestinians as their pawns and excuse to demand the destruction of Israel.

It is important to remember that the Jews were not required to move to Israel.  But millions did once they were provided their own homeland and many are still pulling up stakes in the hostile places that they live and relocating to Israel.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 19, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Oh I completely agree. I should have been more clear. If the Muslim world wanted to help the "Palestinians" they would have by now but to your point they don't.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 19, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


In that case Shusha has a valid point, what about the Jews expelled and displaced by Arabs in 1948?


----------



## Coyote (Apr 19, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > .
> ...


Your bias precedes your understanding.  There are no arab Israeli settlements because only Jews are allowed to build there.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Which Arabs?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Between 1920 and 1970, 900,000 Jews were expelled from Arab and other Muslim countries: from Morocco to Iran, from Turkey to Yemen, including places where they had lived for twenty centuries.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 19, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


The ones that drove out the Jews.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 19, 2019)

Foxfyre said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


And over 711,000 Palestinians were expelled and another 40,000 internally discplaced in  refugee camps.


----------



## Shusha (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Your bias precedes your understanding.  There are no arab Israeli settlements because only Jews are allowed to build there.



There are no Arab settlements because when Arabs do build there, they are not called settlements.  But we've solved that definition problem now.


----------



## Coyote (Apr 19, 2019)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Your bias precedes your understanding.  There are no arab Israeli settlements because only Jews are allowed to build there.
> ...



No we have not.  How many Israeli Arabs have been allowed to build in Area C?

Are you going to keep dodging?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Do you mean Jordan not the Palestinians?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



There have been Arab-Israelis there all along.  And two years ago the green light was given for additional Arab construction.

https://www.israpundit.org/israel-agrees-to-arab-construction-in-area-c/


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 19, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Only after the Arab attempt to exterminate Israel which Israel has successfully fought off several times now.  Those Palestinians who stood with Israel and their progeny remain in Israel with full citizenship status even now and they make up roughly 21% of the Israeli population and enjoy representation on the Knesset.  There could be an exception, but I don't think you can find an Arab country or Islamic majority country anywhere in the world that allows Jews into their leadership.

Among those who wanted the Israelis exterminated and/or driven from the land, most fled expecting to return to a Jew free Palestine.  The rest got the boot.  And they haven't been allowed to return.

I simply can't find a problem with Israel's position on that.


----------



## José (Apr 19, 2019)

> Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> Palestinians who stood with Israel and their progeny remain in Israel.
> 
> Among those who wanted the Israelis exterminated and/or driven from the land, most fled expecting to return to a Jew free Palestine. The rest got the boot.



 

The 150.000 Palestinians who escaped ethnic cleasing by the IDF, Irgun and other jewish paramilitary groups were the ones who longed to be pratriotic israeli citizens.

The 750.000 who got the boot were the ones who wanted to carry out a second Holocaust.

You can clearly see in Foxfyre's words the idealization of the jewish people tipical among westerners who like Rocco, Dogmaphobe, Coyote had their formative years in the second half of the last century.

It's impossible to conceive that the benevolent, angelical creatures who were always harmed by Gentiles and never harmed anyone...

It's inconceivable that these beings of light could even for a moment abandon their historical role of dehumanized and become dehumanizers.

If the "good" Palestinians were allowed to stay and the "bad" ones were driven out, no one can "*find a problem with Israel's position on that.*"

"Justice" was served and the moral status of the "super victims of human history" was not tarnished.


----------



## José (Apr 19, 2019)

The most frightening thing of all is the fact that the lady is not trolling anyone.

She's dead serious, expressing what she really thinks.

She really believes everything she said.


----------



## admonit (Apr 20, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


The Palestinian Arabs were expelled as an enemy population, that took active part in the war against Israel.
Arab countries forced the Jews to leave only because they were Jews.


----------



## admonit (Apr 20, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Did the Israeli Arabs ever wanted to settle there? Did they ever complain over such "discrimination"?


----------



## admonit (Apr 20, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Sixties Fan said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


It is natural and understandable that some Jewish posters are partial to Israel. The question is why you are obsessive about the Jewish state and biased toward it..


----------



## José (Apr 20, 2019)

> Originally posted by *admonit*
> The Palestinian Arabs were expelled as an enemy population, that took active part in the war against Israel.



Now, with admonit's contribution, we have real progress here.

There was only one way Foxfyre's idea could be correct:

Let's imagine...

In february, 1948, the IDF, after encircling and occupying an arab village, conducted detailed, lengthy interrogations with each and every inhabitant of the village to find out if they wanted to harm Jews or not, expelled the ones who did and left the rest alone.

There's no way in hell Foxfyre's idea could be correct without this kind of screening by the IDF, aka, Haganah, Irgun, Lehi, etc...

So admonit thought to himself:

"Foxfyre's idea is too absurd, too crazy even for a commited israeli zionist such as myself."

So he put forth a new theory that regardless of being right or wrong, at least does not rape basic common sense:

Israeli politicians labelled the arab population of Israel "*an enemy population, that took active part in the war against Israel*" and expelled part of the 750.000 refugees, frightening the rest into leaving their homes and forbid them all to return.


----------



## José (Apr 20, 2019)

Right or wrong, no one can deny the fact that admonit presented a version that at least resembles real History, compared to Foxfyre's zionist fairy tale.


----------



## admonit (Apr 20, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *admonit*
> > The Palestinian Arabs were expelled as an enemy population, that took active part in the war against Israel.
> 
> 
> Let's imagine...





> So admonit thought to himself:


Do you really think, that your conversation with yourself is interesting to anybody? 


> Israeli politicians labelled the arab population of Israel "*an enemy population, that took active part in the war against Israel*" and expelled part of the 750.000 refugees, frightening the rest into leaving their homes and forbid them all to return.


The Palestinian Arabs labeled themselves an enemy population, starting a civil war against Jews in Mandatory Palestine.
There were expelled Arabs and there were refugees, fleeing the war. Nobody knows exact numbers. It was a war, started by Arabs, including the Palestinian Arabs, and they and only they are responsible for the consequences of the war.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 20, 2019)

admonit said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Israeli Arabs are already there.  And there are no restrictions for other Israeli Arabs to do so.  It is true that the Israelis do not allow non Israeli people to establish settlements on their land any more than pretty much any country would allow non-citizens to just move in and establish settlements.


----------



## José (Apr 20, 2019)

> Originally posted by *admonit*
> Do you really think, that your conversation with yourself is interesting to anybody?



If the words I put in your mouth are not true, you missed an excellent opportunity to support Foxfyre's point of view in your two previous posts.

The most probable reason you still haven't said a word in defence of the idea according to which arabs who were hostile to Israel became refugees and the ones who accepted the state became israeli citizens is that you consider this "explanation" to be what it really is:

Sheer lunacy... nothing more than drug-induced zionist hallucination.


----------



## José (Apr 20, 2019)

> Originally posted by *admonit*
> The Palestinian Arabs labeled themselves an enemy population, starting a civil war against Jews in Mandatory Palestine.
> There were expelled Arabs and there were refugees, fleeing the war. Nobody knows exact numbers. It was a war, started by Arabs, including the Palestinian Arabs, and they and only they are responsible for the consequences of the war.



Glad to see you agree with me that personal opinions about Jews and Israel had nothing to do with who became israeli citizen or palestinian refugee.

No more than 5000 palestinians *took active part in the war against Israel,* so you have 745.000 palestinians directly expelled or frightened to flee who never raised a finger against the state.

The common denominator of all palestinian refugees was not their personal opinion on Jews and Israel, which was never researched by Israel or the IDF, and it wasn't any "*active part in the war against Israel*" either since less than 1% of them fought the jewish state.

The common denominator of all palestinian refugees was their ethnicity... 

It was the fact they were arabs... the "unofficial", "undesired" ethnic group of the state.

It was the fact that their mere existence posed a demographic threat to Israel...

The fact that they stood in the way of a "comfortable" jewish majority.


----------



## José (Apr 20, 2019)

> Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> It is true that the Israelis *do not allow non Israeli people* to establish settlements on their land any more than pretty much *any country would allow non-citizens* to just move in and establish settlements.



Not so long ago, there was a country on the southern end of the african continent that also insisted on calling the indigenous population "non-citizens".

Its leaders proudly called it a "boer" or "afrikaner" democracy but the rest of the world knew better and simply called it apartheid South Africa.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 20, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> > It is true that the Israelis *do not allow non Israeli people* to establish settlements on their land any more than pretty much *any country would allow non-citizens* to just move in and establish settlements.
> 
> 
> ...



False equivalency. If you understood history, you would understand why. Alas you do not. Also what solution do you have and what is your dog in this fight?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 20, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *admonit*
> > Do you really think, that your conversation with yourself is interesting to anybody?
> 
> 
> ...



Defence? What?


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 20, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *admonit*
> > The Palestinian Arabs were expelled as an enemy population, that took active part in the war against Israel.
> 
> 
> ...



Or you could extrapolate the discussion into ridiculous analogies as you have done here.

You can't get around the fact that roughly 21% of the Israeli population is Arab and almost all of those are Palestinian Arabs.  That 21% enjoys full Israeli citizenship with all the liberty and benefits that comes with that.

How can that be?

It can only be if Israel did NOT expel all Arabs which is of course the truth.  Israel did NOT expel all Arabs but only those who shared the hostile motives, intentions, and efforts of Arab nations to destroy Israel and drive out all the Jews.  Were any 'innocent' Arabs included in those expelled or not allowed to return?  Probably.  But there was no way to tell and almost all of that generation are gone now 70+ years later anyway.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 20, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> > It is true that the Israelis *do not allow non Israeli people* to establish settlements on their land any more than pretty much *any country would allow non-citizens* to just move in and establish settlements.
> 
> 
> ...



That’s a rather pointless attempt at analogy. You’re just cutting and pasting goofy slogans that a few others use.


----------



## rylah (Apr 21, 2019)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



"Natives" who can't even pronounce the name of the land?


----------



## Mindful (Apr 21, 2019)

José said:


> > Originally posted by *Foxfyre*
> > It is true that the Israelis *do not allow non Israeli people* to establish settlements on their land any more than pretty much *any country would allow non-citizens* to just move in and establish settlements.
> 
> 
> ...



Oh _that _old argument.

As stale as mouldy bread.


----------



## rylah (Apr 21, 2019)

Coyote said:


> Foxfyre said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



it's the argument between Abraham our father and Sarah our mother A"H.
Abraham our father was a great host, and we all know who was right in that argument.

Yet still, those in whom called the seed of Abraham are the biggest hosts.
Islam has its place and Judaism has its place, but only one fundamentally based on denial of the other.


----------



## José (Apr 21, 2019)

Or you could extrapolate the discussion into ridiculous analogies as you have done here.

You can't get around the fact that roughly 21% of the Israeli population is Arab and almost all of those are Palestinian Arabs. That 21% enjoys full Israeli citizenship with all the liberty and benefits that comes with that.

How can that be?

It can only be if Israel did NOT expel all Arabs which is of course the truth. Israel did NOT expel all Arabs but only those who shared the hostile motives, intentions, and efforts of Arab nations to destroy Israel and drive out all the Jews. Were any 'innocent' Arabs included in those expelled or not allowed to return? Probably. But there was no way to tell and almost all of that generation are gone now 70+ years later anyway.




​

Oh _that _old argument.

As stale as mouldy bread.




​Debating with you is sheer waste of time.

Askhenazis flooded an already inhabited foreign land, destroyed its ethnic composition, created a separate settler society that eventually caused the total collapse of the native one, herded the refugees of that collapse into ethnic enclaves, spent the next 70 years shooting and bombing them and you still find a way to blame the victim.

You are the mirror image of the anti-semite who blames Jews for everything that happens under the sun from an earthquake in Italy to a tsunami in Indonesia...

Just like an inverted image of the anti-semite, if Israel murdered the entire arab population you'd all spend the rest of your lives blaming the bullets.

But I don't blame you...

Foxfyre, Hollie, Coyote, Mindful are the daughters of the post-WWII western world and one of the basic paradigms of this world is:

*THOU SHALT NOT BLAME JEWS FOR ANYTHING*.

The Holocaust only happened because german leaders blamed Jews for a series of things.

So no matter how justified, well-grounded in historical facts your criticism is:

*THOU SHALT NOT BLAME JEWS FOR ANYTHING*.

Whether you like it or not, criticizing Jews has become a taboo something prohibited by social custom in America, Europe and most of the world.

You cannot ask Foxfyre, mindful, Coyote, Rocco to rebel against the society that nurtured them, the society that molded the persons they are.

You can't expect that one day Foxfyre, mindful, Hollie, Coyote will get rid of this "sanctification", this idealization of the jewish people as a people that can do no wrong.

All you can do is wait...

As WWII becomes more and more a distant memory we see the relaxation of this taboo with protests against Israel throughout the world  but it is still the social norm.

Someday, after living long, fruitful lives Foxfyre's, mindful's, Coyote's days on Earth will be through and they will be replaced by a new generation of westerners who will not have internalized the sanctification of the jewish people as a basic societal value.

This will be the generation who will not be afraid to say wrong is wrong, apartheid is apartheid... even when Jews do it.


----------



## Mindful (Apr 21, 2019)

José said:


> Or you could extrapolate the discussion into ridiculous analogies as you have done here.
> 
> You can't get around the fact that roughly 21% of the Israeli population is Arab and almost all of those are Palestinian Arabs. That 21% enjoys full Israeli citizenship with all the liberty and benefits that comes with that.
> 
> ...



Doesn't sound like debate to me.


----------



## Hollie (Apr 21, 2019)

José said:


> Or you could extrapolate the discussion into ridiculous analogies as you have done here.
> 
> You can't get around the fact that roughly 21% of the Israeli population is Arab and almost all of those are Palestinian Arabs. That 21% enjoys full Israeli citizenship with all the liberty and benefits that comes with that.
> 
> ...



The “rebellious teenager” thing is getting old.


----------



## Mindful (Apr 21, 2019)

Hollie said:


> José said:
> 
> 
> > Or you could extrapolate the discussion into ridiculous analogies as you have done here.
> ...



Who is that person?

A rerun?


----------



## rylah (Apr 21, 2019)

Sixties Fan said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Sixties Fan said:
> ...



Egypt has a power to confuse people with their imaginations.
They know both in Israel and in the US the future is a majority Orthodox community.
And they went after the children of Israel on campuses, on streets, and in synagogues.
Most banal and desperate attempt to deny an inevitable reality.

That's racket and intimidation.
They intimidate them, then congratulate for "free thinking" for keeping quiet or for joining our enemies to "safe face". The biggest Jewish community voted conservative and they know that both among the conservative majority both in US and Israel they won't vote for people like Omar, Talib and the Corbyns in all of heir colors.

They have more children than anyone, a matter of a generation, and with the recent election, the Israeli young evidently switched positions from reactionary to that of leadership.


----------



## Foxfyre (Apr 21, 2019)

José said:


> Or you could extrapolate the discussion into ridiculous analogies as you have done here.
> 
> You can't get around the fact that roughly 21% of the Israeli population is Arab and almost all of those are Palestinian Arabs. That 21% enjoys full Israeli citizenship with all the liberty and benefits that comes with that.
> 
> ...



I think you might need to brush up on your reading skills?  And perhaps debating skills.  Debate offers a counter argument.  Attacking the messenger is not debate.  It is a very clear indication that you are out of ammo to debate with though.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 21, 2019)

Jose has zero credibility. Anyone who compares South Africa to Israel is immediately dismissed as someone  with little to no knowledge of history.


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 22, 2019)

With the on-going vilification of Israel over the settlement and annexation issues, I can’t help but ponder the irony inherent in the use of such expressions as American Samoa.

(full article online)

Settlements and Samoa


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 22, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Jose has zero credibility. Anyone who compares South Africa to Israel is immediately dismissed as someone  with little to no knowledge of history.



Or present-day reality.  Remember, Jose is the same person who recently said that, aside from Jerusalem, the Jews have no real connection to the rest of Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel).


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Apr 22, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Jose has zero credibility. Anyone who compares South Africa to Israel is immediately dismissed as someone  with little to no knowledge of history.
> ...



So did Abbas. Consider the source


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 22, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Jose has zero credibility. Anyone who compares South Africa to Israel is immediately dismissed as someone  with little to no knowledge of history.
> ...



I just want to know what his dog in this fight is.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Apr 22, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



Well, he lives in Spain.  Maybe he needs to paint Jews as villains to clear his conscience, because his ancestors burned Jews alive in the Spanish inquisition.


----------



## ILOVEISRAEL (Apr 22, 2019)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...



The Pollacks did the same rhing in WW11


----------



## Sixties Fan (Apr 24, 2019)

This study explores the strategic-military implications of the establishment of a Palestinian state along the pre-June 1967 lines. Its central thesis is that the creation of such a state, on the heels of the IDF’s total withdrawal from the West Bank, will not only deprive Israel of defensible borders but will almost certainly lead to the advent of a terrorist entity like the one created in the Gaza Strip – at a stone’s throw from the Israeli hinterland.



(full article/PDF online)

https://besacenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/160-Hacohen-ENGLISH-web.pdf

The West Bank’s Area C: Israel’s Eastern Line of Defense


----------

