# What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote



## Coyote (Jan 23, 2020)

Why not?

A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.

With a one state solution (Israel + West Bank) - assuming a scenario where ALL residents are offered the opportunity of citizenship up front,  the plus side for Palestinians would be the potential of better representation, political stability, assumption of rights guaranteed by citizenship and funding for infrastructure, education, etc. that is in perpetual shortage with their Palestinian leadership. 


Here's what happens if Israel annexes the West Bank and lets Palestinians vote


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 23, 2020)

It is a terrible idea for Israel.  They would just end up being the next Lebanon.

Lebanon was formed as the Christian country of the Middle east, and despite the precautions set into place to try to protect that, Muslims simply bred themselves into a position of dominance and the country has suffered.  Beirut was called the Paris of the middle east when I was young, but now it is just another Islamic shit hole.

 Jewish Israelis are fooling themselves if they don't understand the same thing will happen to them as happened to the Lebanese Christians. Within a generation or two they would be a persecuted minority.


----------



## SmokeALib (Jan 23, 2020)

Jews and Arabs will be fighting until the end of time. There can be no compromise. One will have to take over the other.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 23, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> It is a terrible idea for Israel.  They would just end up being the next Lebanon.
> 
> Lebanon was formed as the Christian country of the Middle east, and despite the precautions set into place to try to protect that, Muslims simply bred themselves into a position of dominance and the country has suffered.  Beirut was called the Paris of the middle east when I was young, but now it is just another Islamic shit hole.
> 
> Jewish Israelis are fooling themselves if they don't understand the same thing will happen to them as happened to the Lebanese Christians. Within a generation or two they would be a persecuted minority.




Well, IS the Palestinian birthrate that high?  Birth rates typically drop with education, economic stability, and security. People don't need to worry about having lots of kids to survive  and instead invest more heavily in a few because more educational opportunities are now available and they cost.

According to this article - Jewish birthrates are outpacing Muslim ones.  Israel's Demographic Miracle

I would guess that with a unifying of the landscape - birthrates will likely drop with opportunities as they do in other parts of the world.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 23, 2020)

SmokeALib said:


> Jews and Arabs will be fighting until the end of time. There can be no compromise. One will have to take over the other.



They didn't fight that much prior to Israel being created - why wouldn't they stop again?


----------



## SmokeALib (Jan 23, 2020)

Coyote said:


> SmokeALib said:
> 
> 
> > Jews and Arabs will be fighting until the end of time. There can be no compromise. One will have to take over the other.
> ...


I would be ok with a lasting peace. I just don't see it.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 23, 2020)

SmokeALib said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > SmokeALib said:
> ...



Maybe not lasting peace but maybe the goal could be better peace then we currently have.

Apparently most Arab Israelis PREFER being Israeli citizens, even though they feel they are discriminated against.  They would rather be Israeli than under the Palestinian government.


----------



## SmokeALib (Jan 23, 2020)

Coyote said:


> SmokeALib said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


I like where you're going here. If the Palestinian people would rise up against their "government", perhaps an alliance can be had.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 23, 2020)

SmokeALib said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > SmokeALib said:
> ...




I'm not sure if rise up is needed - just annexation, citizenship, and then the ability to vote in regular elections for parties of their choice with, hopefully a lot less corruption.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 23, 2020)

Wait.  Why?

How would Israel benefit from this?


----------



## Shusha (Jan 23, 2020)

I don't think this is a good idea at the moment.  Annexing SOME of Area A, yeah for sure.  All the large blocs, the Jordan Valley, probably a corridor through from Jerusalem to the Jordan border.  But not all of Judea and Samaria.

My concern is that both Hamas and Fatah (and those Arab Palestinians aligned with them) are edging further and further along their extremist views, in both verbal and physical expression, and when called on it are digging in, rather than easing up.

There might be a polarization of the Arab Palestinians between the factions for a reasonable solution to the conflict and those who will push for violent jihad, resulting in a civil conflict for the Palestinians.  OR there might be a consolidation of Arab Palestinians against Israel in retaliation for their perceived loss of ... well ...

Either way, Israel is left with Israeli citizens actively terrorizing each other.  Not good.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 23, 2020)

Coyote said:


> They didn't fight that much prior to Israel being created



A lot of people claim this.  So much so, its just accepted as one of those "everybody knows" things.  I think we should question it.  In particular, I think we should consider how an oppressed minority experiencing repeated pogroms every few years or few decades can be considered to be living in peaceful circumstances.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 23, 2020)

Which Arabs live in peace with their neighbors?
This discussion is not reflective of reality.
I wish it were reflective of reality.


----------



## rylah (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...



I'm blocked from Haaretz, so I I can't know what's actually written.

And in spite of several false assumptions in this post, like that the 2-state solution didn't already happen with 79% of the territory originally envisioned for Jewish sovereignty already under Arab control, and that if only Hamas and Fatah voters were to get citizenship and vote in Israel, they'd automatically give up their Caliphate goals - I won't be picky.

Because I welcome the realization of the bigger public opinion shift...if already Haaretz influences its readers in these terms, it signs a big shift. Though probably still wrapped in bi-national aspirations, and probably prepared as a poll before the announcement of the US proposition.

In all our conversations about Israeli Sovereignty in Judea Samaria, specifically discussing citizenship, we came to a stall at the point of obligations conditioned upon citizenship.

I raise the same question again - what will be the obligations upon receiving Israeli citizenship?

There's much more than just the basic improvement in quality of life they can get, upon receiving citizenship in ANY developed country compared to their own rule. Much visions and vast projects are already prepared , the TAMA 100 for example, the first National Outline Plan for the entire country with Judea Samaria and the Jordan Valley for development of Greater Jerusalem.
A capital shift of the entire economic infrastructure of the entire country.

Israel on its own is becoming a leading geopolitical partner of the entire region.
Developing into an economic anchor with the potential to recover the natural economic and cultural arteries of the region, as they were functional when the region was the nest of civilization.

There're geopolitical assurances, and to be part of this process takes serious responsibility.
In the meantime all those in opposition to Israel, are becoming an irrationally annoying stick in the wheels of a regional development for the sake of the good of all involved.


(In conclusion)
There needs to be a conclusive defeat of the idea of any Arab state in Judea.
Allegiance to the Jewish nation, is the minimal condition beyond which there's no conversation - and the choices are clear.

Fulfillment of basic civil duties is another basic condition, bringing us back to the same question -
what are the obligations?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> SmokeALib said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...





Coyote said:


> Apparently most Arab Israelis PREFER being Israeli citizens,


I have seen these polls before. "Palestinians would rather live in Israel than in Palestine." It sounds like they like Israel.

The question is that would you rather live in a prosperous country where you can at least get a small piece of the pie, or a country that has been trampled to dust with all of its resources stolen and no chance for peace?

As for the Palestinians living in Israel they do not want to move. They are living in their homeland even if it is occupied by Israel.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 24, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > SmokeALib said:
> ...


Who did the trampling?
Gaza has a fully developed infrastucture.


----------



## rylah (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> SmokeALib said:
> 
> 
> > Jews and Arabs will be fighting until the end of time. There can be no compromise. One will have to take over the other.
> ...



Shusha is correct,
I'll only add that the whole Zionist organizations didn't start with pogroms in Russia,
but as a response to the plight of the Jews living in the middle east, specifically in Israel, and the waves of blood libels and Arab pogroms spreading all over the Ottoman Caliphate.

It's a great injustice to shift blame for Arab violence on Israel's independence.


----------



## rylah (Jan 24, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > SmokeALib said:
> ...



There's no word for 'peace' in Arabic,
only 'submission'.

If Arabs really joined Israel on its quest for independence, instead of siding with those who envisioned a Genghis Khan massacre, we'd all have villas and enough land to graze our stock by 1967.

However naturally, it takes time, I get it...but eventually - inevitable.
Arabs either submit and share the blessing of Israel, or fight and lose any right in this land.


----------



## Hollie (Jan 24, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > SmokeALib said:
> ...


When, exactly, did you become the politburo taking head who speaks on behalf of Arabs-Moslems?


What resources has Israel "stolen" from Arabs-Moslems?

Another of your baseless claims.


When did land controlled by the Ottoman Turks and later controlled by the British Mandate become Arab-Moslem "homeland" occupied by israel?

Another of your baseless claims.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 24, 2020)

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...



Why are you blocked from Haaretz?


----------



## Olde Europe (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...



It's a great idea - particularly in conjunction with the two-track citizenship/nationality law, resulting in a permanent, and permanently frightened, apartheid state, and the requirement either to accept second-class citizenship or to leave.  Of course, the long-standing tradition of unequal resource allocation is set to continue, the international community will issue some feeble condemnations, and some on the Palestinian side will mumble about Nakba, v. 2.  What could possibly go wrong?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...


It would be like letting Illegals vote in CA and NY


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...



Would the Arabs on the West Bank like singing Hatikvah (the most beautiful national anthem in the world, both in terms of lyrics and melody)?  Would they salute the Israeli flag, with its Star of David?  Would they take pride in seeing a Menorah in front of the Knesset, Israel's Parliament?  Would they accept the fact that only Hebrew is their national language, now that Arabic has been demoted from that position?  Even Mohammed Zoabi, an Arab Israeli Zionist, opposed the Nation-State Law.  The answer to all these questions is No.  Therefore, even though it's tough for Jews to to give up Judea (their ancestral, historical and Biblical heartland) to those savage Arabs, I see no other way than 2 states.


----------



## MJB12741 (Jan 24, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > SmokeALib said:
> ...



Yes they are living in their STOLEN homeland & would rather remain living in Israel as citizens than return to their native Arab country homelands.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Wait.  Why?
> 
> How would Israel benefit from this?


Legitimacy, ability to better govern the region and all it's people under one legal system.

It hit me when I looked at what flac called the measles map.  It isn't just Palestinian violence that caused the erosion of a 2 state solution.  I don't think Israel ever seriously intended for it to happen. The map starkly  refutes it.  Given that neither side, imo, is capable of honoring it.. what is left?  The status quo?

Gaza can be a state eventually.  But maybe WB should just be annexed.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 24, 2020)

IMO, Is solution lies in negotiating with Jordan to define new borders where Jordan administers to these former Jordanians.  it would involve a land swap of some sort, but I think it would be better for all in the long run.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...


Why would it be a 2 track system?  Citizenship would be citizenship.  At least that way they can vote for their leadership, exist under the same legal protections, and get much needed development funding.  And if it is unequal, theycanbetterchallenge it.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > They didn't fight that much prior to Israel being created
> ...


I think if you are going to challenge it you can not take it out of its historical context and judge it by today's standards of human rights.


----------



## Augustine_ (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...


Israeli Jews (and American evangelicals) feel about Palestinians the same way that Nazi's felt about Jews and Gypsies.  Part of Netanyahu's election strategy is to warn his people that they need to negate the vote of the Arab undesirables.  The Palestinians will never have a vote.  Of course, that's exacerbated by the Palestinians not wanting peace either.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...


Given the map and lack of political will how possible is it any more?


----------



## Olde Europe (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why would it be a 2 track system?  Citizenship would be citizenship.  At least that way they can vote for their leadership, exist under the same legal protections, and get much needed development funding.  And if it is unequal, theycanbetterchallenge it.



Remember?



Coyote said:


> Interesting and disturbing.  *I guess this doesn’t bode well for the Arab Israeli citizens down the road.*  I wonder if they will allowed into the Jewish settlements being promoted?
> 
> _According to the Haaretz, "The [nation-state] law also includes clauses stating that a 'united Jerusalem' is the capital of Israel and that Hebrew is the country's official language. Another says that 'the state *sees the development of Jewish settlement as a national value and will act to encourage and promote its establishment and consolidation.*'"
> 
> ...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 24, 2020)

This is something similar.

*Caroline Glick & Mark Levin: The Israeli Solution -- A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East*


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 24, 2020)

Augustine_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...



How dare you compare Israelis to the Nazis?  If anyone can be compared to the Nazis, it is the Arabs, who are trying to wipe out Israel.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 24, 2020)

Augustine_ said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...


Boy, do you ever have it backwards.

The Mufti of Jerusalem was an actual Nazi and ran extermination crews in the Balkans. Much of the Arab attitude towards Jews is a result of their collaboration with the Nazis before and during WW2

You are woefully in need of a history lesson.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Wait.  Why?
> ...


Legitimacy?  Are you suggesting that Israel is NOT legitimate?!



> ability to better govern the region and all it's people under one legal system.


This sounds like an awful big and risky ask of Israel for some vague, undefined notion of "better govern".




> It isn't just Palestinian violence that caused the erosion of a 2 state solution.  I don't think Israel ever seriously intended for it to happen. The map starkly  refutes it.  Given that neither side, imo, is capable of honoring it.. what is left?  The status quo?


Hard disagree.  First, keep in mind that for many Israelis the 2 state solution already happened. Way back in 1921 when Palestine was carved into an Arab state and a Jewish state:  Israel and Jordan.  I realize you may not agree with this concept, but recognize that it is the context for many Israelis and Israel-supporters (including some on this board, and often including me).  What is really being asked is for a four state solution (Jordan, Gaza and Palestine for the Arabs and Israel "proper" for the Jewish people. And who knows, maybe a fifth or sixth state for the Arabs in the future.  Nablus?  Bethlehem?).

It is readily apparent that Israel absolutely has been willing to give up territory for (more) Arab self-determination.  This was true certainly right up until the Gaza disengagement and then the Olmert offer.  I will agree with you that Israel has since pulled back from that in recent years.  Why?  I'd argue its because the incitement of terror has increased in the past several years in some very concrete ways.  

Israel has left space for more Arab self-determination for a hundred years now.  Arab Palestinians aren't taking her up on that offer.  Instead, Arab Palestinians are becoming more deeply entrenched in violent rejection of any "normalization" and more extremist propaganda against Israel and Jews.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Would the Arabs on the West Bank like singing Hatikvah (the most beautiful national anthem in the world, both in terms of lyrics and melody)?  Would they salute the Israeli flag, with its Star of David?  Would they take pride in seeing a Menorah in front of the Knesset, Israel's Parliament?  Would they accept the fact that only Hebrew is their national language, now that Arabic has been demoted from that position?  Even Mohammed Zoabi, an Arab Israeli Zionist, opposed the Nation-State Law.  The answer to all these questions is No.  Therefore, even though it's tough for Jews to to give up Judea (their ancestral, historical and Biblical heartland) to those savage Arabs, I see no other way than 2 states.



Valid questions.  I'm certain many would.

The hard question is what to do with those who don't.  And especially those who use violence and incitement to violence to support their won't.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


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




Um.  You DID see Sunni Man say on another thread just today that Jews remaining in Palestine will be restricted from certain professions, will be prevented from military service and will have to pay a dhimmi tax, didn't you?  What makes you think the "historical context" is historical and not current context?  

The historical context of "they didn't fight that much" is that the Jewish people were properly oppressed and generally didn't do outrageous things like, oh, I don't know....pray at their own holy places or fail to pay their special "protection" taxes.


----------



## fncceo (Jan 24, 2020)

Augustine_ said:


> Israeli Jews (and American evangelicals) feel about Palestinians the same way that Nazi's felt about Jews and Gypsies.



Nice hyperbole, but demonstrably not true.

Germans put the mechanisms of industrial extermination in place in 1942. Prior to that, executions and deportations of Jews was carried out by groups of SS men using military methods.  In the three years after that, the Nazis succeeded in slaughtering millions of Jews.

Israel has had administrative control of the West Bank and Gaza for over 50 years.

If they had the slightest inclination to do harm to the Palestinians,  they would have been gone off this earth.

They clearly are not.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Shusha said:


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



No.  I'm suggesting their control of the WB doesn't have full legitimacy.



> > ability to better govern the region and all it's people under one legal system.
> 
> 
> This sounds like an awful big and risky ask of Israel for some vague, undefined notion of "better govern".



So what do you suggest instead?



> > It isn't just Palestinian violence that caused the erosion of a 2 state solution.  I don't think Israel ever seriously intended for it to happen. The map starkly  refutes it.  Given that neither side, imo, is capable of honoring it.. what is left?  The status quo?
> 
> 
> Hard disagree.  First, keep in mind that for many Israelis the 2 state solution already happened. Way back in 1921 when Palestine was carved into an Arab state and a Jewish state:  Israel and Jordan.  I realize you may not agree with this concept, but recognize that it is the context for many Israelis and Israel-supporters (including some on this board, and often including me).  What is really being asked is for a four state solution (Jordan, Gaza and Palestine for the Arabs and Israel "proper" for the Jewish people. And who knows, maybe a fifth or sixth state for the Arabs in the future.  Nablus?  Bethlehem?).
> ...



I absolutely disagree on the two state thing.  Hard disagree.  I think the map says a lot about Israel's long term intentions.  That doesn't mean the Pali's are blameless.  But there are actions from Israel that pretty clearly state they have no intention of giving up any of that territory, and there are strong political forces behind it that feel that that territory is, always was, and always should be a part of Israel (particularly from the strongly religious).

I also would argue that the "incitement of terror" has some relationship to the increasing impossibility of a two state solution.  Not totally - but to some degree.

So should Israel annex it?  I say yes.

If it doesn't...then what is the solution?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Shusha said:


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



No, I didn't.  But, I will say this about Sunni Man - he is a hardcore chain yanker and troller at times, it's hard to know what he really thinks.  What he is saying is not too much different than Rylah's idea of a "guest status" for non Jewish citizens of Israel.  Would be interesting to get Sunni Man in a serious conversation some day and pin him down but don't see that happening.

Historical context matters.  And it is not the same as modern context.  For one - the entire idea of "human rights" is a relatively modern concept.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Shusha said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Would the Arabs on the West Bank like singing Hatikvah (the most beautiful national anthem in the world, both in terms of lyrics and melody)?  Would they salute the Israeli flag, with its Star of David?  Would they take pride in seeing a Menorah in front of the Knesset, Israel's Parliament?  Would they accept the fact that only Hebrew is their national language, now that Arabic has been demoted from that position?  Even Mohammed Zoabi, an Arab Israeli Zionist, opposed the Nation-State Law.  The answer to all these questions is No.  Therefore, even though it's tough for Jews to to give up Judea (their ancestral, historical and Biblical heartland) to those savage Arabs, I see no other way than 2 states.
> ...



Give them the choice of full citizenship and full rights or moving.

THEIR choice, not the annexing government.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

*This thread is NOT about Nazi's, take it elsewhere please.*


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

flacaltenn would love it if you would pitch in.  Should Israel just annex?  Could it be done in a workable way for all?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why would it be a 2 track system?  Citizenship would be citizenship.  At least that way they can vote for their leadership, exist under the same legal protections, and get much needed development funding.  And if it is unequal, theycanbetterchallenge it.
> ...




The thing is - it doesn't HAVE to be.  If Palestinians were full citizens, they would have at least some political say through the political process.

Israel isn't a fragile nation any more.  It's identity is strongly established now, as is it's nature as a Jewish state, with a democratic form of government.

At SOME point, it's going to have to decide how to solve the Palestinian issue in a way that reflects the values it enshrines.

The status quo is unsustainable.

A two state solution is increasingly unlikely.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

I keep looking and finding more information....here's another interesting article.  Really interesting but also disturbing.

Netanyahu's annexation pledge aside, the two-state solution is already in deep trouble. Here's why. - Jewish Telegraphic Agency

In the absence of “courageous, fair-minded, creative diplomacy,” as Thomas Friedman put it in a recent New York Times op-ed, Israeli and Palestinian leaders have inadvertently allowed free rein to disruptive actors on both the left and the right. Israel’s religious nationalist right has put the country on track for formal annexation of the West Bank, now evident from Netanyahu’s recent electioneering from the mainstage. Beyond the Green Line, rockets from Hamas in Gaza have replaced diplomatic Palestinian foreign policy toward Israel. 

While the implementation of Netanyahu’s precise vision relies on his careful maneuvering of future coalition politics, there are several ways the “status quo” is steadily deteriorating right in front of our eyes and *annexation is becoming increasingly likely*.

*The Palestinian Authority and Israel are moving further apart.*

It is no secret that Netanyahu and P.A. President Mahmoud Abbas do not like or trust each other. As Israel and the Palestinian Authority move further away from each other’s positions on security and territorial issues, *the closer they get to bringing about a binational state — that would spell disaster for both peoples. *

Weeks before Netanyahu’s annexation announcement, Abbas vowed that he would no longer adhere to the divisions of the West Bank set in place by the Oslo Accords. 

At best, a binational state would likely result in a perpetual political battle for equality between Arabs and Jews — and at worst, apartheid or civil war. 

*Israeli and Palestinian public opinion is shifting further away from each other and the two-state solution.*

It is not just the leadership class that is moving away from a two-state solution. While pluralities still exist in support for two states, polling shows *support has declined in recent years to the lowest point in over a decade for both Israelis, to 49 percent, and Palestinians, to 43 percent.*

The Israeli public, especially younger Israelis, has undeniably shifted to the right in recent years, *and public discourse has steadily tilted away from any language espousing peace*. The sentiment that intensified on the eve of Election Day in 2015, with Netanyahu stating that “Arab voters are coming out in droves to the ballot box,” has only increased. In both 2019 elections, Netanyahu’s key challenger, the moderate Blue and White party, has largely ignored the Palestinian issue and any talk of two states. 

*Palestinians face far more urgent issues than diplomacy. *

Living under strict oversight from both Israel and Hamas in Gaza and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, *Palestinians enjoy a significantly lower quality of life compared to their Israeli neighbors, making the status quo much less sustainable. *

*But the drastic lack of trust that the Palestinian public has in the capabilities of its own leadership and institutions to govern is a far more urgent issue than a two-state solution*. At the end of last year, more than three-quarters of Palestinians perceived the Palestinian Authority to be corrupt, and nearly two-thirds were demanding Abbas’ resignation (55 percent in the West Bank and 77 percent in the Gaza Strip), according to polling conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. Less than one-third was optimistic about the unity between the two governing regimes. 

*When compounded with hard-line Israeli rhetoric and tactics, it becomes nearly impossible to even mention two states to Palestinians without coming off as unrealistic and naive.*


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> No.  I'm suggesting their control of the WB doesn't have full legitimacy.


Why not?  



> I think the map says a lot about Israel's long term intentions.


Which map?  From which time period?  Too much is made of the "swiss cheese" map.  Do you know what Israel looks like if you made a map based on the same criteria with Arab citizens of Israel?  Oh yeah, "swiss cheese".  The map does not prohibit self-determination or sovereignty or one more state in the region.  

Here's another way of looking at the map.  Its been a hundred years.  Israel is absolutely capable of taking every inch of territory it wants.  The fact that all that territory was de facto abandoned by Israel and that Arab Palestine still exists as not only an idea but an actual fact on the ground is testament to Israel's restraint.  

Now, I will agree with you that the winds have changed in recent years.  Just how long should a territory (and a people) be kept in a vacuum in the hopes that one day, maybe, SOMETHING will come in and fill that void?  Ten years?  A hundred?  

You seem to want to say that "time is up" and that Israel should step up and fill that void, while also subtly dissing Israel for her "long term intentions".  



> But there are actions from Israel that pretty clearly state they have no intention of giving up any of that territory, and there are strong political forces behind it that feel that that territory is, always was, and always should be a part of Israel (particularly from the strongly religious).


Relatively recent developments.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


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




To be clear, you would support the expulsion of those who use violence and incitement to violence?  Their choice.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> At SOME point, it's going to have to decide how to solve the Palestinian issue in a way that reflects the values it enshrines.



Israel is not responsible for solving the "Palestinian issue".


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > No.  I'm suggesting their control of the WB doesn't have full legitimacy.
> ...



If it did, there would be no questions about it being occupied or disputed - both terms that are used today.



> > I think the map says a lot about Israel's long term intentions.
> 
> 
> Which map?  From which time period?  Too much is made of the "swiss cheese" map.  Do you know what Israel looks like if you made a map based on the same criteria with Arab citizens of Israel?  Oh yeah, "swiss cheese".  The map does not prohibit self-determination or sovereignty or one more state in the region.



The most current map.  And no...too much isn't made of it.  It very clearly illustrates Israel's overall plan of demographic change for that area to solidify control.   And yes realistically it does greatly impede a two state solution.  In an ideal world it wouldn't.  But this is nowhere near an ideal world.



> Here's another way of looking at the map.  Its been a hundred years.  Israel is absolutely capable of taking every inch of territory it wants.  The fact that all that territory was de facto abandoned by Israel and that Arab Palestine still exists as not only an idea but an actual fact on the ground is testament to Israel's restraint.



Nope.  I don't see it that way at all.  Israel is technically capable of taking it but it hasn't, imo, due less to "restraintl" then to the divisive internal politics surrounding it, and the fact that taking it creates serious security and control challenges to hold it,  unless there is enough of a demographic change.  I think this is what the dominant political faction has been working towards for a long time.



> Now, I will agree with you that the winds have changed in recent years.  Just how long should a territory (and a people) be kept in a vacuum in the hopes that one day, maybe, SOMETHING will come in and fill that void?  Ten years?  A hundred?



Good question.  Do you mean the Palestinian people or the Israeli people or both?



> You seem to want to say that "time is up" and that Israel should step up and fill that void, while also subtly dissing Israel for her "long term intentions".



It's not any sort of subtle "dissing" - it's an expression of fact (as I see it).  I think that while some in Israel did and do support a two state solution, I think there is a significant political faction that never intended that to come about just as there was a significant political faction among the Palestinians.  The only difference is Israel has the power.  I think it's time to acknowledge that Israel isn't exactly an angel in this either.



> > But there are actions from Israel that pretty clearly state they have no intention of giving up any of that territory, and there are strong political forces behind it that feel that that territory is, always was, and always should be a part of Israel (particularly from the strongly religious).
> 
> 
> *Relatively recent developments*.



I don't think so.  The growth and spread and legalization of so many settlements and outposts has been on going for some time.  Not "relatively recent".  It isn't an argument about whether Jews have a right to live there or not - it's about the the effects of demographic change on a 2-state plan.

You and I both, I think, agree that an ideal solution, two states would accept each others people's as citizens in the new state, without expelling people.  But realistically - I doubt it.  I doubt many Palestinians would be willing to allow Jewish settlers to remain and I doubt many Jewish settlers would be willing to be citizens of Palestine.  That's where reality meets idealization and politicians are nothing if not pragmatic.  Create a demographic situation that makes eventual annexation all but inevitable.  So why not just do it?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > At SOME point, it's going to have to decide how to solve the Palestinian issue in a way that reflects the values it enshrines.
> ...



Yes.  They are.  Along with the Palestinians.  Because it's not a "Palestinian issue".  It's a Palestinian/Israeli issue.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Shusha said:


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



Sure.  As long as it applies to both.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 24, 2020)

Could annexation and one state work? (Just talking about Area C, not the rest of the WB or Gaza)


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...



I actually believe that the standard of living for Israeli Palestinians is good enough that MOST would choose to stay..  After all -- their identity is in those Pali City Centers...  

BUT --- the Ha'Aretz article makes some whopping bad assumptions.. They use the voting preferences of CITIZEN ARABS of Israel to predict the make-up of a new Knesset.. That's not what's gonna happen.. The AMBITIONS of Palestinians politically are far more divided than those of current Arab citizens and the ISSUE would be "radical fringe" candidates making it to the Knesset and disrupting the operation and the high LIKELIHOOD that certain Pali cities would choose less democratically oriented governorship than others.. 

There's already a HUGE disparity in freedom and tolerance between the City Centers.. You can have western women's ware shops in one and not another... The PLURALISTIC tolerant character of how Israel governs would be tested... 

I'm all for MAXIMUM choice for folks.. And I think that's best when everyone understand that TOLERANCE is what makes "liberal choice" work... So --- I don't think FULL political assimilation would work at all... 

BUT -- I think that "city grants" could be issued to consolidate 80 or 90% of the current Pali populattion in the occupied area.. This allows expansion of the 6 or 7 big city centers to include the Pali villages surrounding the existing city centers..  This is a simple REZONING process. * THESE to be run by LOCAL control (as in City States or Emirates) within the West Bank where the remainder of the territory IS annexed as you proposed and governed jointly....   

The city states COULD have fixed representation in the Knesset that is JOINTLY APPOINTED by the leaders of the city states...  And a "Joint Development Board" established for the West Bank that allows security, tariff, taxes and OTHER issues to be handled... 



*


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


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




Well, that IS interesting.  I always thought you were against that.  Certainly seemed to be when suggested by some on Team Israel.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> flacaltenn would love it if you would pitch in.  Should Israel just annex?  Could it be done in a workable way for all?



Be careful what you ask for... I don't want to crush your dreams and hopes....


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


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




Hmmmmmm. I disagree.  (Where's the fun in agreeing, right?)

Israel absolutely can not solve any issue which is the responsibility of Palestine.  There are two key things which Israel can not do:  

1.  Compel Arab Palestinian self-determination.
2.  End Arab Palestinian Muslim extremism.  

All Israel can do is protect its people best it can and wait those things out.  Which leaves us with the status quo, right?


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


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



You can't expect ISRAEL to dictate a solution.. For the 109th time, there needs to be a responsible RECOGNIZED leadership that speaks for the Palestinians in occupation in the West Bank....

Probably will never happen..., So the next best thing is to LOCALIZE Pali leadership and governance the way it has ALWAYS BEEN before Europeans redrew the Mid East maps..

Then a coalition of those city leaders would be the de facto NEGOTIATORS for settlement.  Works just fine. It's just not been properly proposed and analyzed quite yet...  Maybe soon it will be...


----------



## Shusha (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> So why not just do it?



I think Israel will annex, eventually.  Not yet. 

The political will in Israel isn't quite there yet.  (Soon).

Normalization with other Arab States is not solidified enough yet.  (Making progress).

Arab Palestinians not suffering enough from their own internal problems to rise up against THAT sort of oppression.  (That sounds harsh, its not that I want them to suffer, just that they need to drive it from within.)

Need to see who replaces Abbas.
Iran


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 24, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Could annexation and one state work? (Just talking about Area C, not the rest of the WB or Gaza)


It is illegal to annex occupied territory.


----------



## Hollie (Jan 25, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Could annexation and one state work? (Just talking about Area C, not the rest of the WB or Gaza)
> ...


What sovereign Arab-Moslem territory is occupied?


----------



## westwall (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> SmokeALib said:
> 
> 
> > Jews and Arabs will be fighting until the end of time. There can be no compromise. One will have to take over the other.
> ...








Actually,  they did.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> The thing is - it doesn't HAVE to be.  If Palestinians were full citizens, they would have at least some political say through the political process.
> 
> Israel isn't a fragile nation any more.  It's identity is strongly established now, as is it's nature as a Jewish state, with a democratic form of government.
> 
> ...



The thing is, according to Israel's basic law, second class citizenship it's going to be.  That has nothing to do with whether or not Israel is "established", one way or another.  It's a result of the prevailing lack of respect for non-Jews and international law.

A two-state solution is increasingly unlikely because of Israeli settlements on occupied territory, and the ramped up demolition of Palestinian homes and infrastructure to make more room for more Israeli settlements.

Don't you see that Netanyahu's electioneering plot, if implemented, will make Israel an international pariah?  And what's Israel going to do if a half million Palestinians refuse both Israeli citizenship and to leave?  Cattle cars?  Dumping half a million into the Jordan river?  Because Jordan certainly isn't going to pick them up.  They have more than enough on their hands now already, without half a million uprooted, angry, devastated newcomers.

Whatever the values apparent in Israel's treatment of the Palestinians are supposed to be, the evidence is destruction, making lives as miserable as inhumanely possible, theft, and a slow-moving genocide in the planning - yes, replacing the indigenous population on occupied territory with the occupier's own population is one of the definitions of genocide.  Some values...


----------



## Mindful (Jan 25, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > The thing is - it doesn't HAVE to be.  If Palestinians were full citizens, they would have at least some political say through the political process.
> ...



Still grinding your axe about Jews? 

You've been doing it for years, repetition gets tedious. 

For whatever reason, only known to yourself?

Genocide is an oxymoron, coming from you. Given the Palestinian Arab population has increased substantially since 1947. Maybe you can provide   the demographics.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

westwall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > SmokeALib said:
> ...




Not as much, or I should say no more than others around them - there were long periods of relative peace, stability, prosperity.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...



That is what I'm thinking...so...I wonder....how can it be done in a way that might work?

I think - we can all agree the current status quo is unsustainable in the long term?



> BUT --- the Ha'Aretz article makes some whopping bad assumptions.. They use the voting preferences of CITIZEN ARABS of Israel to predict the make-up of a new Knesset.. That's not what's gonna happen.. The AMBITIONS of Palestinians politically are far more divided than those of current Arab citizens and the ISSUE would be "radical fringe" candidates making it to the Knesset and disrupting the operation and the *high LIKELIHOOD that certain Pali cities would choose less democratically oriented governorship than others..*



I agree with being divided - but...I would ask this:

in terms of "fringe" - are they any more divided than Israeli Jews?  For example you have pretty radical fringe groups there represented in the Knesset...are they that disruptive?

Also...isn't how it is governed based on laws - you can't exactly change it?  Can you expand on your thoughts here?



> There's already a HUGE disparity in freedom and tolerance between the City Centers.. You can have western women's ware shops in one and not another... The PLURALISTIC tolerant character of how Israel governs would be tested...



Yes it would....maybe semi-autonomy for some areas within an Israeli nation?



> I'm all for MAXIMUM choice for folks.. And I think that's best when everyone understand that TOLERANCE is what makes "liberal choice" work... So --- I don't think FULL political assimilation would work at all...
> 
> BUT -- I think that "city grants" could be issued to consolidate 80 or 90% of the current Pali populattion in the occupied area.. This allows expansion of the 6 or 7 big city centers to include the Pali villages surrounding the existing city centers..  This is a simple REZONING process. * THESE to be run by LOCAL control (as in City States or Emirates) within the West Bank where the remainder of the territory IS annexed as you proposed and governed jointly....   *
> *
> The city states COULD have fixed representation in the Knesset that is JOINTLY APPOINTED by the leaders of the city states...  And a "Joint Development Board" established for the West Bank that allows security, tariff, taxes and OTHER issues to be handled...*




What I put in blue - let's expand.

A lot of Palestinians are agrarian, farmers....how would they fit in to this model?

So - I"m simplifying it.  Those city-states would be semi-autonomous within greater Israel.  Citizens would elect their leaders who would then appoint their representatives to the Knesset?  Each city state would have a representative with full rights in the Knesset?

Would this be somewhat comparable to our relationship to Native American tribes?

I know people hate it when I make comparisons but comparing the unfamiliar to something familiar is the easiest way to understand it.

Let me add one thing - because this WILL come up from opponents, and it can be a legitimate concern:  people will compare this to apartheid and the creation of "bantustans" - substandard, and far from equal.  How would you answer that and what would be in place to prevent that?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 25, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Where did he mention Jews?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


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




The situation on the ground has changed.

 I am morally against it.  But if terrorist acts - and I mean ACTS are performed (as defined by life threatening acts against people because of their ethnic identity) then sure - expel THAT person - not the family, not the tribe, not anyone else.  Or - put them through the criminal justice system.  Actually that might be better.

*But it has to be applied equally - that means Jews committing acts of violence against Palestinians should get the same treatment.*

What I'm afraid of though is that this will be abused and used as a reason for mass expulsions much the way demoliting the family homes of Palestinians is abused as a group punishment.

How can such abuse be prevented?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > So why not just do it?
> ...



Interesting points Shusha...


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


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



Disagree....because some of the problems are coming from Israel's own policies which are causing the demise of a two-state opportunity.

Israel can't affect the above, but it is provoking the situation through political policies and by that I mean settlements (we won't agree there so lets not get into it  )


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


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



Israel can't "dictate" a solution yet it's been working towards that for a long time.  If it's a problem both parties have a hand in, then the solution will require both to be involved.  That's my opinion anyway....and...it may work best along the lines you propose.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 25, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Olde Europe said:
> ...



He doesn't need to.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > The thing is - it doesn't HAVE to be.  If Palestinians were full citizens, they would have at least some political say through the political process.
> ...



Good point.  But what would you propose instead?



> Whatever the values apparent in Israel's treatment of the Palestinians are supposed to be, the evidence is destruction, making lives as miserable as inhumanely possible, theft, and a slow-moving genocide in the planning - yes, replacing the indigenous population on occupied territory with the occupier's own population is one of the definitions of genocide.  Some values...



I wouldn't use genocide as a term here.  For one....the Palestinians are still living there, with the same birth rates, and no mass expulsions are occurring.  It's unequal and unjust but it's not genocide.  Compare it to Myanmar.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn would love it if you would pitch in.  Should Israel just annex?  Could it be done in a workable way for all?
> ...



I want some real discussion - something beyond the status quo.


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


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



Why do you keep attaching to me this "guest status"?
Each time you bring this up I correct you, but you insist on repeating this.

Ger Toshav, though you try to distort it, is not a 'guest status', and it's not my idea,
rather a Halachic term for the non-Jewish *citizens* of Israel.

Torah prescribes for all non-Jews who want to live in the land to

Recognize the G-d of Israel,
Recognize the Torah of Moses
Follow the 7 Laws of Noah
Submit to Israel's sovereignty
1-3 are fulfilled, we're at stage 4.
We only need some reformation on stage 2, but it's all pretty much about stage 4.
This is what this whole conversation is about, and for the last 71 years.

You keep talking about guests, I'm repeating citizens with civil obligation.
So, at this stage, I raise the same question you have been evading for months now -

What should be the *obligations* upon receiving Israeli citizenship?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah said:


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


Why should non Jews be required to recognized the God of Israel? Or the Torah?  Or religious law?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah

You ask: “what should the obligations of Israeli citizenship be” and that is a good question.  

I would say it includes following the laws of the state, participating in civil society and the political process, participating in defense. Not engaging in treason or sedition.


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Because that's the prescription for enjoying the full blessing of this land.

All non-Jewish citizens, even those who might identify as atheists are in the category of Ger Toshav,
this is how the Rabbinate was set by Maran Avraham Yitzhak Cohen Ztz"l.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah 

Is this a reasonable definition of the term?  If so how exactly would it relate to Israel today and the citizenship of non-Jews in Israel now and if Israel annexes territory?

Ger toshav - Wikipedia


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



How does that effect citizenship and rights?


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> rylah
> 
> You ask: “what should the obligations of Israeli citizenship be” and that is a good question.
> 
> I would say it includes following the laws of the state, participating in civil society and the political process, participating in defense. Not engaging in treason or sedition.



So how this declaration should be documented?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > rylah
> ...



Following the laws (civil and criminal) is easily documented, if laws are broken, the person is subject to the legal process.

To some degree treason and sedition is the same.

Are obligations mandatory or encouraged as part of good citizenry?

if mandatory, required military (or equivalent) serve is easily documented. Voting can be as well.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> rylah
> 
> Is this a reasonable definition of the term?  If so how exactly would it relate to Israel today and the citizenship of non-Jews in Israel now and if Israel annexes territory?
> 
> Ger toshav - Wikipedia




I am going to add this because there is a strong similarity to the Muslim dhimmi and the Jewish Ger Toshav, in my opinion, and I predict an explosion, in part because I don’t think Dhimmi status, as was originally formulated is well understood either.

The Dhimmi and the Ger Toshav | Judaism and Islam – comparing the similarities between Judaism and Islam

 Both would seem to be a means of offering some protections and status in a world where a secular concept of human rights did not exist, in fact the idea of a secular government did not exist and religious minorities were often persecuted.  Neither, in my view, is applicable to a modern state or modern concepts of citizenship.


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



How does a Halachic term for non-Jewish citizenship effect rights?
I don't know...you don't get be a hazan at my shul.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



And I don’t know what you mean.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Ger Toshav doesn't mean anything other than a citizen of Israel for all non-religious purposes. Let's not get our panties in a wad here.

(and no it is NOT the same thing as dhimmi)


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > rylah
> ...



Full stop.
Ger Toshav is a civil status of the non-Jewish citizens of Israel.
Dhimmitude is a communal religious status of permanent subjugation and servitude for no-citizens.

Dhimmi is nothing like the privilege of being a citizen of the 11th most happy country in the world, that's called Ger Toshav.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Ger Toshav doesn't mean anything other than a citizen of Israel for all non-religious purposes. Let's not get our panties in a wad here.
> 
> (and no it is NOT the same thing as dhimmi)


Read the link, it is informative.  What specifically is significantly different?  I don’t mean in how it has been applied or abused over the ages but rather in it’s original intent?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah said:


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



Originally, you seemed to be saying that it was a status where the person could be expelled while a Jewish citizen would not be.  You seemed to be expressing the different types of citizenship as desirable.  I don’t recall the thread.  Is that what you you were expressing?  If not, then I misunderstood.  If so, then I think my question about how it would relate to modern concepts of nationhood and citizenship is perfectly relevant since annexing involves questions about citizenship.


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Ger Toshav doesn't mean anything other than a citizen of Israel for all non-religious purposes. Let's not get our panties in a wad here.
> ...



Under the Dhimmi status Jews had to wear their shoes off when getting out of the Mlah (Ghetto), couldn't ride horses, had to build lower than Muslims, pay skull tax in humiliation, convert daughters upon father's death and give them away to foster families...

Just to name a few.

You're doing great injustice, and insulting everyone's intelligence comparing this to Israeli citizenship.


----------



## Hollie (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



It’s important to note that “periods of periods of relative peace, stability, prosperity” were conditioned under the Islamic imposition of the dhimmi status for Jews and Christians and the exclusion of Jews from post-colonial Pan Arab nationalism of the late 19th and 20th centuries. At no time ii islamist history have the dhimmi been considered as anythijng but second-class citizens in islamist society with limited rights and privileges expressly targeted at the dhimmi.  The history of Arab/Moslem behavior toward Jews (and Christians( is quite clear. We have 1400 years of Arab/Moslem and Jewish relationships to which we can refer. The conflicts that arose from the influx of Western/European ideologies in the 18th and 19th centuries in the final century of the Ottoman Empire, including "equal rights" and equal dignity, the joint rise of Arab nationalism and Zionism, and the world tragedy of WWII were, (and still are). Unthinkable to the islamist psyche.


As to the notion of a one state solution (Israel + West Bank). That seems absurd. Maybe it’s just me but I don’t believe this years graduating class of the Nazi inspired Hamas youth camps are really motivated toward such concepts as representative rule, democratic principles or rule of law. Those who envison Pan-Arab nationalism, or re-establishment of the Caliphate, or religiously seek the world united (politically and theologically) under Islam have an agenda that is contrary to Israeli citizenship. Somrthing like the Hamas Charter as an example. 


When Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948...as the armies of 5 Arab nations (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq) prepared to "drive the Jews into the Sea", the Israel Declaration was a call from the Jews to their Arab neighbors, both in Israel and beside her:

_In the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months — to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions. We extend our hand to all neighbouring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighbourliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The State of Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.
_
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace Pro...claration of Establishment of State of Israel


The above speaks to a different aganfa than does Islamic gee-had and the Hamas Charter.


Further, I see nothing to indicate that Arabs-Moslems in the West Bank would accept the responsibilities of representative type democracy. On a daily basis, the PA criminalizes Israel's existence, distorts its motives and maligns its character, its birth, even its conception. These are folks who still worship Arafat and it’s difficult to forget the Black September episode.


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



What a mess.

Yes, you're totally misrepresenting what I said.
I, and not only, already explained several times how this applies to common terms.

How else do you want me to explain what CITIZENSHIP means?
Look at judge Salim Joubran, he's a Ger Toshav, a non-Jewish citizen of Israel.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Ger Toshav doesn't mean anything other than a citizen of Israel for all non-religious purposes. Let's not get our panties in a wad here.
> ...



I read the link. Its a weak attempt to create equivalence where there is none.  There is no hidden meaning behind rylah 's use of the Hebrew term for "citizen" rather than the English term for "citizen".  It just means citizen.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> The thing is, according to Israel's basic law, second class citizenship it's going to be.
> 
> A two-state solution is increasingly unlikely because of Israeli settlements on occupied territory, and the ramped up demolition of Palestinian homes and infrastructure to make more room for more Israeli settlements.



These two comments are simply false.

There is nothing in Israel's laws which make Arabs "second class citizens".  Nor does Israel ever demolish Arab Palestinian homes or infrastructure and replace them with Jewish Israeli homes.  

There is PLENTY to criticize Israel for.  Why do people continue to post blatant lies?  Oh.  It would be because if they told the truth about Israel, it would be obvious that Israel, for all its faults, is actually one of the better States in the world as far as how it treats its citizens.


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...



I don't understand how their "not feeling proud" of the Star of David,
suggests giving them Judea...

What's next, Tel-Aviv because there's alcohol in the bars?
Shorts my circuit.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> The situation on the ground has changed.
> 
> I am morally against it.  But if terrorist acts - and I mean ACTS are performed (as defined by life threatening acts against people because of their ethnic identity) then sure - expel THAT person - not the family, not the tribe, not anyone else.  Or - put them through the criminal justice system.  Actually that might be better.
> 
> ...



So, here's the thing.  Such "abuse" can be prevented by *Arabs refraining from being hostile and committing acts of terrorism*. Full stop.  

In a one state solution, Israel will have a significant minority of Arab citizens who are hostile to Israel and to Israel's Jewish citizens.  Any hostilities, overt, covert, incitement, actual acts of harm or terrorism are the responsibility of those committing the violations.  Full stop.

The question being asked here is not, "How can we prevent Israel from abusing Arabs?"  The question is, "In the face of a hostile and violent minority population, how should Israel respond to acts of violence, threats of violence and a culture of violence and hostility?"

Is the answer expulsion?  Its a bigger question than just "what to do with individuals who commit acts of terror".  Its a question of managing that hostile culture.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Disagree....because some of the problems are coming from Israel's own policies which are causing the demise of a two-state opportunity.



The only reason the two-state solution is dead is because Arabs refuse to entertain the possibility.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Could annexation and one state work? (Just talking about Area C, not the rest of the WB or Gaza)
> ...



Was it then an illegal Jordanian occupation of the West Bank for about 15 years before the 67 war?  And WhereTF were you when you LEARNED that Jordan was "occupying" it.???  


Diff is that majority of Palis APPROVED of Jordan's annex.. Got $$Bills in infrastructure and political control of the WB cities... But Yasser Arafat screwed that relationship by starting a literary invasion of the Kings capitol and got his ass KICKED out of there..


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why should non Jews be required to recognized the God of Israel? Or the Torah?  Or religious law?



I think there is a misunderstanding here.  I think this type of misunderstanding is common because people tend to see Judaism through Xtian- or Muslim-colored glasses.

When rylah says:



rylah said:


> Torah prescribes for all non-Jews who want to live in the land to
> 
> Recognize the G-d of Israel,
> Recognize the Torah of Moses
> ...




notice he says that #1, 2 and 3 are ALREADY fulfilled.  

This concept is not meant to be understood as a requirement for each individual citizen of Israel, nor a restriction on individual citizens.

Its an understanding that the nations, generally, have accepted monotheism and a very basic set of moral values.  Don't take it to mean that all non-Jewish citizens will be required to do anything or that they will discriminated against.  It doesn't mean that at all.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> The thing is, according to Israel's basic law, second class citizenship it's going to be. That has nothing to do with whether or not Israel is "established", one way or another. It's a result of the prevailing lack of respect for non-Jews and international law.



Garbage... This is NOT a religious tolerance issue (except among Arabs) and the Arab citizens of Israel NOW with 13 seats in the Knesset have full rights.. There may BE some Arab (not Muslim) bias going on among some Israelis,  but what tolerant advanced country doesn't have a few buttheads???? 

And even tho the Arabs are exempt from mandatory national service, they STILL volunteer in areas CRITICAL to IDF and other security areas.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Yes it would....maybe semi-autonomy for some areas within an Israeli nation?



Actually fairly COMPLETE autonomy for the City Centers (or states).. Their own laws, own security,  own zoning, own taxation, own determination of who speaks for them...  This OF COURSE means that have to also have to establish TRADE and routes of commerce and freedom to buy and selll with ANYONE -- not just Israel..  That's why my "Palestine Trade Route" paper INCLUDES these cities at the center of a MAJOR regional transit system.. 

And there CAN BE a "federation" of all these City Centers (states) that cooperate on regional planning and negotiating with Israel on trade regulations and such... 



Coyote said:


> A lot of Palestinians are agrarian, farmers....how would they fit in to this model?



Farmers are pretty flexible.. They need access to trade routes, water, power and NOT A LOT of "regulation"
or govt..  And if Israel recognizes their property claims and gives them access to the Israeli legal system for disputes, farmers would be just peachy.. More complicated companies and businesses would have more issues being bound by Israeli policies.. 

I think the main areas along the upper Jordan border would too important to defending BOTH Israel and the "Pali Federation" to NOT annex..But that would not strip out that much of the fertile ground..


----------



## Mindful (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Olde Europe said:
> 
> 
> > The thing is, according to Israel's basic law, second class citizenship it's going to be.
> ...



Israelis shouldn't even _have _to justify or defend their reasons to exist. I wonder why Gentiles assume the right to discuss what's right or wrong for someone else's country.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Yes it would....maybe semi-autonomy for some areas within an Israeli nation?
> ...



One irony was when the Gazan  rocket launchers actually hit the power station that was providing _them _with the everyday means to survive.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> So - I"m simplifying it. Those city-states would be semi-autonomous within greater Israel. Citizens would elect their leaders who would then appoint their representatives to the Knesset? Each city state would have a representative with full rights in the Knesset?



I have to refrain from getting too specific to give THEM the latitude to decide the details.. But either the City Centers get recognized in the Knesset by appointments from City leaders or they get recognized by a POTENTIAL "federation of Palestiine"   If they chose to have a "loose federated govt" to share, then THAT BODY would be their voice to the rest of world and COULD BE recognized internationally and independent of Israeli control..... 

Remember the model here.. That 80 to 90% of Palestinians covered by the City State govts are NOT Israeli citizens.. They are autonomous and locally governed.. So representation to the Israel Knesset is more of diplomacy and negotiations team than ACTUAL sitting members.. But MAYBE -- they get to weigh in on a lot of aspects of Israeli policy and politics..


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


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



Israel micromanages Pali commerce for example.. Decides on tariffs, imports, exports, ect..  Very difficult to HAVE the best tradering partners when you're being crushed like that.. It's to Israels AND the Palis benefit to be TIGHTLY coupled in trade.. But it has to be a much fairer deal... WITH OPTIONS to deal with the rest of the world as well... 

That's one example "political policy" that Israel COULD improve, but I think they like having a convenient "farmer's market" at cut rate prices..  And in the OTHER DIRECTION, most of those fancy WB Pali homes are paid thru SALARIES earned in Israel by the SKILLED sector of their workforce... 

So there's already a "bond" there in terms of trade and dependence....


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


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



Currently the Emirate Plan (Dr. Mordechai Kedar) is less likely an option.

There're more Arab clans on the ground preferring full Israeli sovereignty,
rather than speaking of self-government.

Eventually many realize there're 2 options - either they themselves overthrow Hamas and PA with the support of other Arab states, and position themselves as partners in mutual regional development, 
or stay an irrelevant obstacle to be tossed the cards accordingly.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

Mindful said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Here's another irony..  Gaza's utility bills are paid largely thru the remnants of the PAuthority govt from international aid. And the large reason their lights go out often is that the PA stops paying their bills because they ESSENTIALLY LEFT the PA after going to war with them.. 

Lot of fancy hotels and restaurants going to candlelight in Gaza...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

Mindful said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Here's another irony..  Gaza's utility bills are paid largely thru the remnants of the PAuthority govt from international aid. And the large reason their lights go out often is that the PA stops paying their bills because they ESSENTIALLY LEFT the PA after going to war with them.. 

Lot of fancy hotels and restaurants going to candlelight in Gaza...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Their decision is based on 1000s of years of NOT trusting large federations or govts.. The Emirate plan gives them the ability to SELF govern as they wish without defaulting to a MINORITY Israel political coalition.. Don't think that would last long..  In America -- we RESERVED all the other rights to the states to decide to PREVENT "one size fits all" govt edicts...

And I think the friction would be constant in an "absorbed" solution...  ALTHOUGH, the relatively HIGH level of living for Palis would CERTAINLY IMPROVE as citizens..  And that may be WHY the "Pali on street" might be enticed to be a citizen of Israel..

Hate to say it but Dr. Kedar plan is EXCELLENT in terms of the MODEL... But it purposely leaves out creating a COMMERCE and TRADE option that is fair to the Palestinians or the NEIGHBORING Arab countries for that matter... 

Still convinced with the tighter bonds between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, Saudi, ect -- this NEEDS to be a regional solution with cooperation on MANY things.. Not just getting the Palis hooked up in commerce with the rest of the world...

That's the part I'm pitching... *And INTERESTINGLY, Jared Kuschner's (trump admin) plan fell on its face BECAUSE he only focused on "economic development" for the region and NOT SOLVING the governance/representation issues..*  Don't think Palis are more interested in 5G Cell service than they are in what FLAG their police on the street are gonna wear..

Maybe getting some Pali City States/Emirates/Regional solution folks together in a room, there might be a more tasty solution....


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



Or they just stop paying bills, so Gazans get to say they shoot rockets because they have no electricity, and the PA can keep looking "moderate".

In anyway, nothing one signs will be recognized by the other.
They're both irrelevant.


----------



## rylah (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



I don't want to speculate too much about the Trump deal,
in 3 or less days we'll know.

The way You think is more long term, kinda natural stage of development, which can be achieved in the following decade. Not a matter of instant deals, and I don't think that what it's aiming to address in the current geopolitical situation.

But we may be both surprised.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why should non Jews be required to recognized the God of Israel? Or the Torah?  Or religious law?
> ...



Thank you for clarifying. You are right, it is confusing to this secular person


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > The situation on the ground has changed.
> ...


Are suggesting that all violence from Israel’s Jewish citizens is simply responding to Arab hostility and therefore they can not be held responsible for their acts?  If so, I strongly disagree.  There are strong racial overtones in the violence coming out of both sides.

How can we prevent them from abusing each other and creating a state where all can feel ownership in.  

Here is a thought.  Maybe Israel can sell the Palestinians on the benefits of citizenship.  Less corruption, investment, better schools, political accountability, jobs?  Maybe they should start actively investing in the Palestinian areas of Area C prior to annexation?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


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


I disagree, I think part of the problem here is the term “dhimmi” has become so demonized and toxic it can’t be discussed rationally, in the historical context in which it was developed which is a world not to different than the a ancient Jewish, both worlds dominated religion, where the concept of human rights not very developed, and two societies that created ways to allow a degree of religious freedom within the laws of their own society.  It is a topic worth discussing elsewhere.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


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



Yeah,  I get that.  Its interesting how easy it is for people to miss each other because they are hearing the words in their own native "language" or worldview.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Disagree....because some of the problems are coming from Israel's own policies which are causing the demise of a two-state opportunity.
> ...



I disagree.  It enjoyed strong Palestinian support for some time.  The decline in support is primarily due settlements reducing the amount of contiguous from which a state could be formed making it increasingly unlikely to happen.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Yes it would....maybe semi-autonomy for some areas within an Israeli nation?
> ...


 Out of curiosity, how would that look on a map, have you tried mapping it?  I admit it is an idea I like.



> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > A lot of Palestinians are agrarian, farmers....how would they fit in to this model?
> ...


So, I am confused here, who’s jurisdiction would these rural people fall under? What citizenship?



> I think the main areas along the upper Jordan border would too important to defending BOTH Israel and the "Pali Federation" to NOT annex..But that would not strip out that much of the fertile ground..


Ok, so the people there would simply become Israeli citizens?[/quote][/QUOTE]


----------



## cnm (Jan 25, 2020)

> *What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote *


You'll be able to use ice skates in Hell.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


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



....and when it comes to religion there is a wealth of meaning that isn’t obvious.  Any religion.  That is why when people take scripture Or religious law out of context it is often misused. (Case in point)


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Are suggesting that all violence from Israel’s Jewish citizens is simply responding to Arab hostility and therefore they can not be held responsible for their acts?  If so, I strongly disagree.


Nope.  Not at all.



> There are strong racial overtones in the violence coming out of both sides.  How can we prevent them from abusing each other and ...


There you go equivalizing again.  They are not abusing each other.  Jewish Israelis are NOT breaking into Arab homes and slaughtering entire families with knives.  Jewish Israelis are not stabbing Arabs in the streets, or in their mosques.  Jewish Israelis are not planting bombs and IEDS and suicide martyrs in civilian locations trying to target as many children as possible.  Jewish Israelis are not stockpiling guns in houses of worship.  Jews don't collect government pensions for every Arab they slaughter.  

And yes, I know there are two notable exceptions.  You can name them off the top of your head.  They prove the rule.  

(I'm not talking about rock throwing in Area C.  Whatever, stupid children (literal and figurative).  They'll grow out of it.)  



> Here is a thought.  Maybe Israel can sell the Palestinians on the benefits of citizenship.  Less corruption, investment, better schools, political accountability, jobs?  Maybe they should start actively investing in the Palestinian areas of Area C prior to annexation?


We happen to agree on that.  And once Israel decides to fully annex, I am certain that she will provide the option of full Israeli citizenship for anyone who wants it.  What happens to those who don't?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Olde Europe said:
> ...




Maybe for the same reason non-gentiles do.  I hear plenty of criticism of other nations on these boards by members who are not of the nationality or religion being discussed.  Wonder why?  Human nature?


----------



## Shusha (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


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



"Settlements" are just an excuse for not entertaining the possibility.  Why was there no two-state solution during the decades long settlement freeze?


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Are suggesting that all violence from Israel’s Jewish citizens is simply responding to Arab hostility and therefore they can not be held responsible for their acts?  If so, I strongly disagree.
> ...



I think Israel needs to do that PRIOR to annexation. Otherwise, as far as the Palestinians go, what benefit do they see coming from a hostile power formalizing it’s control.  I think the benefit has to be there first.

Those who don’t want want it can opt for permanent legal status.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


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


Lots of reasons, none of which mean settlements have no role.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


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





flacaltenn said:


> Was it then an illegal Jordanian occupation of the West Bank for about 15 years before the 67 war? And WhereTF were you when you LEARNED that Jordan was "occupying" it.???


I never even heard the word "Palestine" until 20-30 years ago.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

Shusha said:


> The question being asked here is not, "How can we prevent Israel from abusing Arabs?" The question is, "In the face of a hostile and violent minority population, how should Israel respond to acts of violence, threats of violence and a culture of violence and hostility?"
> 
> Is the answer expulsion? Its a bigger question than just "what to do with individuals who commit acts of terror". Its a question of managing that hostile culture.




Oww Oww.. If I was a little more naive I could answer all that.. And I'd say ---  

You make their lives so secure and prosperous, and start appreciating them as neighbors that those thoughts never cross their minds and THEY start hating the "agitators" who would destroy that bliss and opportunity FOR them as much as Israelis do....  

OK -- well maybe I AM a bit naive.. *But THAT is what's happening right now with Israel/Arab relations in general..*. The Arab neighbors to Israel are beginning to realize that Israel is a reliable and valuable neighbor.. That they only want to live their lives in peace in their own boundaries.. A lot of that stems from the need for mutual defense in a tough neighborhood as ISIS, Al Queda, and Iran have demonstrated.. But furthermore, Israel is the nexus for all the ancient Arab/Jewish trade routes in that area..  A fact that I use to pitch my plan for a new age Palestine Trade Route... 

As an example of that, while I was working on this concept last year, rylah sent me this news that MIRRORS the principle "novel" feature of the plan...  Israel has offered to CONNECT Jordan RAIL routes with Saudi thru existing rail routes in Egypt. Thus giving SEVERAL Arab neighbors access to Israeli ports for international commerce... 

https://www.thejc.com/news/israel/israel-plans-rail-link-to-saudi-via-jordan-pa-1.436238

*Transport and Intelligence Affairs Minister Yisrael Katz publicly presented his “Tracks for Regional Peace” initiative this week, which has already been shared with the Trump administration and other allies of Israel, including a number of Arab states.

The plan is to connect largely existing rail infrastructure in Israel, Jordan and Saudi Arabia via a new link between the Jezreel Valley and the border crossing to Jordan near Bet Shean. This would to allow goods trains to run all the way from the Persian Gulf to the ports of Ashdod and Haifa.
*
"Anti-muslim" my ass Olde Europe* !!  *This is the same BOLD outreach that I'm proposing to put the Pali city centers on a CONNECTED "super highway" that runs along either side of the River Jordan from the Dead Sea to the North of Israel.. Same concept of creating win-win situations for an ENTIRE REGION... 

(OK -- it's NOT a "super" highway because of limited land availability.. But it IS more than sufficient to run a massive amount of tractor trailers and commercial traffic)

This would make Pali Emirates the exact CENTER of action for commerce and trade in the entire Levant and beyond... And the Palis would prosper even on the limited land that they have sovereignty over and give THEM a leg up on connectivity to the world and themselves... 

Israel is a valuable ally when Iran threatens Syria, Iraq or when ISIS showed up in the Sinai... And the Palis KNOW that defense of Palestine means they need the whole NEIGHBORHOOD to protect their gain of freedom... 

This is worth working on.. And I'll continue... But what started as a "too long for print" magazine article has turned into a "policy paper" for diplomacy.. And along the line, I've been learning from experts in this area.. And I have no reason to doubt it's a valuable model for settling an occupation that's now over 50 years old...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Not really into playing games about this anymore.. Only interested in solutions.. And if you can't simply acknowledge that Jordan was the previous "occupier" of Palestine for 20 years or so -- that's your problem, not mine...

And anyway, that statement is blatantly false unless you're so ignorant on this that you don't know what PLO stands for....


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...




And the world press can blame Israel for turning off the power...    So they fight each over paying the utility bills when they're not plotting to assassinate each other... Sounds like a healthy "people" to me... 

Have you seen any reliable polls in Gaza as to how happy the CITIZENS are with their choice of leadership?  Or have too many poll takers been killed trying to accomplish that simple feat???


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 25, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


I know. It was just before my time.
True it was occupied not annexed.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



IF Palestinians could economically and culturally flourish - would you be happy with that result?


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 25, 2020)

rylah said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



The days of starting negotiations with a map are over.. Never worked, Never WILL work..  What is needed is a new design for that region.. One that brings fast and unexpected value to ALL the stakeholders.. Creating value out of mere land holdings..

Entrepreneurs understand this.. You take a swamp and build a DisneyWorld on it.. You cut a channel across narrowest part of Central America and change the world.. Everyone knows change happens slowly in the Mid East and there's usually a lot of destruction and false starts before something good happens..

But in this case, the futuristic vision is to take the area BACKWARDS several thousand years and RESTORE it as hub of commerce for the world....


----------



## westwall (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...








When the Jews weren't allowed to be there.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

westwall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



No, not true.  There were times when Jews prospered there.  Actually, they had more rights and opportunities than in the Christian nations.


----------



## westwall (Jan 25, 2020)

Coyote said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...








Sure, during the Seleucid Empire, and a tad during the Abbayid.  But that is hundreds of years ago.  How about the recent history.  You know, the last 200 or so.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 25, 2020)

westwall said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



I would say that in the last 200 years (up until WW2) Jews had kind of a sucky time int eh Christian world.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Concerning Israel, it goes beyond criticism.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 26, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



Concerning Israel, sometimes honest criticism is labeled as something else.

Israel is not above criticism.  It can't have it's cake and eat it too.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


Sure, but the Palestinians would have to farm their own land and work in their own factories. They would have to control their own imports and exports. Control their own trade and tourism. And the rights of the refugees would have to be respected.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Does it matter what nationality that falls under?

The rights of refugees pertain only to those actually expelled.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


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


That is not my decision to make.

That is not true.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


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



On the first - just asking your opinion.


----------



## toastman (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Right of the refugees? That's NEVER going to happen. You know that Tinmore ...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


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


That is something the people living there will have to decide. I have no opinion on that.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


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



That's not even true TODAY that "Palestinians have to work in their factories"... LARGEST source of income in the West Bank is from HIGHLY SKILLED Palestinians taking in BIG bucks from working in Israel... 

What we are suggesting here WOULD let them control their own trade and tourism.. In fact, it would astronomically increase their ability to freely trade with the world... 

But "rights of refugees" would ALSO be up to them and don't think that's a simple issue as you make it out to be... Probably NOT every self-declared Palestinian would be taken in by EITHER Israel or the West Bank leadership... It's just a reality...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



Not above criticism by Israelis even.. Every successful FREE country needs balance. Major media in Israel is extremely critical of the ongoing occupation.. That's a healthy thing..


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 26, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> LARGEST source of income in the West Bank is from HIGHLY SKILLED Palestinians taking in BIG bucks from working in Israel...


They will never be prosperous if they are subordinate to Israel.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...




And that's the thing; I've not seen any 'honest' criticism of Israel, so far on these boards at any rate. It's usually tainted with contempt and the denial of existence, with an infusion of  lurid use of language, a la Old Europe for instance.

And the cake. A fragile cake, still fighting for its own right to actually be there.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > LARGEST source of income in the West Bank is from HIGHLY SKILLED Palestinians taking in BIG bucks from working in Israel...
> ...



Palis in the West Bank are TODAY more prosperous than most of the rest of the Arab world.. Declared "middle class" in comparison to the world population by the World Bank.. Lots of wealth and money and infrastructure in the West Bank that goes with middle class status..  They have their own stock exchange, universities and sports clubs.. 

Some of the housing there rivals the US middle class standards...


----------



## Mindful (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > LARGEST source of income in the West Bank is from HIGHLY SKILLED Palestinians taking in BIG bucks from working in Israel...
> ...



How do you explain the millionaire mansions, Mercedes, swimming pools, and Fillipino maids? I've seen them for myself.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> They will never be prosperous if they are subordinate to Israel.



Is that true?  There are many semi-autonomous, semi-self-governing territories in the world that are quite satisfactorily prosperous despite being "subordinate" to their sovereigns.


----------



## westwall (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...








They had a sucky time ALL OVER THE WORLD. 

C'mon, you can admit that, can't you?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 26, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



It certainly does.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 26, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


OK, but working for foreign companies should not be their economic model. And besides, where would those who owned farms work?


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 26, 2020)

Mindful said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



We need to start a go fund me and SEND Tinmore to the West Bank for a vacation... I think the convos would get more interesting after the trip... I can recommend a couple places to visit... But NO BUS TOURS from Israel OR the West Bank..  Needs to just mingle in the markets and take in the restaurants and culture a bit...


----------



## Mindful (Jan 26, 2020)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > They will never be prosperous if they are subordinate to Israel.
> ...



The German enclave in Belgium being one such example.

The area was known as Eupen-Malmedy, and is now called the East Canton.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 26, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



He'd learn a lot from the excavations and archeological digs.

Jericho's quite nice, in the Spring. Or at least it was, till Arafat paraded into Ramallah, on his  Trojan Horse.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 26, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


That would be cool. Nabi Saheh and Tent of Nations would be my first stops.

Where would you recommend?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



You can't expect Flaca to be your tour guide.

Try these:  Palestine Society of Tourism & Travel Agents


----------



## rylah (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Trade and employment with foreign business is an essential aspect of modern economy.
Farming is unfortunately becoming less and less sustainable in the broad sense,
and especially given the tiny land mass.

That said, Israel is becoming a world leader in the transformation towards modern urbanized agriculture technologies. It's a huge business with great potential, no less than the High-Tech industry.

If you want the world economy to return to the 7th century just for the Arabs to "feel comfortable",
this won't happen. They have to be competent in the real world.


----------



## rylah (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



Let me correct you, the first stops will be:
Kfar Kassem, Hars, Salafit, Farrakhah, Qarawat Beni Zaid and Kfar aSa'ana.

And that will be enough to see the ridiculous disparity between the media coverage of the average prosperous wealthy villages and a dysfunctional Hamas hub, where people instead of working, entirely rely on grants from foreign governments for propaganda provocations.

Near that is a village called Peduel, where there's a small children playground on the hill called "The Country's Balcony". There's a big wooden swing, where on a clear day one can see with a naked eye the entire width of the country, with Tel-Aviv on the Mediterranean coast in front, and when turning to the opposite direction the Jordan valley.


----------



## rylah (Jan 26, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The question being asked here is not, "How can we prevent Israel from abusing Arabs?" The question is, "In the face of a hostile and violent minority population, how should Israel respond to acts of violence, threats of violence and a culture of violence and hostility?"
> ...



I'd suggest contacting Dr. Guy Bechor.


----------



## rylah (Jan 26, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



I agree, the key is in wider regional geopolitical development.

That's why solution to this relatively negligible conflict, in the context of the broader region, should come from normalization with the wider Arab world from without, that loses most from investing in the continuation of the conflict, and not the other way around.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Good point.  But what would you propose instead?



Seriously, Coyote, you are tentatively arguing in favor of Israel committing a heinous crime, and now you are trying to recruit my help in figuring out how to carry it to completion?

Here's what I would propose: Over the next two years, in close coordination with the PA, Israel withdraws everything Israeli from the occupied territory.  Settlers are being given the choice of either accepting Palestinian citizenship, if offered by the PA, or resettled to Israel proper.  In 2022, no armed Israeli has any business entering the by-then no longer occupied territory other than in reasonable self-defense.  By then, a state of "Palestine" (or whatever name they choose) shall be announced to the UN, with the ardent support of Israel, supporting that state's right to exist in both word and deed.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 26, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Good point.  But what would you propose instead?
> ...



They've already had three chances at a Palestinian State.

Good luck with the fourth.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



Seriously, you've dedicated your life to this cause.  Why don't you actually go?  Alison Weir went.


----------



## rylah (Jan 26, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



Haven't seen any polls.

When a kid, I once made a mistake going to Liveleak to see what the media doesn't show about Gaza. 
Let me spare You the graphic descriptions, and just say they love their public executions no less than Americans love their football games.

All eagerly participate, women children.
This was long before ISIS.


----------



## rylah (Jan 26, 2020)

Coyote said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...









Don't be naive... BDS-holes couldn't care less, 
their sole goal is destruction of Israel,

Any positive development spells an end to their multi-billion welfare scheme and industry of lies.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 26, 2020)

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...





rylah said:


> Farming is unfortunately becoming less and less sustainable in the broad sense,
> and especially given the tiny land mass.


Any country that cannot feed its people is at the whims of others. That is a precarious position.


----------



## rylah (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



So when the potato season ends in your country,
you don't eat potatoes?

Grow up.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 26, 2020)

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Yes, Americans drink Columbian coffee, and eat Chilean grapes and Mexican berries.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 26, 2020)

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


Red herring.

Control oil and you can control nations. Control food and you can control the people, ~ Henry Kissinger

*Henry Kissinger’s Food Occupation Of Iraq Continues To Destroy The Fertile Crescent*

**


----------



## Hollie (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Islamic terrorists spending their welfare money on the tunnel 
gee-had will have less welfare money for agriculture.


----------



## rylah (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Indeed you usual deflections.

What you don't understand, is there's no other people or country to control in this equation.
Ramallah becomes and adjacent district to Tel-Aviv, and the entire territory eventually comes under Israeli sovereignty to form a single economic unit, with all pertaining international trade.

On one hand, Israel is world's most vegan nation, as well a world leader in AgriTech.
On the other hand you cling to visions of 7th century Feudalism as ideal of sufficiency.

Again, if you think the world will be held hostage and wait until a handful of privileged Arabs reach their dreams of Utopia in a detached microcosm - further shows their basic lack of sincerity in assuming responsibility for their lives, proving they don't actually look for or deserve a country of their own.

Can you show me a single country where this Utopia exists?


----------



## Shusha (Jan 26, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Good point.  But what would you propose instead?
> ...



Oh look.  Another person who accuses Israel of committing a "heinous crime" with no understanding of law.  

The conditions you have demanded above are ALREADY in place.  Israel has already withdrawn from Palestinian territory.  There are no settlers in the Palestinian territory.  No armed Israeli enters the Palestinian territory except to carry out duties related to defending Israel and her citizens.  Palestine is already has observer status in the UN (thus already announced).


----------



## Shusha (Jan 26, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Any country that cannot feed its people is at the whims of others. That is a precarious position.



Then most countries in the world are in that "precarious" position.  Only a handful of countries are food self-sufficient.  (Canada.  Australia.  US.  Russia.  India.  France.  Argentina.  Burma.  Thailand.)


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 26, 2020)

rylah said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



Yeah -- but we're shipping those foreign potato farmers Strawberries and Oranges and meat in the winter to PAY for it... 

Pali farmers can also upgrade their operations. In fact, they're pretty good at it.. For awhile this one operation was providing about 90% of the mushrooms to Israel... Until Israel embargoed the manure they were using for "security reasons"..  Which is far fetched, but technically, you COULD make explosives... Seems like protecting Israeli mushroom farmers is pretty easy to do when you control the gates of commerce.  

Just need to a have a fairer and MORE TRUSTING trading relationship with Palestinians... 



But just don't follow OUR example of "trade negotiations" or import/export balancing...   LOL.....


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 26, 2020)

Olde Europe said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Good point.  But what would you propose instead?
> ...



Wow.. You have a plan... I thought you were just here to jeer at people that want this fixed... 

Problem is -- if in 2022 no armed Israeli has any business at all in the West Bank territories, by 2025, ISiS or other radicals will have CONSUMED it for lunch.. If you're ISOLATING the Palis in a situation where their NEW commerce gate keeper is Jordan, they still won't be completely free to deal their goods and imports with the rest of the world.. And in reciprocation, the "NO JEW feet" in the West Bank would probably shut off the valuable INCOMES of many middle class Palis from working in Israel as "retaliation"... Which is right NOW a very large chunk of Pali income.. 

What you want is isolation from Israel.. You have no defense plan.. And -- to BOOT, the Palestinians have never in modern times succeeded in agreeing and LOVING any kind of "centralized govt"... 

What you DONT know, is that Pali opinion of the PA is very bad... In a 2018 article by Dr. Khalil Shikaki which I quote in my policy proposal ---- 



> More than 1/2 of the public views the PA as a burden on Palestinian people, and a large majority, ranging from 60 to 70% in 2018 , demands the resignation of the PA President Mahmoud Abbas. <SNIP>Confidence in diplomacy has plummeted: only 25% of Palestinians believe a Palestinian state will emerge in the next five years.



With that kind of instability and sentiment, there's simply NO ONE FOR Israel to negotiate with.. I could get into the 2000 year Arab history of distributed tribal govt here, but suffice it to say, very damn few Arabs TRUST democracy and they're not fond of strong man dictatorships flying their flag either.. 

*So -- under those handicaps -- a "WITHDRAWAL" from the West Bank, like the one Israel did in 2002 where they DRAGGED EVERY JEW out of Gaza and turned it over to the PA only to have it RIPPED IN CIVIL WAR between Palis FROM the PA by Hamas -- just isn't a mistake anyone is gonna make anymore..*. No one LIKES the Gaza embargo, but even the remnant of the PA does NOT get along at all with the Hamas Gaza govt... 

You need to refine your proposal....


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 26, 2020)

Mindful said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



I don't do tour buses in the Holy Land.. It's all propaganda... My 1st M in Law came back from Israel with all this misinformation like "there just isn't any crime in Israel"... My colleagues and i would rent a car and just go.. I suppose they are insured if we ended up with a rock thru the windshield.. 

Once we got caught in the Old City narrow hallways when Muslim school got let out.. I was pinned to the wall between a couple spice carts and got a donkey tail end in my face... And somewhere in the early evening near Bethlehem, we were surrounded by SOME kind of protest parade with small pickups flying flags with didn't recognize and a lot of shouting and fireworks..  THAT's what I want..   LOL....


----------



## Mindful (Jan 27, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Tinmore might love it. I think he thought it might be all about olive picking. I went all around the WB in the halcyon days  before the Intifadas began.

What you said earlier about the standard of living. I noticed that.


----------



## TDontTouchMyCigars (Jan 27, 2020)

There will simply be no Israel.

AND DONT READ HAARETZ!!!


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 27, 2020)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...


Stupid post.

You can't grow food on money. You grow food on land.

When all of your land is stolen, you are out of business.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 27, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


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



The world is beyond "subsistence" living... Except for "greenie intellectuals" that live in tall apartment building and have never SEEN where their food actually comes from... You have a romantic concept of what keeps Palis or any other people fed... 

Working a single hectare of land by hand feeds virtually only a few people.. You know most farmers in the west have college degrees in agriculture and maybe even an Masters in Business.. THAT is what it takes to sustain a population where 85% of them live in the DENSE URBAN cities....


----------



## Shusha (Jan 27, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


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




Yes. And ask why some people are romanticizing subsistence farming.  It’s another way to pretend victimization.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Shusha said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...




All I can see when I think about this romance is THIS... 



Are you as "shook" as this apartment dweller congress woman that is amazed by seeds growing in rooftop box???  Without even HER HELP??? 

 Kinda sums up the romance about subsistence or sustainable anything.... LOL....


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 28, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


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


Palestine was an exporter of food.


flacaltenn said:


> THAT is what it takes to sustain a population where 85% of them live in the DENSE URBAN cities....


That is Israel's plan. Many of them or most of them were farmers before Israel stole their land.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Many of them or most of them were farmers before Israel stole their land.



No they weren't..  Where do think those hospitals and universities came from?  They were there BEFORE the war.. You have a very clouded view of life in Palestine Today even if you DID author that thread and post for 50 pages or so... 

Doesn't matter what amount of food anyone exports..  What matters is what the import/export BALANCE is..


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Palestine’s Top 10 Exports


Stone, plaster, cement, asbestos: US$176.7 million (19.1% of total exports)
Furniture, bedding, lighting, signs, prefab buildings: $101.7 million (11%)
Plastics, plastic articles: $78.5 million (8.5%)
Vegetables: $60.8 million (6.6%)
Animal/vegetable fats, oils, waxes: $48 million (5.2%)
Tobacco, manufactured substitutes: $34.5 million (3.7%)
Footwear: $33.1 million (3.6%)
Wood: $29.7 million (3.2%)
Iron, steel: $27.9 million (3%)
Fruits, nuts: $24.3 million (2.6%)
Not sure I'd invest in the Pali stock market tho if their LARGEST exports include ASBESTOS and TOBACCO... 

Just sayin''..  

Palestinians are BIG on architecture and building design.. They have mad skills.. They are not the shepards and farmers that you imagine...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 28, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Many of them or most of them were farmers before Israel stole their land.
> ...


I hear that Palestine had a positive balance of trade.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



They MIGHT. I don't know.. BUT -- not if you include Gaza... 

Problem IS their 80% "trading partner" is only Israel and that's not a fair trade situation considering Israel can manipulate what they produce and bring to market in many ways.. 

On the bright side, a lot of mutual dependencies are developing which is GREAT for relations between the two of them...

Part of what I'm proposing gives them direct access to the world for trade and commerce.  With the help of Jordan and Egypt as well as Israel...


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 28, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


Well, that was before Israel destroyed the holy land.


----------



## rylah (Jan 28, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



The Ottoman Caliphate was, not Palestine.
The commerce was largely based on ancient Roman roads, which were kept in the condition that they left it, and the Gaza port, which was too traditionally owned by Jews.

It never functioned as an independent country under Arab-Muslim rule.
And it's not independence they're looking for.


----------



## rylah (Jan 28, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



For thousands of years, this country wasn't as prosperous as it is today.
Under Arab-Muslim rule it remained a secondary district, and the most impoverished and neglected of them all compared to the rest of the Caliphate.

Even the large Muslim presence on the Temple Mount, was a function of re-constitution of Israel.










With all the pilgrims moving through the land, there were weeds on the floors.
And the only Arabs who took interest were Waqf guards and those employed by Jews to carry them above the ground when on the mountain on a rare occasion. 

All a function of Israel's revival.


----------



## rylah (Jan 28, 2020)

Shusha said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



That and having a Feudal system as the romanticized ideal for historic re-construction.
Because this is basically what was the Caliphate rule was, and as my Rabbi likes to point out "What people had then? Malaria! And a single set of cloth to wear all life"  - this is literally and figuratively.

That's what Muslims openly preach in the Al-Aqsa mosque, that and taking back Rome.
Kinda nostalgia...


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 28, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Interesting that you call it the "Holy Land."  It was the Holy Land for Jews before it was that for the Christians and Muslims (whose real Holy Land is Saudi Arabia anyway where Mecca is located).  And it's because of the Jews that it even became a Holy Land to those 2 other faiths.  And Israel didn't "destroy" the Holy Land, lol.  It built cities and drained swamps, and kept all the holy sites in pristine condition.  Which is alot more than I can say for the Arabs.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Legitimacy, ability to better govern the region and all it's people under one legal system.
> 
> It hit me when I looked at what flac called the measles map.  It isn't just Palestinian violence that caused the erosion of a 2 state solution.  I don't think Israel ever seriously intended for it to happen. The map starkly  refutes it.  Given that neither side, imo, is capable of honoring it.. what is left?  The status quo?
> 
> Gaza can be a state eventually.  But maybe WB should just be annexed.



Imo you cannot claim " legitimacy " by breaking the law. You cannot expect anyone to recognize as legitimate a crime against another just because they have been allowed to get away with it for decades. 

If some people are only just now coming to the conclusion that Israel/Zionism never had any intention of honouring a two state soution, historical acceptance( Peel/UN partition ) was privately admitted as a stepping stone for the Jewish state by the likes of Ben Gurion and co , that shouldn't mean they should just capitulate to Israeli regional hegemony/propaganda and reject the rights of others.


If both sides are incapable of resolving it by themselves or with eachother there is always the option to put pressure on the US to stop it using its veto power in order to scupper the application of international law , in line with the decades long overwhelming international consensus and have the UN/ICJ sit both sides down an attempt a just resolution of the conflict based on international law instead of the status quo which is nothing but might is right.

I respect your willingness to offer a solution , I just think it lacks balance , justice and is a de facto encouragement for more international crimes being committed by states in the future , further undermining existing international law.

If people want to resolve the conflict to end the suffering they should use and support the application of international law which is the correct mechanism for setting out the framework and offering a more just resolution than the might is right alternative.


----------



## rylah (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Legitimacy, ability to better govern the region and all it's people under one legal system.
> ...



You confuse international law with popular vote in the UN.
It is illegal to prevent Jewish settlement and sovereignty in Judea.

The US itself is bound by the Balfour Declaration and Mandate terms Constitutionally.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Legitimacy, ability to better govern the region and all it's people under one legal system.
> ...





Spartacactcus said:


> If people want to resolve the conflict to end the suffering they should use and support the application of international law which is the correct mechanism for setting out the framework and offering a more just resolution than the might is right alternative.


It is interesting that the Palestinians always call for a solution based on international law and UN resolutions.

Israel says: We don't need no steenking law.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Israel is not responsible for solving the "Palestinian issue".



It most definitely is partially responsible. If you decide to occupy another people you have a whole host of LEGAL responsibilities along with contractual responsibilites as per the conventions and charters it voluntarily agreed to commit to.

If Israel cannot sort it out with the Palestinians, as looks likely, it should go to the UN and ICJ imo and the relevant mechanism should be used to resolve the conflict


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Legitimacy, ability to better govern the region and all it's people under one legal system.
> ...



The Palestinians also never had any intention of honoring a two-state solution.  Why do you only say Israel?


----------



## rylah (Jan 28, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Another one confusing international law with popular vote in the UN.
That's barely an argument with 22 Arab states.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

rylah said:


> You confuse international law with popular vote in the UN.
> It is illegal to prevent Jewish settlement and sovereignty in Judea.
> 
> The US itself is bound by the Balfour Declaration and Mandate terms Constitutionally.



I count the two as seperate events but see the justice and pragmatism in both as the better option for conflict resolution

The reason why the UNGA November vote at the UN is so massively popular is because it is seen as a just framework with which to engender a lasting resolution of the conflict

Nope, there are numerous UNGA and UNSC resolutions that have been applied to the situation wrt Israel/Palestine the latter being legally binding.

If we were to see the US veto blocking this chance of progress being removed then there would be the opportunity for the legal battle required to ascertain what is applicable and what is not. I am more inclined to accept the view of experts from both sides/all sides in international law than some random blogger on an anonymous board.

We need that legal wrangle and a definitive verdict to set the parameters for debate

And,there are moral as well as legal considerations imo that trump such an aged and blatantly racist /colonialist justification than that of the Balfour declaration which is what when you break it down ?

The gifting of the land of one people to another by yet another still.If that's what you want to set your moral compass by in the year 2020 be my guest but it seems morally retarded by contemporary moral standards


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> The Palestinians also never had any intention of honoring a two-state solution.  Why do you only say Israel?



Because on boards like these it is always stated that the Arabs/Palestinians never accepted the Jewish state at any point which is historically accurate.

What is much less well known is that neither did/have the Zionists. For sure in public they saw and supported any chance of the furthering of the Jewish state in Palestine as progressing the dream. In private , however, they never really accepted anything less than all of Palestine and often had eyes on areas completely out of those borders as well.

Finkelstein had it right years back when he stated that, to paraphrase  " there has never been a peace process , but rather an annexation process that used the " peace process " as a facade ".

The rejectionism of both sides is not what we regularly see in the discussion hence my comment


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> It is interesting that the Palestinians always call for a solution based on international law and UN resolutions.
> 
> Israel says: We don't need no steenking law.



The Palestinians have realized that the application of international law is the only game in town that actually supports their rights and offers them the chance of a just , or as just as possible , resolution of the conflict.

If you are allowed to flout the law for as long as Israel has it shouldn't come as a surprise to see the Israeli side viewing it with contempt. The cherrypicking of it is what gets to me about the so called supporters of Israel and the state itself.


----------



## rylah (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > You confuse international law with popular vote in the UN.
> ...



If that is all it takes to deny binding international law, then don't propose it as a measure.
What is racist about recognizing indigenous rights of the nation?

A UN resolution is binding only if it follows its own charter, and the charter of the League of Nations, 
its formal legal basis - and all those recognize sovereignty of the Jewish Nation in Judea,
on the basis of "safeguard of civilizations".


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

rylah said:


> If that is all it takes to deny binding international law, then don't propose it as a measure.



That international law has its enforcement issues ,solely down to the US veto in this case, is extremely frustrating and has enabled this slaughter to go on longer than it ever needed to imo BUT if it could be pressured into a reversal that would be a monumental step forward on numerous levels and that's what people should be pushing for.
It is proposed because it is the correct and just mechanism with which to try to resolve the conflict.

You are coming across as someone who supports the might is right camp so maybe you should resist the urge to cherrypick the laws you seem to hold in contempt and I guarantee you will have done so in the past and will have no problem doing so in the future



> What is racist about recognizing indigenous rights of the nation?



You don't see any racism in the British thinking they had the right to promise the land they had conquered to an immigrant European settler colonialist movement with the total disregard to what the truly indigenous people living there, the Arabs , thought ? Really ?

At the time of the first immigrant Zionists into  Palestine the Jewish population was a miniscule 2-5 %. If you want to class that percentage as indicative of the " indigenous " people and bomb out the other 95% on the grounds that they are somehow non indigenous feel free but don't expect to be taken seriously

I suppose if you support settler colonialism anywhere it's pretty much a waste of time discussing what equates to racism so at least you can be deemed consistant



> A UN resolution is binding only if it follows its own charter, and the charter of the League of Nations,
> its formal legal basis - and all those recognize sovereignty of the Jewish Nation in Judea,
> on the basis of "safeguard of civilizations".



I am pretty sure international law experts are fully aware of all the above and yet when some of them convened in the 2004 advisory opinion on the legality of the annexation wall they also made the call that all of the settlements in the territories occupied since 1967 by Israel are illegal under international law.

I actually want to see the US veto blocking this crucial argument to be stopped precisely so it can be thrashed out and a decision made and I am certainly not going to put your opinion before those mentioned above


----------



## Coyote (Jan 28, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...


Why do you only blame the Palestinians?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 28, 2020)

Coyote said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



How can you tell from this post that I only blame the Palestinians?  I was asking Sparta why, in his long post, he only accused Israel of not wanting a two-state solution, without mentioning that the Palestinians were also averse to that idea.  He gave me a satisfactory answer for his omission.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 28, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


The whole thread is nonsense since it is about the prospect of Israel annexing all of Judea and Samaria and there is little to no support for this among Israelis.  Bennett proposed this a few years ago in  a NYT opinion piece and was promptly taken to school by both left and right.  Israel will continue to maintain de facto sovereignty over areas A and B without annexing them.  The real question is how much of area C will Israel annex and when?  The cabinet will vote on annexing all of the Jordan Valley and all the settlements this week and the Knesset will likely vote on it next week.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Israelis bought a lot of sand dunes from Arabs fleeing to better grounds and turned it into a vibrant, tolerant oasis in a sea of despair... Holy Land is there awaiting your arrival..

Your romantic notion that this place will go back to subsistence farming and grazing is quite naive.. The land in all of Israel and Palestine would NOT employ even 2 Million Pali farmers..  Not EVEN 200,000 Texas A&M graduates with doctorates in agriculture..  That's a fact.. Get a more realistic view of what's REQUIRED for a Pali population of about 2.5 Million... 

If that why you think the land is "destroyed",  go design a Disney World version of YOUR vision of the Holy Land and charge $180 a day for families...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Shusha said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Worse than that, the UN and various intl NGOs are trying to KEEP the developing world in that subsistence state for their own protection...


----------



## Mindful (Jan 28, 2020)

The notion that the Palestinians will accept a Jewish state of any size, in any form, is a pipe dream.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> If some people are only just now coming to the conclusion that Israel/Zionism never had any intention of honouring a two state soution, historical acceptance( Peel/UN partition ) was privately admitted as a stepping stone for the Jewish state by the likes of Ben Gurion and co , that shouldn't mean they should just capitulate to Israeli regional hegemony/propaganda and reject the rights of others.



And yet TODAY -- a pro-Israel US govt and the govt of Israel is reviving "the 2 state solution".. In a way where if the Palis can't CREATE a state on their own, they will get help to do so... 




Spartacactcus said:


> Nope, there are numerous UNGA and UNSC resolutions that have been applied to the situation wrt Israel/Palestine the latter being legally binding.



These are no more legally binding than the UN Declaration of Human Rights which IRONICALLY has a "rights kill switch" embedded in it for the benefit of those many DICTATORSHIPS that SIT in the UNGA or UNSC.... Besides, many of those resolutions applied to JORDAN as well in that Israel had to negotiate with Jordan (and Egypt) for land acquired from the 1967 war..


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > The Palestinians also never had any intention of honoring a two-state solution.  Why do you only say Israel?
> ...



Ironic.. since what the Palis LACK is a Zionist movement.. They fight with each other over Gaza after Israel drags every last Jew out of there by force and hands it to PA... Zionism is simply ACKNOWLEDGED diplomatic leadership that binds ALL of its people thru common beliefs and goals.  If the Palis could ORGANIZE like that, we wouldn't be waiting for A PARTY TO NEGOTIATE WITH... 

Ain't no chance of UN solution.. Ain't no chance of a fractured PA solution.. *But there ARE different forms of organization OTHER than :"statehood" that would still give them international recognition and power to negotiate on behalf OF ALL OF THEM... That's why I'm proposing an "emirates" or city state model based on city states with a purposely WEAK central govt....*

There never has been and never WILL be a huge demand for a "western style" State.. They are steeped in identifying by their tribal, familial, place of origin identities and PREFER "local and consolidated" govt to any kind of large inclusive statehood.. You're asking them to accept models that they do not trust...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Israel cannot negotiate with a "vaporware" leadership... NO country can...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



Let's be honest here.. The Pentatuch is a Muslim/Judaic family tree.. I don't think that argument flies because ARABS and JEWS have the same forebears in the Bible.. It's fine to IMAGINE they led separate lives wandering around the MidEast, but come Thanksgiving, they all eat from the table..


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Mindful said:


> The notion that the Palestinians will accept a Jewish state of any size, in any form, is a pipe dream.



At this point, MANY will.. But they want a better deal.. And SOME folks are working along those lines. Others are just whining about romantic notions of the past. 

Then there's the Hamas types that get to weigh in and screw the REST of them out of any deal... LEADERSHIP that can LAST is the key element here.. It will NOT COME from a large centralized govt for Palestine that tends to slide to corruption, and causes tribal, locality, feuds..  They don't WANT to agree... 

The USA is becoming tribal as well.. We MAY fail as well to SUSTAIN a representative government. So we should be sensitive about the TYPE of representation that people are comfortable with and NOT force them into models that will not endure...


----------



## Picaro (Jan 28, 2020)

It's pure STUPID to let West Bank thugs vote in Israeli elections. Their votes on issues in their own elections make it very very clear why. They also already have a two state solution, and they screwed that up royally, no need for what is really a 'third state' solution just so some Arab gangsters can feel 'legitimate'.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> And yet TODAY -- a pro-Israel US govt and the govt of Israel is reviving "the 2 state solution".. In a way where if the Palis can't CREATE a state on their own, they will get help to do so...



What they seem to be endorsing is the two state solution the Israeli state has wanted/worked for since the onset of the Palestinian peace offensive from the 1970's onwards which is FAR from what the application of international law would afford the Palestinians as the basis to start negotiations.

The problem for Zionism is and always has been how to acquire the land without the acquiring the Arabs that are living on it.

So when they were the weaker group they accepted, stragglers aside, the Peel Commisions recommendation which was the creation of an Arab state and a Jewish state with the ethos being something being better than nothing.

After the Palestinian revolt 0f 1936-39 the Palestinian position worsened still and the Jewish position improved. Once more we see the Jewish leaders accept the UN partition plan and for the same reason. In private however they never accepted this as a final settlement and ben Gurion himself said it would be the Jewish people that set the borders for the Jewish state.

Once Israel had established itself and its military power was stronger than the Arab side it initiated a war to ,imo , conquer and claim the rest of the former partition plan  area.

As time has  passed and the Palestinian grew to accept the reality of Israel , along wityh growing UN and international condemnation of Israeli flouting of international laws, attacks on its neighbours and it's treatment of those under its control.

Today Israel wants to annexe most of the settlements , have control over the crucial water resources and most valuable land in the WB whilst ridding itself of the burden of the millons of Palestinians there forcing them to live in a series of disconnected and unviable state lite with that being locked into a deal for all time

Trump and co are just rolling out that plan for them as something of the deal of the century and the Palestinians , unsurprisingly, have rejected it


----------



## Picaro (Jan 28, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Israel cannot negotiate with a "vaporware" leadership... NO country can...



No matter what the majority will vote for, the press and most other Muslim states will peddle the dissenters and terrorist factions as the 'legitimate' factions deserving of world support, same as they did after 1948. There will never be a 'legitimate' Arab govt. that will work at peaceful resolutions, it's a fantasy. Like the premise of the thread title, all these alleged 'fair' solutions merely make demands that will result in the genocide of Israelis, and just like in the past the homicidal maniacs will rob and kill their 'Arab brothers' as well.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 28, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



According to the Muslims' own beliefs, after Abraham and Sarah kicked out Ishmael and Hagar, they went to Arabia and built the Kaaba.  I repeat, this is according to them.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> The problem for Zionism is and always has been how to acquire the land without the acquiring the Arabs that are living on it.



Yep the EMPIRE of Israel stretches far and wide don't it? Once youre out of city traffic at the beach and Jerusalem, it takes you maybe a whole 40 minutes WITH CHECKPOINTS to cross it... Darth Vader himself was at the WH today with a whole bunch of Arab country representatives, DICTATING TO THEM what the "final solution" will be...


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> These are no more legally binding than the UN Declaration of Human Rights which IRONICALLY has a "rights kill switch" embedded in it for the benefit of those many DICTATORSHIPS that SIT in the UNGA or UNSC.... Besides, many of those resolutions applied to JORDAN as well in that Israel had to negotiate with Jordan (and Egypt) for land acquired from the 1967 war..



UNSC resolutions are legally binding and if it were not for the US veto standing in the way of the international consensus there would most likely have been a resolution of the conflict already.

I have stated that there are definitely frustrating weaknesses/contradictions with the UN , namely the UNSC veto power of the big 5, which are incidentally most of the biggest arms dealer nations around, how's that for a conflict of interests ? But support for international laws that are there to aim to keep the peace should be supported by all decent people of the world imo 

The UN Charter doesn't start off with " we the governments of the world " , it starts off with " we the peoples of the world " and we , each of us in our own nations , need to stop our governments from flouting international laws and conventions.

Progress is slow with obvious periods of regression but people need to stick with it imo


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

Picaro said:


> It's pure STUPID to let West Bank thugs vote in Israeli elections.



I agree, dismantle the illegal settlements and send them back to Israel where they should be living and let the Palestinians have their rights and self determination


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 28, 2020)

Mindful said:


> The notion that the Palestinians will accept a Jewish state of any size, in any form, is a pipe dream.


The nice thing, perhaps the clever thing, about Trump's plan is that Israel's actions do not depend on what the Palestinians decide


Spartacactcus said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > The Palestinians also never had any intention of honoring a two-state solution.  Why do you only say Israel?
> ...


What a load of bullshit!  Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time?  Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape.  Did Israel take the peace process seriously?  Absolutely.  Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously.  Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza.  What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace?  Absolutely nothing.  In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.


----------



## Picaro (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > It's pure STUPID to let West Bank thugs vote in Israeli elections.
> ...



They already decided; Jordan, the Palestinian state, relinquished any claims on the West Bank; it is now open for Jewish settlements with Palestinian consent. the squatters just need to go back to Syria, Egypt, and the other Arab states they came from. Just because Arab racists illegally denied Jews to settle anywhere in the Mandate doesn't mean their settlements are illegitimate, they are in fact completely legal an long overdue.  It's clear the illegal squatters Jordan left behind have no interest in developing the land anyway, they just continue to rely on extortion and murder for hire as their primary source of income.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Yep the EMPIRE of Israel stretches far and wide don't it? Once youre out of city traffic at the beach and Jerusalem, it takes you maybe a whole 40 minutes WITH CHECKPOINTS to cross it... Darth Vader himself was at the WH today with a whole bunch of Arab country representatives, DICTATING TO THEM what the "final solution" will be...



It only has to " stretch " far enough to deny an entire people their right to self determination to be classed as wrong imo

East Timor is smaller  still , so was the Indonesian treatment of them justified by the same token ?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

Picaro said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



Jordan doesn't decide for the Palestinians what or how their state should be constructed anymore than they should your own state.

Your denial of the people of Palestine, in true Joan Peters style, is acknowledged and rejected. Your own racism against Arabs is noted and rejected too


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


lol  What state?


----------



## Shusha (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> I agree, dismantle the illegal settlements and send them back to Israel where they should be living and let the Palestinians have their rights and self determination




All of the "settlements" ARE in Israel.  The Palestinians can have self-determination when they accept peace, recognize Israel, yes, as the state for the Jewish people, put down their weapons, and just develop their state.

They can start by accepting one of the peace visions on offer.  What the hell are they holding out for?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 28, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > I agree, dismantle the illegal settlements and send them back to Israel where they should be living and let the Palestinians have their rights and self determination
> ...


Hatred of Jews and Israel is the defining characteristic of the so called Palestinians.  If they gave that up, who would they be?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> What a load of bullshit!  Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time?  Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape.  Did Israel take the peace process seriously?  Absolutely.  Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously.  Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza.  What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace?  Absolutely nothing.  In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.



You talk of " bullshit " then come out with a whole load of it in the above diatribe. The reference to rape is an old hasbara mainstay and is always, always misrepresented as it has been here. It's an appeal , and an irrational one at that , to the emotional in the face of a lack of a proper reesponse. If you need it explaining I will gladly do so and believe me you won't look good after it.

Both publics took the Oslo Process seriously at first. You probably wouldn't know about the Palestinian support for it in the early years because you don't want to know what they think nor care about it. Both sides have stopped their support for it because it was a BS process and once they realized that all hell let loose again.

On peace with the other Arabs

Egypt

Anwar Sadat informed the UN Jarring mission that unless the Israelis left the occupied Sinai he would be forced to attack them and remove them himself. This is 2 years prior to the 1973 Egyptian war of territorial liberation. So the land that Israel " gave up " was sovereign Egyptian territory it was occupying and had no title to

Jordan

The Jordanian-Israel peace treaty saw Israel " give back " an insignificant amount of land, basically a man made island with a power station on it , that was formerly Jordanian sovereign territory.

Gaza was never " given back " either. At least if given back means they can run it as they like seeing as it is now their territory. They took out the illegal settlers , moved the guards from the inside to the perimeter fence and opened the largest open ait prison in the world.

Image seperated from reality


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > These are no more legally binding than the UN Declaration of Human Rights which IRONICALLY has a "rights kill switch" embedded in it for the benefit of those many DICTATORSHIPS that SIT in the UNGA or UNSC.... Besides, many of those resolutions applied to JORDAN as well in that Israel had to negotiate with Jordan (and Egypt) for land acquired from the 1967 war..
> ...



How many wars has the UN prevented or won??  Really not interested spending time worshipping an institution that dictates a "Rights" for "the people" and puts a kill switch clause in small print at the very end... BINDING? Over national sovereignty??  What nation do YOU live in??? 

Want to see the Declaration of Rights for "the people of world" signed by narco-dictators and human rights abusers??   Where's the UN Army to enforce those rights??? 

I'll dig it up for you and if you're RATIONAL it'll chill your bones....


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

Shusha said:


> All of the "settlements" ARE in Israel.  The Palestinians can have self-determination when they accept peace, recognize Israel, yes, as the state for the Jewish people, put down their weapons, and just develop their state.
> 
> They can start by accepting one of the peace visions on offer.  What the hell are they holding out for?



The settlements are in Occupied Palestinian Territory and thus illegal as per the ICJ opinion on them

Imo they are " holding out " for a genuine self determination and resisting a deal that would lock in forever with everyone whistling and looking the other way , most of the worst aspects of life under occupation in a "state" that is really a state lite and by some distance a state lite


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Yep the EMPIRE of Israel stretches far and wide don't it? Once youre out of city traffic at the beach and Jerusalem, it takes you maybe a whole 40 minutes WITH CHECKPOINTS to cross it... Darth Vader himself was at the WH today with a whole bunch of Arab country representatives, DICTATING TO THEM what the "final solution" will be...
> ...



I guess old families in Mexico feel the same way about the raw deal that lost them their rancheros in California and New Mexico...  For crying out loud their heritage and footprints are right outside the Staples Center in LA...


----------



## Shusha (Jan 28, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> The nice thing, perhaps the clever thing, about Trump's plan is that Israel's actions do not depend on what the Palestinians decide



Yep.  The language in the plan is very much, "Israel is entitled to these things and here are the reasons why".


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



People tend to hate those that abuse them , who knew ?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > What a load of bullshit!  Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time?  Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape.  Did Israel take the peace process seriously?  Absolutely.  Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously.  Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza.  What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace?  Absolutely nothing.  In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.
> ...



I don't think the Palestinians ever took Oslo seriously.  The more land Israel gave up on the West Bank, the more suicide bombings there were.  Bereaved Israelis shouted at Peres, "Look at what your 'peace process' gave us!"


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



The provisional Palestinian state that is recognized by vastly more people than the Israeli annexation attempts of East Jerusalem and the Golan , the current pantomime US president and his lackies aside


----------



## Mindful (Jan 28, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



It's called Jordan. The British reneged on their promise to the Jews, and gave that part of the Mandate to the Arabs, for fear of upsetting the French in Syria. And then installing a Hashemite king.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > All of the "settlements" ARE in Israel.  The Palestinians can have self-determination when they accept peace, recognize Israel, yes, as the state for the Jewish people, put down their weapons, and just develop their state.
> ...




There is no such thing as "Palestinian territory", occupied or not.  The "settlements" are in territory under full Israeli sovereignty whose final status will not be determined until a Peace Treaty is signed between Israel and a future State of Palestine.  And you have consistently ignored this.

"Genuine self-determination" is a vague and foolish sound byte with no objective definition.  (Perfect for rejecting anything and everything as an excuse to continue to be belligerent).  Be specific.  What do the Arab Palestinians NEED for "genuine self-determination"?

A recognized state?  Check.  Continguity?  Check.  Direct access between WB and Gaza?  Check.  Direct access to Jordan and Egypt?  Check.  Ports?  Check.  Access to holy places?  Check.  Choice of citizenship and remaining where they live?  Check.  Economic prosperity?  Check.  Better medical care, better education, better access to water, a new university, an airport, a history museum, free trade, improved technology, better life expectancy, lower infant mortality rate, release of their prisoners?  Check.  And check.  And freaking check.

What are they NOT getting with a peace deal like this?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...




You wouldn't know what the Palestinians take seriously because in your book what they think doesn't count for anything. That's why you didn't know that the polls initially showed much Palestinian support for Oslo up until they realized what Oslo actually was and that it didn't even put a stop to the illegal settlement of their land by Israelis etc etc

The suicide bombings came only after the mass shootings of Palestinians during the Second Intifada , months after them in fact. Killings beget further killings and both sides are guilty


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 28, 2020)

Tomorrow peoples , it's getting on so will pick this up again tomorrow


----------



## Mindful (Jan 28, 2020)

*US releases map of Israel/Palestine under peace deal*
Borders of Israel, proposed state of Palestine under 'Deal of the Century' revealed.

Arutz Sheva Staff,  28/01/20 20:52







the map


US releases map of Israel/Palestine under peace deal


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 28, 2020)

Mindful said:


> *US releases map of Israel/Palestine under peace deal*
> Borders of Israel, proposed state of Palestine under 'Deal of the Century' revealed.
> 
> Arutz Sheva Staff,  28/01/20 20:52
> ...



The Palestinians should grab this while they can.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 28, 2020)

;';lp




Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...




Any say in the process.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 28, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



I'm glad you find suicide bombings funny, Tinmore.  Must be nice not to have human emotions.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > What a load of bullshit!  Did some Israelis aspire to more land than Israel had at the time?  Absolutely, but what you are saying is that if I aspire to have sex with a woman, I am guilty of rape.  Did Israel take the peace process seriously?  Absolutely.  Look at the polls of Israelis during Oslo and you will see Israelis took the process very seriously.  Look at the land Israel gave up to the Egyptians in exchange for peace or to Jordan in exchange for peace or even to the Palestinians when Sharon gave Abbas Gaza.  What have the Palestinians been willing to give up for peace?  Absolutely nothing.  In fact, they have had to be bribed each time to even agree to sit down with Israelis to discuss peace.
> ...


It appears there is nothing to you but bullshit, and dull witted bullshit to boot.  You argued that because Israelis aspired to more land they were never serious about peace, and were always scheming to get more land and never give any up, essentially saying you just can't trust a Jew. 

The fact is that in every negotiation, with Arab nations or with the so called Palestinians, Israel has offered to give up land for peace, and have followed through in good faith when It found a credible partner for peace.  
Egypt
Sadat was a better politician than he was a general, and when he did attack in 1973, he was soundly defeated.  Israel broke through the anti aircraft barrier the Russians had constructed for Egypt, captured 500 Soviet tanks and tons of ammunition and Israeli tanks were rolling toward Alexandria and Cairo and were only stopped by pressure from the US.  The few Egyptian troops left in Sinai could have been destroyed at any time, but under pressure from the US Israel allowed them to remain while occupying significant Egyptian territory across the Canal in order to leave the door open for peace talks.  Was Sinai sovereign Egyptian territory?  In modern times Sinai was not a part of Egypt until the British attached it their Egyptian colony in 1906 to better secure the Canal.  That being the case, it is not at all clear that Egypt had a better right to it than Israel.  Nevertheless, Israel was always serious about peace and security and gave up Sinai despite all the pain it caused to secure peace.  

Jordan

Before 1948, Jordan was known as Trans Jordan, meaning across the Jordan River, and held no land west of the river, however, in a war of aggression in 1948 Jordan captured Judea and Samaria and held it from 1948 to 1967 despite having no legal right to it.  Only Pakistan and the UK recognized Jordan's right to the land, so Jordan had no legitimate claim on the land when negotiating peace with Israel, but again, Israel was so determined to make peace with the Arabs that it agreed to allow Jordan to keep title to some of the land adjacent to the river that it had developed during its illegal occupation of the land.  That's how serious Israel was about making peace.  

Oslo 

While it is true that both Israelis and Palestinians supported Oslo at first, at the end, when Barak offered all of Gaza, 93% of Judea and Samaria, PA jurisdiction over Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem and Arafat said, no, Israelis still supported the peace process, but the Palestinians turned to violence and launched the second intifada, and it was the intifada that convinced Israelis that it as impossible to negotiate peace with people who turned to violence whenever they don't get everything they want.  Israel was very serious about peace with the Palestinians and was willing to make great sacrifices to secure it, but the Palestinians were clearly not serious about peace since they were unwilling to make any compromises to secure it.  

Gaza

Sharon gave Gaza to the PA with the understanding that Abbas would maintain peace there, but despite the PA forces outnumbering Hamas and the other terrorists, the PA quickly lost Gaza to Hamas and there was no peace.  This was the final nail in the coffin of a negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians since it showed that there was no political entity among the Palestinians that could credibly offer peace to Israel.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 28, 2020)

Coyote said:


> ;';lp
> 
> 
> 
> ...




They keep refusing a seat at the table. I think part of the point of this Vision is to point out, “Look Israel is going to take what she needs for security and the safety of her citizens so you can either get ALL sorts of goodies or you can keep walking away from it all, which is it going to be?”


----------



## Shusha (Jan 28, 2020)

Also, this is not an actual Peace Treaty. It’s just a Potential plan. The Palestinians have plenty of time to make counter-offers. 

What do they need to make it work for them?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 28, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > ;';lp
> ...


Actually, it's not quite that simple.  In order to get the goodies, the Palestinians would have to make fundamental reforms such as disarming, ending payments to terrorist, stop demonizing Israel and Jews in their schools, media, mosques, put an end to corruption which is an integral part of how they do business and run their governments and more, however how can they do any of this since there is no Palestinian government that has enough control to make it happen?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 28, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Also, this is not an actual Peace Treaty. It’s just a Potential plan. The Palestinians have plenty of time to make counter-offers.
> 
> What do they need to make it work for them?


In fact, Netanyahu said he accepted it as a basis for negotiations, not tht he accepted it as written.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 28, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


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



Oh for sure.

Its a test.  With a four year time limit.  Can Palestine meet the requirements to be a peaceful member of the family of nations?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 28, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


The funny part is Israel giving up anything.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> What they seem to be endorsing is the two state solution the Israeli state has wanted/worked for since the onset of the Palestinian peace offensive from the 1970's onwards



You just contradicted yourself from one page ago..  What happened to --



> If some people are only just now coming to the conclusion that Israel/Zionism never had any intention of honouring a two state soution,



????  Let me help you.. The 2 state solution has ALWAYS the go to model for international plans for peace.. It's been declared dead often by BOTH sides many times but even in 2018 you can find a lot of endorsement for it..



Spartacactcus said:


> What they seem to be endorsing is the two state solution the Israeli state has wanted/worked for since the onset of the Palestinian peace offensive from the 1970's onwards which is FAR from what the application of international law would afford the Palestinians as the basis to start negotiations.



There was no real "partner in peace" until the PA came into existence and had the PEOPLE'S authority to speak for them.. At the height of the PA, they had their own local security. The Israelis were helping them develop policing and other critical safety infrastructure... Tensions were greatly reduced to the POINT where Israel attempted to EXIT the Gaza completely and TRUST the PA for its administration under their own cognizance.

We all know how that turned out.. Battles between Hamas and Fatah in the streets of ALL the occupied territory and a STILL CONTINUING very cold relationship between Fatah and Hamas in Gaza.. Yasser Arafat was NOT that guy.. SO -- you're time period sucks..

You cannot negotiate for peace without a strong STABLE partner.. That existed for a very brief period of time in the late 90s and early 2000s where this was the case. Not only was every Jew REMOVED from Gaza, but there were plans (encouraged by the intl allies) for Israel to ASSIST in rebuilding the Gaza airport and perhaps improving a deep water port off of Gaza...  Like I told you -- THAT mistake is never gonna be repeated again. And I don't blame Israel one bit for the outcome...



Spartacactcus said:


> The problem for Zionism is and always has been how to acquire the land without the acquiring the Arabs that are living on it.



This is patently false.. I remember when I was in Silicon Valley I went to an exhibit at Stanford about the history of Tel Aviv and Haifa. Stanford had acquired the FOUNDING DOCUMENTS for Tel Aviv and Haifa and a treasure chest of photos showing the DEVELOPMENT of those cities..  Among the documents were the DEEDS TO THE LAND which were SOLD by Arabs to the Zionists. These were largely ABSENTEE landlords and there is some evidence that not ARABS were screwed, but the BRITISH (or even going back to the Ottoman Empire masters) got screwed.. In that those deeds to JEWS violated the process of transferring land.. But that's a problem with the EMPIRES -- not with the Arabs...

THEREFORE -- there were "no Arabs to ACQUIRE" for those principal settlements. These photos and deeds USED to on the web and I linked them to USMB about 10 years ago now.. But since that exhibit got transferred or archived, Stanford took them down and I haven't been able to relocate them.. A trip to Stanford museum next time I'm out there, might rectify that...



Spartacactcus said:


> Today Israel wants to annexe most of the settlements , have control over the crucial water resources and most valuable land in the WB whilst ridding itself of the burden of the millons of Palestinians there forcing them to live in a series of disconnected and unviable state lite with that being locked into a deal for all time



There is no land more valuable than others. Other than bare hilltops being at a premium.. It's just buildable or NOT buildable land. *"MILLIONS OF PALIS" dont live in the settlements yet.. 85% of their population are within the city limits of their 6 or 7 major cities and SAFE from that awful "jewish settler threat" that you whine about..*. This is why I'm pushing a City State or Emirate autonomy rather than a full-on powerful NATIONAL govt.. The culture and tone of those cities VARIES greatly due to religious and tribal differences.. And an Emirates style Pali govt would give maximum freedom for MOST govt to be local.. MY favorite plan is ALSO a 2 state solution.. Because these city states can have a "loose" Federation Council at the national level to fly the Pali flag, do diplomacy, international representation and all of that.. But it IS NOT under ONE President or Prime Minister and there needs to be no "national consensus" on leadership.. But the Federation council WOULD SPEAK for them on an international level.. It's very much like the UAE governance..

So in this vision of 2 state, the 6 or 7 Pali city centers would ANNEX all the land in their immediate surroundings that contained the MAJORITY of the Pali settlements spread out on a current map like swiss cheese. That takes the AUTONOMOUS PALI TOTAL included in the deal to close to about 95%... The rest of the West Bank would be annexed to Israel.. And the remaining Palis or Israeli remaining in the WRONG areas would be given choices on citizenship... Maybe to include DUAL citizenship options.. All that is not up to outsiders.

Reason for that is --- what are CALLED "Israeli settlements" ALSO includes A LOT of MILITARY outposts that would STILL be required for defense of both ISRAEL and the new Pali entity... And to protect Israel from further invasions, they need access to the border with Jordan and the transit roads in that area,

Bottom line is -- you can put up to 95% of the WB Pali population under self-rule EVEN WITH a map that is not exactly contiguous or drawn with straight lines... But of course there needs to be interconnection BETWEEN cities and to the rest of the world..

It doesn't take a lot of whining about the past or romantic notions that Palis need millions of acres of "farm land" to survive"... It's not the 19th or 20th century any more.. Time for the DEFENDERS of the Palis to realize a WORKABLE plan for their independence...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 28, 2020)

Water IS an issue for both Palis and Jews in the West Bank.. There are some major misconceptions about "battles over water" in WB..  There are some ground water sources in the  West Bank hills and Jordan valley but I get the impression it's not reliable enough for MASSIVE density of people.... A MAP of where MOST of the water comes from tells it pretty clearly...






That lake "thingy" is the sea of Galliee and its CLEARLY not on West Bank territory..* So if West Bankers of ANY kind want water in BULK for expansion of housing --- they are gonna be buying from Israel and paying for the overhead of getting it there.. No "fighting" required...*

I suppose --- SYRIA and JORDAN could do a similar expansive pipeline from THEIR side of Galliee along Jordan river valley, But the government of Syria has a full plate right now even BEING a country...

This is MY understanding of "water battles" ..  I'm not an expert on water sources, but the literature is very clear that most of water comes from where Jesus fished..


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Water IS an issue for both Palis and Jews in the West Bank.. There are some major misconceptions about "battles over water" in WB..  There are some ground water sources in the  West Bank hills and Jordan valley but I get the impression it's not reliable enough for MASSIVE density of people.... A MAP of where MOST of the water comes from tells it pretty clearly...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Israel is leading in desalination technology.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


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



Israel settled for far less, back in the day. They had to.

The population didn't go around blowing things up out of resentment.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 29, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


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



All of the land between the Jordan River and the Med. Sea is what's known as Eretz Yisrael, whether or not it's been formally annexed as of yet.


----------



## Olde Europe (Jan 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Any say in the process.



As they say, You either have a seat at the table, or you are on the menu.

Did you watch the announcement of the fabulous plan?  If not, you should, as it was quite instructive.  There was a little interruption near the end when Trump gloated, together with Pompeo, over the "good job" the latter did on the "reporter".  Actually, it wasn't much of an interruption, as the whole thing was self-congratulatory gloating over the "good job" they did on Them.  Just, while doing another "job" on the reporter, they didn't even try to hide the malignant vulgarity.


----------



## Picaro (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Your 'Stuck In The Fifties' commie propaganda has already been noted and laughed out of the room. Your 'talking points' are now just a standard joke among anyone who is even moderately  informed. Of course Jordan speaks for Palestinians, it *is* the two state solution. The fact they got themselves expelled from Jordan doesn't make them Israel's responsibility, no matter what Kruschev and Brezshnev decided for you way back when.


----------



## Picaro (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Total rubbish. They have relied on terror attacks since the Ottomans were still around. You really have no idea what you're talking about.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Picaro said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



Jordan got most of the Mandate.

80% Palestinian? Or was.


----------



## Picaro (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



lol being 'recognized' by a UN packed with  a majority of assorted criminal syndicates, crime families, and Muslim terrorist regimes doesn't impress anybody. The UN actually put Qaddaffy Duck's Libya in charge of its 'Human Rights', and worse. lol


----------



## Picaro (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Yes. About 85% or so; they then promptly barred Jews from owning land, something the terrorist fans pretend never happened, nor the 700,000 or so Jews deported and driven out of ME countries when the Israelis embarrassed the Arab mobs who invaded in 1947 by defeating the poor hapless mass murderers and plunderers posing as 'armies'. Kind of ruined their whole 'We're mighty ancient warrior N Stuff' when they can't even perform as well as their bandit ancestors did with far worse odds. Like I said  earlier, their entire 'culture' depends on extortion and mass murder now, with Europe and the oil states feeding them as long as they operate terrorist operations against Israel. The whole idea of even talking to those animals as if they're 'legitimate' is absurd. They aren't a real 'people', they're gangsters.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Picaro said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



Yeah. Remember Rwanda? 

A defining moment for me.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Picaro said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



The Arabs got 75% of the territory. How much more do they want?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> It appears there is nothing to you but bullshit, and dull witted bullshit to boot.  You argued that because Israelis aspired to more land they were never serious about peace, and were always scheming to get more land and never give any up, essentially saying you just can't trust a Jew.



Ad hominems acknowledged and laughed at

I argued that at every turn where we see land offered to the Zionist leadership prior to the creation of the state the Jewish leadership publicly accept it but in private saw them as stepping stones to the full control and possible sovereignty of the entire area of the Mandate post Jordan seperation.

That is just a view supported by the historical record. We have all of the documents that support it, them having been released since. It has nothing to do with a slur on Jews , it's just an accurate view of the history that very few people who comment on this subject are even aware of. If you think you are going to distract me from discussion with veiled ( or not so veiled ) accusations of antisemitism you are going to be disappointed , I've been at this game a long time and refuse to let phoney accusations or the resort to emotional misrepresentations silence me , ain't happening


----------



## Coyote (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > ;';lp
> ...


Both sides were demanding pre-conditions.  Trump unilaterally screwed the Palestinians: with Jerusalem, closing their consulate, cutting all aid.  They were also excluded from the negotiation process.

We have always said it needs to be settled with both sides.  Now suddenly, no?

Should we treat the Ukraine Russia conflict in this manner? Just pointing it because normally both sides are in on the deal.

What if we set up a deal excluding Israel, and unilaterally cut all funding to her and closed her embassy?

That said, there are some good possibilities in this idea depending what economic opportunities can be developed AND what happens to the people both Jewish and Pali on the wrong sides?  Palestine is completely surrounded by Israel, which would keep it vulnerable to Israel who could shut of trade or water for any reason.

The devil will be in the details.


----------



## Coyote (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Also, this is not an actual Peace Treaty. It’s just a Potential plan. The Palestinians have plenty of time to make counter-offers.
> 
> What do they need to make it work for them?


True!  We will need to see.

Also will Israel’s people accept it?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> The fact is that in every negotiation, with Arab nations or with the so called Palestinians, Israel has offered to give up land for peace, and have followed through in good faith when It found a credible partner for peace.
> Egypt
> Sadat was a better politician than he was a general, and when he did attack in 1973, he was soundly defeated.  Israel broke through the anti aircraft barrier the Russians had constructed for Egypt, captured 500 Soviet tanks and tons of ammunition and Israeli tanks were rolling toward Alexandria and Cairo and were only stopped by pressure from the US.  The few Egyptian troops left in Sinai could have been destroyed at any time, but under pressure from the US Israel allowed them to remain while occupying significant Egyptian territory across the Canal in order to leave the door open for peace talks.  Was Sinai sovereign Egyptian territory?  In modern times Sinai was not a part of Egypt until the British attached it their Egyptian colony in 1906 to better secure the Canal.  That being the case, it is not at all clear that Egypt had a better right to it than Israel.  Nevertheless, Israel was always serious about peace and security and gave up Sinai despite all the pain it caused to secure peace.
> 
> ...



Chest thumping about how the Israelis defeated the Egyptians in 1973 acknowledged but it didn't alter the fact that Israel " gave back " only sovereign Egyptian territory , like I said.

Same with Jordan. Like I said

Oslo never even offered the Palestinians an end to illegal Israeli settlement building , that's how " serious " it was. It saw the PA being subcontracted in to assist in the subjugation of their own people. I could offer you 80% of Algeria and it would be entirely desert. Percentages should be viewed in terms of value . The percentage Israel allowed istelf to keep was virtually all of the illegal settlement/settlers and control over the water supply.

If Gaza was "given" to the Palestinians you would think that that would mean they could vote into power any one of their political parties ? I mean without the Israelis , US UK etc etc instigating an attempted coup ? That alone is indicative that Gaza was never " given " to the Palestnians 
Could control their airspace , economy , borders , coast etc etc 

The Gaza disengagement was a pragmatic decision to remove the illegal settlers from there and release the thousands of IDF troops guarding them and move them to illegal settlements in the WB and Golan and, if we are to believe the likes of Dov Weisglass , to " freeze " the peace process

Either way nothing of what you wrote above undermines what it is attempting  to do


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > It appears there is nothing to you but bullshit, and dull witted bullshit to boot.  You argued that because Israelis aspired to more land they were never serious about peace, and were always scheming to get more land and never give any up, essentially saying you just can't trust a Jew.
> ...


Again, you are full of shit.  There is no documentation that shows israelis were not entirely sincere in every agreement they signed on to and every offer of land they made.  Your argument is, you just can't trust a Jew.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



That's the bottom line. At the root of it. Has been, since time  immemorial:

The Jew.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Again, you are full of shit.  There is no documentation that shows israelis were not entirely sincere in every agreement they signed on to and every offer of land they made.  Your argument is, you just can't trust a Jew.



Ben Gurion in reaction to the Zionist leaderships acceptance of the Peel Commisions plan to partition



> "Does the establishment of a Jewish state [in only part of Palestine] advance or retard the conversion of this country into a Jewish country? My assumption (which is why I am a fervent proponent of a state, even though it is now linked to partition) is *that a Jewish state on only part of the land is not the end but the beginning.... This is because this increase in possession is of consequence not only in itself, but because through it we increase our strength, and every increase in strength helps in the possession of the land as a whole. The establishment of a state, even if only on a portion of the land, is the maximal reinforcement of our strength at the present time and a powerful boost to our historical endeavors to liberate the entire country"*



1937 Ben-Gurion letter - Wikipedia

There are others that anyone can access if they have the will


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > These are no more legally binding than the UN Declaration of Human Rights which IRONICALLY has a "rights kill switch" embedded in it for the benefit of those many DICTATORSHIPS that SIT in the UNGA or UNSC.... Besides, many of those resolutions applied to JORDAN as well in that Israel had to negotiate with Jordan (and Egypt) for land acquired from the 1967 war..
> ...


Resolutions are “Binding”?
An opinion is Binding?!
Really?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> That's the bottom line. At the root of it. Has been, since time  immemorial:
> 
> The Jew.



It's only the " bottom line " for those who are struggling with the argument imo

For sure there will be those who are anti Israel because they are Jew haters and there will be those that are pro Israel because they are Arab or Muslim haters. 

To use it as a blanket smear of those that disagree with you and can argue their points is disingenuous but to be expected for the reason given in the first sentence


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...




UNSC resolutions are legally binding. The opinion was given by experts in international law with access to all of the relevant treaties/conventions/charters etc etc

Really


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> The devil will be in the details.



Absoutely , it always is and that's why people should be suspicious of those that want an instant decision


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



78%, to be exact.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > That's the bottom line. At the root of it. Has been, since time  immemorial:
> ...



Thanks for nothing. 


Irrelevant.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Picaro said:


> lol being 'recognized' by a UN packed with  a majority of assorted criminal syndicates, crime families, and Muslim terrorist regimes doesn't impress anybody. The UN actually put Qaddaffy Duck's Libya in charge of its 'Human Rights', and worse. lol



It's not meant to impress you , it's just a fact . And if you think that " Muslim terrorist regimes " are a " majority " you could maybe do with some extra study in maths


Maybe they should have put the USA leadership in charge of the HR Council and turn a blind eye to Guantanimo Bay and those it sent to Assads regime to be tortured to name just two of many............people in glass houses and all


----------



## OldLady (Jan 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...


I read an article awhile back that said there are more Palestinians in Israel than Israeli's, and therefore, Israel would cease to exist if Palestinians were allowed to vote.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



I am just finding my feet here and getting to know the members. I have encountered you before elsewhere and have noticed the same trait, you cannot seem to argue your points so it doesn't come as a surprise that you resort to evidence free blanket smears of those that hold a different view than yourself


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

OldLady said:


> ]
> I read an article awhile back that said there are more Palestinians in Israel than Israeli's, and therefore, Israel would cease to exist if Palestinians were allowed to vote.



I think out of the territory under Israeli control , which is all of the partition plan former Palestine( Israel , the West Bank and Gaza ) , the numbers are pretty similar. IIRC there are around 20% of Isrealis that are of Palestinian origin , around 1.8 million in Gaza and around 2.7 million in the WB.

The illegal settlements in the Golan are obviously an aside


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


Uh...no.
It’s an opinion; you just said so yourself.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

OldLady said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...





OldLady said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...


And yet most Arabs vote for Jews because Arab leaders have left them in the Stone Age.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> OldLady said:
> 
> 
> > ]
> ...


I guess you missed the part where Syria initiated an attack and lost.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> 78%, to be exact.



So that's 22% less than what they are entitled to under international law


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > The fact is that in every negotiation, with Arab nations or with the so called Palestinians, Israel has offered to give up land for peace, and have followed through in good faith when It found a credible partner for peace.
> ...


It is difficult to tell whether your ignorance is the result of your bigotry or your bigotry is the result of your ignorance.  Egypt's claim to Sinai is at best dubious since it was never a part of Egypt in modern times until the British attached it to their Egyptian colony.  Nevertheless, Egypt was powerless to take Sinai back from Israel, and it was only Israel's desire for peace that led it to trade Sinai for peace with Egypt.

Your claim that the land Israel gave to Jordan in return for peace was sovereign Jordanian land is simply false.  Jordan had no legitimate claim on any land west of the river, yet Israel's desire for peace with the Arab nations was so great that Israel gave some of the land west of the river to Jordan anyway.

Nowhere is your ignorance and bigotry more evident than in your discussion of Oslo.  Israel offered 93% of the land in Judea and Samaria and jurisdiction over Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem to the PA and all water resources in Judea and Samaria were under the control of the Joint Water Resources Commision which was made up of an equal number of Israelis and Palestinians.  Nearly the entire world, including most Arab countries, thought this was an offer Arafat couldn't refuse, and huge sums of money were  pledged to help build the economy of the new Palestinian state, but Arafat did reject it and instead launched the second intifada and in doing so ended the possibility of a Palestinian state.

Shaon gave Gaza to the PA in exchange for a  promise that the PA would maintain peace there, and he also closed some of the Israeli settlements in in Samaria.  In a letter to President Bush, Sharon explained that he wanted to try again to negotiate peace with the PA, but the PA quickly lost control of Gaza to Hamas, demonstrating it was not a credible partner for peace, 

In every case, Israel has offered to give up the land you claim it is scheming to keep for peace, proving conclusively that in all your posts you are expressing nothing but bigotry.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > 78%, to be exact.
> ...


Too bad the UN disagrees with you.
The UN recognizes Israel’s borders; they’re just pissed off Israel exists.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> ]
> I guess you missed the part where Syria initiated an attack and lost.



It was relevant to the illegality of the settlements in the Golan so I didn't " miss " anything.

Moshe Dayan conceded years later that around 80% of the border skirmishes that led up to the 1967 war were initiated by Israel

The Syrian, and Jordanian, responses were because they were signed up to a mutual defence pact with Egypt . Israel attacked Egypt first and so triggered the pact


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > ]
> ...


Of course the border skirmishes were initiated by Israel...Arabs hate Jews.
Please provide a Link regarding Moshe Dayan.
I found one but it was a Liberal site talking out of it’s arse.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Again, you are full of shit.  There is no documentation that shows israelis were not entirely sincere in every agreement they signed on to and every offer of land they made.  Your argument is, you just can't trust a Jew.
> ...


There is no question but that the early Israelis wanted more land than they were given, but that does not mean they were less than sincere in their acceptance of the land they could have.  Ben Gurion is arguing in favor of a pragmatic approach against ideologues who wanted to turn down everything less than all they wanted.  There is no suggestion of trickery or scheming in this statement but only an expression of faith in very difficult times that Israel would prosper.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > ]
> ...



Link to that Moshe Dayan quote?

I always heard that the Syrians used to shoot down on Israeli kibbutzim (farms).  Since the Syrians held the high ground, that seems to make the most sense.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > 78%, to be exact.
> ...



That 22% constitutes all of the land that is currently not part of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, namely Israel proper, as well as the West Bank and Gaza.  So if you are saying that Israel is not entitled to ANY of that 22% of land west of the River Jordan, you are basically suggesting that Israel has no right to exist at all.  Is that your position?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Because you (and OL) get up close and personal. Demanding that I argue on your terms.

The I/P discussions follow a circular direction, always the same old, same old. Personal bias. And no interest in facts, historical and otherwise.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



I've been several times around the Golan. Saw the Syrian  high ground for myself. How easy it was to aim missiles down on the kibbutzim. Eventually, the Israelis had had enough. You know the rest.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > These are no more legally binding than the UN Declaration of Human Rights which IRONICALLY has a "rights kill switch" embedded in it for the benefit of those many DICTATORSHIPS that SIT in the UNGA or UNSC.... Besides, many of those resolutions applied to JORDAN as well in that Israel had to negotiate with Jordan (and Egypt) for land acquired from the 1967 war..
> ...



The entire thrust of your Islamist apologia here is based upon two logical fallacies, namely, the appeal to authority and the appeal to popularity.  Just because representatives of nation states with an animus towards Jews are allowed to persecute them through their collective might, that does not make such persecution valid or fair.

If you put 198 members of the kkk with 2 black people and had them vote on various resolutions, the resulting resolutions would target blacks. That does not make the resolutions either fair or just, however.


Now, I realize you despise liberalism, but here in our country liberal political philosophy recognizes the notion of the tyranny of the majority.  Recognizing the rights of minorities against persecution by the majority is a liberal position, and the United States has stood up for such a tradition against the inherent antisemitism so obviously evident in the U.N.

I, for one, am glad we have.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> The I/P discussions follow a circular direction, always the same old, same old. Personal bias. And no interest in facts, historical and otherwise.




Antisemites do not reason.  They merely hate.


----------



## The Original Tree (Jan 29, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> It is a terrible idea for Israel.  They would just end up being the next Lebanon.
> 
> Lebanon was formed as the Christian country of the Middle east, and despite the precautions set into place to try to protect that, Muslims simply bred themselves into a position of dominance and the country has suffered.  Beirut was called the Paris of the middle east when I was young, but now it is just another Islamic shit hole.
> 
> Jewish Israelis are fooling themselves if they don't understand the same thing will happen to them as happened to the Lebanese Christians. Within a generation or two they would be a persecuted minority.


*Why let The Trojan Horse in to your gates, when the gates are already locked?*


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 29, 2020)

The Original Tree said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > It is a terrible idea for Israel.  They would just end up being the next Lebanon.
> ...


Yep.

It's like dumping a bunch of piranhas into your koi pond.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

*Deconstructing The Deal of the Century from Trump to Israel and the Palestinians*
by Brian of London

My opening opinion on the plan as a whole: this is a great deal and Israel will accept it in a way that is more unified than I have ever seen from Jews before. And you can even include many Israeli Arabs who will quietly go along with this. The Palestinian leadership, tied as it is to enriching itself from perpetual war and keeping their people back, will reject this. They have no interest in a state or good conditions for their people.

I was intending to read the whole thing but I stopped at the last paragraph on the 2nd page when I read a very important section which demonstrates exactly how Jared Kushner thinks (I know it is his point of view because of the interview he gave CNN included below). 

The conflict between the State of Israel and the Palestinians has kept other Arab countries from normalizing their relationships and jointly pursuing a stable, secure, and prosperous region. *One reason for the intractability of this problem is the conflation of two separate conflicts: a territorial, security and refugee dispute between Israel and the Palestinians and a religious dispute between Israel and the Muslim world regarding control over places of religious significance.* The absence of formal relations between Israel and most Muslim and Arab countries has only exacerbated the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. We believe that if more Muslim and Arab countries normalize relations with Israel it will help advance a just and fair resolution to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians, and prevent radicals from using this conflict to destabilize the region.

Page 2  Read the rest:


Deconstructing The Deal of the Century from Trump to Israel and the Palestinians


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Uh...no.
It’s an opinion; you just said so yourself.[/QUOTE]

I was talking about multiple thing

1 UNSC resolutions are legally binding

2 The " opinion " of the ICJ judges regarding the applicability of  the laws to the territories and the wall , along with the settlements. I tend to take their opinion more seriously than some random anonymous poster on an internet forum


----------



## Hollie (Jan 29, 2020)

As you might expect, the Arabs-Moslems are promoting conspiracy theories. Similarly, two of the most Jew haten'est places on the pkanet; Iran and Turkey, are engaging in some world class whining. 



Hamas: 'All options open' following Trump 'conspiracies' with Israel


*Hamas: 'All options open' following Trump 'conspiracies' with Israel*
*Terror group says provisions for Jerusalem are 'nonsense', while Jordan warns against 'annexation of Palestinian lands'; Iran, Turkey blast what they say is one-sided proposal, as Egypt urges both sides to 'carefully study' the plan.*


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Uh...no.
> It’s an opinion; you just said so yourself.



I was talking about multiple thing

1 UNSC resolutions are legally binding

2 The " opinion " of the ICJ judges regarding the applicability of  the laws to the territories and the wall , along with the settlements. I tend to take their opinion more seriously than some random anonymous poster on an internet forum[/QUOTE]
UN Resolutions are Dear John letters.
If they are legally binding then the Muslim world has violated them left and right.
But you go right ahead with whatever floats your boat.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Uh...no.
> It’s an opinion; you just said so yourself.



I was talking about multiple thing

1 UNSC resolutions are legally binding

2 The " opinion " of the ICJ judges regarding the applicability of  the laws to the territories and the wall , along with the settlements. I tend to take their opinion more seriously than some random anonymous poster on an internet forum[/QUOTE]
I presume you haven’t Googled this matter.
I did and I’m correct.
Google is your friend if you’re interested in the truth.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> It is difficult to tell whether your ignorance is the result of your bigotry or your bigotry is the result of your ignorance.  Egypt's claim to Sinai is at best dubious since it was never a part of Egypt in modern times until the British attached it to their Egyptian colony.  Nevertheless, Egypt was powerless to take Sinai back from Israel, and it was only Israel's desire for peace that led it to trade Sinai for peace with Egypt.
> 
> Your claim that the land Israel gave to Jordan in return for peace was sovereign Jordanian land is simply false.  Jordan had no legitimate claim on any land west of the river, yet Israel's desire for peace with the Arab nations was so great that Israel gave some of the land west of the river to Jordan anyway.
> 
> ...



Let's see what the facts say and they will shed light on who is " ignorant "





> The peninsula was governed as part of Egypt under the Mamluk Sultanate of Egypt from 1260 until 1517, when the Ottoman Sultan, Selim the Grim, defeated the Egyptians at the Battles of Marj Dabiq and al-Raydaniyya, and incorporated Egypt into the Ottoman Empire. From then until 1906, Sinai was administered by the Ottoman provincial government of the _Pashalik_ of Egypt, even following the establishment of the Muhammad Ali Dynasty's rule over the rest of Egypt in 1805.



Sinai Peninsula - Wikipedia


Thus your claim that it was " never part of Egypt in modern times until the British attached it to their Egyptian colony" clearly shows a damning ignorance of how the Sinai has been governed as part of Egypt for at least the last 800 years. If that's your idea of a " dubious claim " WRT it's status as part of Egypt you might have a dictionary all of your own , who knows.

On Jordan

The area "given back"* is east of the river Jordan*. It is East of the river Jordan and West of the river Yarmouk. That's why its occupation was challenged by Jordan in the aftermath of 1947-49



> Although the 1949 Israel-Jordan armistice agreement did not explicitly mention this region, the map attached to the agreement* showed the armistice line cutting off a corner of Jordan between the two rivers (the present day Island of Peace).https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naharayim#cite_note-Weissberg-16https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naharayim#cite_note-Weissberg-16*[16] When Israel sent military forces into this corner in August 1950, Jordan filed a complaint with the United Nations Security Council.[17][18


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naharayim#cite_note-Complaint-18

Naharayim - Wikipedia

So not only were you completely wrong about the Sinai you apparently have no idea where the Jordan river is , not knowing that the land in question was east of the river , not west of the river as you claimed.

Two in , two down already. I have done enough to show already that it is yourself that has shown the true ignorance and is trying to project that ignorance onto others along with false claims of bigotry.

In other words I have humoured you more than I think you deserve already.

If you really have " toomuchtime" I suggest you start spending it on researching the subject instead of showing your ignorance of it whilst claiming the factually accurate comments of others are based on ignorance and/or bigotry because it just highlights your own


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> I presume you haven’t Googled this matter.
> I did and I’m correct.
> Google is your friend if you’re interested in the truth.




I probably " googled it " 10 years before you ever heard of it

Just to be clear, what are you challenging ?

I said UNSC resolutions are legally binding ? What did google say ?

I said the opinion of the ICJ was that the wall where it strays from the green line is illegal and should be dismantled. That all of the settlements are illegal under international law? What did google say ?


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Trump unilaterally screwed the Palestinians: with Jerusalem, closing their consulate, cutting all aid.


The US Embassy is in WEST Jerusalem.  Jerusalem "proper".  Israel "proper".  Israel "proper" is NOT disputed territory and is not subject to negotiation.  States traditionally have sovereignty over their own capital.  Embassies are typically located in a State's capital.  (In fact, to my knowledge, Israel is the only country in the world who has been prevented from exercising this mark of sovereignty).  All the US did was accept existing fact.  Full stop.  The idea that accepting this existing and inviolable fact is somehow a cause for Arab Palestinian temper tantruming is evidence of how surreal this conflict is.  



> They were also excluded from the negotiation process. We have always said it needs to be settled with both sides.  Now suddenly, no? .


This Vision is not a negotiation.  This Vision is a framework for negotiations.  Its an offer.  Palestinians were invited to participate.  They declined.  You can lead a horse to water....and all that.

When one Party to the conflict refuses to participate in mutual negotiations and refuses to meet with negotiators and refuses to even READ THE DAMN PAPER, what next?  The obligation is to invite the Parties to dinner.  Its up to them to eat.



> What if we set up a deal excluding Israel, and unilaterally cut all funding to her and closed her embassy?


What, you mean like BDS?!  



> That said, there are some good possibilities in this idea depending what economic opportunities can be developed ...


Its Trump.  The economic opportunities are ... well ... EXTRAVAGANT.  



> Palestine is completely surrounded by Israel, which would keep it vulnerable to Israel who could shut of trade or water for any reason.


Ah...the "for any reason" argument.  You know, because Israel.  Its Tuesday, let's shut off water to Bethlehem.  That'll be fun.  You probably didn't mean it, but the implication is that Israel will arbitrarily harm Arab Palestine because ... reasons.  You aren't using the apartheid word, but you are making the exact same implication.  So, dive into "reasons" and tell me WHY Israel would shut off trade or water to the a sovereign State of Palestine.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > 78%, to be exact.
> ...



Up until now, you have been quoting the "1967 lines" (in error as that is).  NOW you seem to indicate that the Jewish people are entitled to NOTHING in international law (also in error).

Please clarify your position.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> *Deconstructing The Deal of the Century from Trump to Israel and the Palestinians*
> by Brian of London
> 
> My opening opinion on the plan as a whole: this is a great deal and Israel will accept it in a way that is more unified than I have ever seen from Jews before. And you can even include many Israeli Arabs who will quietly go along with this. The Palestinian leadership, tied as it is to enriching itself from perpetual war and keeping their people back, will reject this. They have no interest in a state or good conditions for their people.
> ...




Why didn't you say ?

Brian of London !!! shut down the I/P subforum and send Brian of London to the ME and we can all sick back reassured that justice will be served where everyone else failed.

We can maybe spend our time learning about the fight for Kurdish nationhood instead

He can take Tommy Robinson with him too if he is out of jail. Maybe they can do what they do best ?

I will add, appears to have no shame to the list


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...




Where is the " indication " that the Jewish people are entitled to nothing ?

Israel is recognized as the sovereign in around 78% of the partition plan area and the rest is recognized by most groups/HRs groups , the UN , ICJ, a whole host of legal experts as ?............. Occupied Palestinian territory which constitutes the remaing 22 % and that's what those people recognize as the state of Palestine.

That's the position , and that's the mainstream position imo as per those mentioned above that also support it


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Clearly there is a misunderstanding.  We were discussing that the Arab Palestinians got 78% of the Mandate (Jordan) and the Jewish people, therefore, would have the remaining 22%.  By suggesting that the Jewish people were not entitled to the remaining 22% well .... you see, yes?

But apparently you are discussing different numbers.  So, to clarify you DO agree that the Jewish people are entitled to some form of self-determination in some portion of their homeland?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> The entire thrust of your Islamist apologia here is based upon two logical fallacies, namely, the appeal to authority and the appeal to popularity.  Just because representatives of nation states with an animus towards Jews are allowed to persecute them through their collective might, that does not make such persecution valid or fair.
> 
> If you put 198 members of the kkk with 2 black people and had them vote on various resolutions, the resulting resolutions would target blacks. That does not make the resolutions either fair or just, however.
> 
> ...



There is no " Islamist apologia" in what I wrote but when you are clutching at straws I understand why you people try to bring these ridiculous notions to the table.

You are ridiculously claiming that everyone that supports the two state solution , which is the de facto support for the continuance of the Israeli state too , using international law ( the law specifically written for disputes between states/peoples ) are doing so because the all hate Jews.

My guess is you don't even know how the voting on Palestinian self determination goes in the UN. In 2017 it was 176 - 7 ( see link )

So what you are actually saying is that virtually the whole world is antisemitic and the US , were the most recent mass slayings of Jews has occured outside of the conflict zone , is somehow a bastion of moral supremacy.

The appeal to authority is justified. If you have a problem with electics you seek an electricians view/opinion. If you want an opinion on international law you seek the opinion of those who have spent their lives studying it. That you seem to be somehow opposed to this is quite bizarre. Let's hope you don't suffer a gas leak and ask the window cleaner what to do about it.

Please don't try to lecture me about " liberalism " when you are supporting the subjugation and mass human rights abuses of millions of people on a daily basis. 

Cheering as one people are enjoying their rights and the other are denied them and then claiming you understand liberalism. Supporting the view that a people should be ruled over and denied their right to self governance. That 2.7 million people in the WB are subjected to a military court system tried by occupiers whilst the illegal settlers of the military occupiers enjoy civil courts tried by their own and claim you understand liberalism

The trouble with people like you is you are too quick to believe the BS your own propaganda system feeds to you everyday

176 nations at UN call for Palestinian statehood


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > I presume you haven’t Googled this matter.
> ...


Are you willingly stupid or is your Mullah standing behind you?
You posted several times that UNRs are legally binding.
Who gives a damn about the ICJ’s opinion?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Clearly there is a misunderstanding.  We were discussing that the Arab Palestinians got 78% of the Mandate (Jordan) and the Jewish people, therefore, would have the remaining 22%.  By suggesting that the Jewish people were not entitled to the remaining 22% well .... you see, yes?
> 
> But apparently you are discussing different numbers.  So, to clarify you DO agree that the Jewish people are entitled to some form of self-determination in some portion of their homeland?



The misunderstanding is that you are ascribing to me comments made on two different regions.

Read back and you will find that I only ever discuss in this thread the area the UN were given to control after the British wanted out of the mandate , the area given up for partition , note not Jordan.

imo the Jewish people have around 78% of that area as sovereign Israeli territory , the other 22% imo should be given to the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The 78% mentioned above is the territory where Israelis enjoy self determination and I have no issue with that remaining that way from now until eternity. The same should be applied to Palestinian self determination ( not what you allow them ) in the remaining 22%

That is where negotiations should start , not where an idiot like Trump claims they should


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Are you willingly stupid or is your Mullah standing behind you?
> You posted several times that UNRs are legally binding.
> Who gives a damn about the ICJ’s opinion?



Read what people write not what you think ( maybe too much credit here ) they write

I said UNSC resolutions are legally binding UNGA resolutions are not. There's a difference that even you might understand

The reason why they haven't been implemented against Israel , and I wrote this waaay back , is due to the US veto power in the UNSC

If you want to dismiss the opinion of the ICJ panel of experts regarding the legality of things applicable to the conflict feel free but it makes you look stupid yourself imho


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Clearly there is a misunderstanding.  We were discussing that the Arab Palestinians got 78% of the Mandate (Jordan) and the Jewish people, therefore, would have the remaining 22%.  By suggesting that the Jewish people were not entitled to the remaining 22% well .... you see, yes?
> ...



Trumps plan has a pretty fair allocation of territory, imo.  70% of the "WB", all of Gaza, plus expansive territory in the Negev.

Good starting place, yes?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

The legendary Israeli diplomat Abba Eban once said about relations between the Arabs and Israel, “The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” and there have been many statehood opportunities that Palestinian leaders have wilfully missed.

Three so far?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Don't hold out much hope.  Look what happened last time.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Are you willingly stupid or is your Mullah standing behind you?
> ...


So a valid US vote bothers you?
You’re looking dumber with every post.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Because you (and OL) get up close and personal. Demanding that I argue on your terms.
> 
> The I/P discussions follow a circular direction, always the same old, same old. Personal bias. And no interest in facts, historical and otherwise.



I'm sure OL doesn't need anyone to talk for her here so I will just address the above as I see it

I have given a lot of facts and information that supports the views I hold and you chose to dismiss it as  antisemitism. Then you claim others get " up close and personal ". You calling someone a bigot musn't count as being up close and personal I take it ?

WE all have biases and we are all not truly/perfectly objective on any given subject, it's a human thing we all suffer from but you are doing precisely what you accuse others of doing.

Asking you what information is supporting/influencing your opinions is legitimate behaviour in a discussion, that you seem to see this as " arguing on your terms " seems really odd to me.

You don't have to reply if it's so damaging ,no worries, just try to resist the urge to call people bigots if you don't want a negative response. Common sense really


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> If you want to dismiss the opinion of the ICJ panel of experts regarding the legality of things applicable to the conflict feel free but it makes you look stupid yourself imho



On the contrary, its quite common for legal experts to vary in their opinions on the same laws, treaties and customs.  Taking the word of a single opinion as gospel and uniquely correct, with no basic understanding of those laws, treaties and customs, leaves one unable to provide coherent arguments, other than "this person said so".


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> The legendary Israeli diplomat Abba Eban once said about relations between the Arabs and Israel, “The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity,” and there have been many statehood opportunities that Palestinian leaders have wilfully missed.
> 
> Three so far?



I think we are up to 11.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Because you (and OL) get up close and personal. Demanding that I argue on your terms.
> ...


When you study the history of the entire Middle East between all the Arab countries and then post WWII Balkans and post WWII Pakistan/India relations and learn the hypocrisy of the UN’s anti-Jew stance, get back to us.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Because you (and OL) get up close and personal. Demanding that I argue on your terms.
> ...



I don't care about your responses. I'm not interested in talking to an overblown ego, who tells lies.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



Is that person a reincarnation? Or a sock?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


Grammar is good; facts out of context.
I think it’s someone new.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > If you want to dismiss the opinion of the ICJ panel of experts regarding the legality of things applicable to the conflict feel free but it makes you look stupid yourself imho
> ...




Have I not already stated a wish to see this argument take place on numerous occasions already ?

Was it not you that said " there is no argument " ?

And I am not taking a " single opinion " as gospel. I referred you to other groups that hold the same view in the HRs game , the ICRC , other legal experts outside of the ICJ panel that gave the opinion, social commentators with moral integrity that I hold in esteem etc etc

You are the one that has said there is no argument not me , my view is and has been all along to wish to see that debate take place by the revision of the US veto that solely blocks it


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


There is no argument because context proves the argument is based on fiction.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...




Oh, I hold out no hope whatsoever.  I'm a firm believer in, "when people tell you who they are, believe them".

The Arab Palestinians should take this Framework and run with it.  Or at least respond to the actual deal.  Or maybe, here's a CRAZY idea, maybe read the Framework.  They could even write a counter-offer.  Whoa.

But they haven't.  And all indications are that they won't.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



Accusing people of things they never said is de  rigueur here.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Yet you keep ignoring the one relevant factor in the debate:  that the Green Line forms some sort legal territorial demarcation between Israel and ... something labelled the "Occupied Palestinian Territories".  

Without that crucial point, all further debates are operating on false premises.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> So a valid US vote bothers you?
> You’re looking dumber with every post.



It is the solitary single vote that has stopped the overwhelming world consensus for application of international law and a resolution of the conflict , it should bother people. That it doesn't bother you doesn't come as a surprise either.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > So a valid US vote bothers you?
> ...


Tell us why the US has so much power.
And have you taken my suggestion to start studying post WWII and why Muslims cause havoc wherever they dwell.
Of course not.

It’s obvious that you prefer opinions over facts.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Yet you keep ignoring the one relevant factor in the debate:  that the Green Line forms some sort legal territorial demarcation between Israel and ... something labelled the "Occupied Palestinian Territories".
> 
> Without that crucial point, all further debates are operating on false premises.



Recall that is I that welcomes the debate and it is you that states there is no debate to be had , correct ?

Recall too I gave you the words of the legal advisor to the 1967 Israeli government who urged them not to illegally settle the territories captured with civilian settlers and warned not to get into a legal battle

And, I am sure that all of the experts are aware of such things as the green line and still they rule that there are OPTs

I welcome the debate , you appear not to but claim I am somehow the pigheaded one here


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> It’s obvious that you prefer opinions over facts.



Projection central


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Yet you keep ignoring the one relevant factor in the debate:  that the Green Line forms some sort legal territorial demarcation between Israel and ... something labelled the "Occupied Palestinian Territories".
> ...




I have given detailed reasons why the Green Line never did and still does not represent a legal boundary between Israel and the "OPT"s, with quotes from relevant treaties.  I've not received a response from you, beyond, well, "all of the experts are aware of such things".

So here's the thing.  If the experts are "aware of such things" -- why do they continue to argue something which is blatantly incorrect?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > It’s obvious that you prefer opinions over facts.
> ...


I’m not the only one responding to your posts in like manner.
I’m just stating the obvious in a more explicit manner.


----------



## Hollie (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > So a valid US vote bothers you?
> ...


I'm not clear on what "application of international law", means. If you're suggesting the UN issuing opinions as law, that doesn't make sense. The UN ha no authority that would override domestic law. Further, you seem to be suggesting that if Israel complied with UN opinions, the islamic terrorist attacks would magically end. One of the glaringly obvious realities, in my opinion, is that the UN has become a biased, political entity with little concern for its original goals. 

Where has the UN taken a position on islamic terrorist attacks from Gaza or the actions of Fatah and its promotion and enabling of mass murder / suicide aimed at israelis?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jan 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


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



Hamas openly throws gays off roofs and treats women as 2nd class citizens. With or without Israel this would be true. Until that savage behavior is ceased there can be no peace. None.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



Does International Law  have any jurisdiction?


----------



## Picaro (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...



These parrots have no idea what they're talking about, especially when babbling about the ICJ, who has never once ruled on any actual cases involving settlers. The reason why that is is because despite all the noise making and propaganda they know they have no real case, so they rely on presenting little biased scenarios to some of the justices for their opinions on cases based on the 'what if' facts presented, always fake premises and made up nonsense for 'evidence', and then proclaim these opinions as if they're actual rulings on real cases.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Tbh I find reading through the likes of the ICJ advisory opinion , and following all of the links to the Hague Convention of 1907, the UN charter , UNSC res this and that etc etc ,on the wall to be well tedious and beyond my willingness to give in the time and that's why I refer to what those people THAT HAVE spent the time have concluded.

If it were such a cut and dry case as you claim they simply wouldn't hold the view they hold, it's just that simple


----------



## Picaro (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > lol being 'recognized' by a UN packed with  a majority of assorted criminal syndicates, crime families, and Muslim terrorist regimes doesn't impress anybody. The UN actually put Qaddaffy Duck's Libya in charge of its 'Human Rights', and worse. lol
> ...



Maybe you should just quit pretending you know anything at all about any of this, since you've done nothing but babble rubbish that was exploded and laughed out of any serious discussion even before Kennedy was elected President. Some of us are old enough to remember when you whiney little Commies were all in love with Israel and then changed your propaganda overnight in 1967 and started pretending your little terrorist scumbags were 'victims of Da Evul Jooos N Stuff' because LBJ took up where the French left off and the Israelis decided they didn't want to be Kruschev's client state. See, we know exactly where your stupid 'talking points' come from, while you obviously don't; that's because you much prefer fashion to facts.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> There is no argument because context proves the argument is based on fiction.



So these raft of legal experts all have the same fault and have a complete disregard for their credibillty because sercretly they must all just hate Jews

Makes perfect sense now


----------



## Hollie (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Without any means of enforcement, no. And I know of no "international law" that would override Israel's domestic law or how Israel responds to islamic terrorist attacks, acts of war.

I've never seen the UN react to rocket fire from Gaza as an act of war.

Why does the UN condemn Israel for responding to an act of war?


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > The entire thrust of your Islamist apologia here is based upon two logical fallacies, namely, the appeal to authority and the appeal to popularity.  Just because representatives of nation states with an animus towards Jews are allowed to persecute them through their collective might, that does not make such persecution valid or fair.
> ...


So not only have absolutely no understanding whatsoever of the two logical fallacies I mentioned , you have added in some straw men just to make sure, and to make certain that people understand that you also know nothing about liberalism, you repeat various cliches crafted by those who kill their daughters and call it honor 

Is there anything else you were hoping to convey about yourself?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Picaro said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Picaro said:
> ...



I am the one that has supplied virtually all of the links here in case you hadn't noticed and have used them to back my points

Maybe everyone should just listen to your , as yet,  unsubstantiated " babble "


----------



## Picaro (Jan 29, 2020)

OldLady said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...



There are no such people as 'Palestinians'; they were made up by Arafat as a propaganda gimmick in the mid-1950's. they considered themselves Syrians before that, except for the illegal migrants who came from Egypt, Iraq, Turkey, and other points outside the region.


----------



## Picaro (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Picaro said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Nobody gives a shit about your 'links', they're rubbish, and you can't refute a thing  I said with any legitimate source, in case you haven't noticed. Why not post 'links' to Charles Manson's fan club as well?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > There is no argument because context proves the argument is based on fiction.
> ...



Of course it makes  perfect sense.

And it's no secret.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...



The only straw men have been your own inclusion, the first being " Islamic apologia " the latest BS about "honour killings "........ you might need a whole lot more introspection imo


Three of the cornerstones of liberalism are government by consent , equality before the law and individual freedom

You support the subjugation of and the mass HR violations of millions of people on a daily basis , by an occupying force and government they never elected , living under a system of justice where the illegals living in their country are given civilian courts and they are given military courts judged by people from the occupying nation.

Listening to you trying to preach on liberalism to others who oppose the above has only comedic value to any rational person viewing


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



You are unwilling to read and research the source documents.  Noted.

Even when the relevant particular Articles or paragraphs are presented to you by posters on this board (like me).  Noted.

But you are willing to read lengthy ICJ opinions.  And opinion letters.  Noted.

Seems like a case of deliberate, willful, ignorance so as to remain entrenched in your existing biases.  It also reeks of, "the only opinions which matter are those which I agree with".

Your response that they "simply wouldn't hold the view they hold" is, frankly, a cop-out.

The source documents are clear.  Perhaps you can be convinced to read a single sentence:

_It is also recognised that no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party hereto in the ultimate peaceful settlement of the Palestine question, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations._


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > There is no argument because context proves the argument is based on fiction.
> ...



Out of curiosity, have you read the legal opinions of those who do not agree with your position?  Or would you be willing to read these opinions.  I can make suggestions.  I will even provide links.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Picaro said:


> Nobody gives a shit about your 'links', they're rubbish, and you can't refute a thing  I said with any legitimate source, in case you haven't noticed.



The links have refuted a lot of what people have said and claimed. I don't recall you even giving any. Maybe you are just so special that we should all just eat your words and doff our caps in your honour



> Why not post 'links' to Charles Manson's fan club as well?



Because they are not relevant ? Radical isn't it !!


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



I have some knowledge of them , like I have some knowledge of the counter arguments and THAT'S why I want there to be a lifting of the US veto to allow that debate to take place.

Reading the cases of both sides requires that tedious referencing I told you is beyond my commitment to the subject , so thx but no thx as regards any links


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> ... the subjugation of and the mass HR violations of millions of people on a daily basis ...



Mass human rights violations of MILLIONS of people on a daily basis?

Oh please. Back that nonsense up with facts.  What human rights are being violated on a daily basis?  Be specific.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jan 29, 2020)

Every majority Islam country is not safe for women, gays or Jews. This is not a coincidence. Israel has a separation of church and state. I do not see any peace plan that would work until those in Palestine accepted this way of life as well.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > ... the subjugation of and the mass HR violations of millions of people on a daily basis ...
> ...


Millions and billions, don't you know.


AzogtheDefiler said:


> Every majority Islam country is not safe for women, gays or Jews. This is not a coincidence. Israel has a separation of church and state. I do not see any peace plan that would work until those in Palestine accepted this way of life as well.


Not to mentioned that we have had three generations of these Arabs being indoctrinated from birrh to see the mass murder of Jews as their highest purpose in life.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...




Cool.  You have "some knowledge" of them, but refuse to actually read them, or to engage in discussion about them.  

Seems your contribution is to amplify opinions which agree with your set of biases, refuse to engage with opinions which do not and hope someone else debates this for you.  

When someone tells you who they are, believe them.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



Notice the spelling of honour.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> The source documents are clear.  Perhaps you can be convinced to read a single sentence:
> 
> _It is also recognised that no provision of this Agreement shall in any way prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party hereto in the ultimate peaceful settlement of the Palestine question, the provisions of this Agreement being dictated exclusively by military considerations._



The Palestinians were not involved in the drawing up of these lines and the above clearly states that a peaceful resolution of the " Palestinian question " remains the ultimate goal. 

They served as a de facto border with all Arab attempts at annexation being rejected along with the Israeli annexation attempts. I don't see the above as a cut and dry case that assures the " peaceful " resolution of the I/P conflict


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Notice the spelling of honour.



If it's so important to you , which is really kinda sad ,  I have the name and number of a good private investigator you can call


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The source documents are clear.  Perhaps you can be convinced to read a single sentence:
> ...



The above CLEARLY states that the Green Line exists only for military considerations.  It can not be used in any way to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party.

Black.  And.  White.  It can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel.  Period.  Full Stop.

And ask yourself WHY the Arab Palestinians were not involved in the Peace Treaty between Israel and Jordan.  Nor why Arab Palestinians were not differentiated or mentioned at all. 

And, let's talk about "Israeli annexation".  You claim equivalence between Jordan crossing its own established international borders and taking land which does not belong to it AND Israeli annexation.  This implies that Israel had an international boundary PRIOR to the 1949 Armistice and that it was attempting to cross that international border and take land which does not belong to it.  So, *where was Israel's border prior to the 1949 Armistice Agreement?*  And what agreement or treaty provided the legal parameters for that border?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Cool.  You have "some knowledge" of them, but refuse to actually read them, or to engage in discussion about them.
> 
> Seems your contribution is to amplify opinions which agree with your set of biases, refuse to engage with opinions which do not and hope someone else debates this for you.
> 
> When someone tells you who they are, believe them.



I will remind you again that I am wishing for the debate whereas you don't even admit there is one to be had. So you are actually describing your own position in the above.

I am prepared to admit to having biases because I am human , you appear to believe you are somehow a bias free humanoid.

When someone tells you that you are human , believe them


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> I will remind you again that I am wishing for the debate whereas you don't even admit there is one to be had. So you are actually describing your own position in the above.


I'm not having a discussion based on deliberate ignorance.  My stand that there is no debate is based on knowledge.

I argue that there is no debate to be had, because the law is clear and unambiguous and can be put to rest with one sentence.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Notice the spelling of honour.
> ...



No thanks. No need to overdo it.


----------



## RoccoR (Jan 29, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
※→  Spartacactcus, et al,

The various relevant entities of the United Nations _(including the two International Courts)_ are fallible.  They are slow to grow and develop along political lines.  They are not shielded from the influence and the effects of emotionally driven contentious confrontations.

The "politics", "facts" and the "opinion" must be valid; and not a Kangaroo Court. Each side of the presentation must argue from the Rule of Law and not just on the basis of fairness.   The claimants must have some legal stance under the Rule of Law, in support of the conclusion in the application for the court's determination.



Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > It’s obvious that you prefer opinions over facts.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

I believe that the influence of propaganda and opinion are very important.  It is from the opinion that ruling is issued.  The International Criminal Court (ICC) neither the UN General Assembly _(through the many resolutions)_ or the International Court of Justice _(Advisory_ opinion) make clear that the borders of Palestine _remain undefined_.   This is not to say that the boundary by which Israel uses to determine its exercise of sovereign authority has been tacitly approved by the international community every time the international community defers to Israel on matters of travel, immigration, and border control.

There is a matter that, the ICC cannot stretch its authority.
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court • 18 PART 3 • GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF CRIMINAL LAW • Article 22 • Nullum crimen sine lege:

1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court. 

*2. The definition of a crime shall be strictly construed and shall not be extended by analogy. In case of ambiguity, the definition shall be interpreted in favour of the person being investigated, prosecuted or convicted.*

"The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime;

"Today, 28 January 2020, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court ("ICC" or "Court") issued an order setting the procedure and the schedule for the submission of observations on the Prosecutor's request, resubmitted on 22 January 2020, under article 19(3) of the Rome Statute related to the scope of the Court's territorial jurisdiction in the Situation in the State of Palestine."
​ 3. This article shall not affect the characterization of any conduct as criminal under international law independently of this Statute. ​
It is my OPINION that the ICC does not have the legal authority to determine and resolve the question of boundaries pertaining to the State of Palestine.  Nor do I believe that the ICC has the authority on such questions relative to non-signatories. Given that Israel is a non-signatory to the ICC, determining the borders for the purpose of establishing jurisdiction, especially when the Oslo Accords give Israel exclusive criminal jurisdiction over Israelis Area "C" in the West Bank.

And there is the question as to whether Palestine can delegate jurisdiction over territory that the State of Palestine does not possess.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...





Shusha said:


> So, *where was Israel's border prior to the 1949 Armistice Agreement?* And what agreement or treaty provided the legal parameters for that border?


The never answered question.

This is where everybody starts dancing.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Go on then. Tell us.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus 

And I would also like to add why this particular issue is both relevant and important to the thread and to the conflict.  (flacaltenn will be asking soon, grin).

The entrenchment of the idea that anything less than the "1967 lines including East Jerusalem" is a loss or unfair for the Arab Palestinians is an obstacle to peace.  It is a fable which insists that this is the minimum acceptable to Arabs for ... reasons.

At best, it limits creative solutions.  

At worst, (and we are definitely operating in this domain), it is an excuse for Arab Palestinians to turn down, well ... anything.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...




Hard eyeroll.  Answered dozens of times.  You just don't like the answer.  Let's see if Spartacactcus is going to be as obstinate and willfully ignorant as you.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Cool.  You have "some knowledge" of them, but refuse to actually read them, or to engage in discussion about them.
> ...


I am biased as well toward logic.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> It is a fable which insists that this is the minimum acceptable to Arabs for ... reasons.



Actually, let's try *ahem cough* to have a discussion about those ... reasons.

Why are the "1967 lines" important and relevant to the future of Arabs in a future State of Palestine?  What is accomplished by having those particular boundaries legitimized as the international border between Israel and Palestine?

Are there natural resources near those lines which are necessary to the economic health of Palestine?
Do those lines represent the largest possible incorporation of Arab Palestinians into Palestine?
Are they necessary for Palestinian security?
Are they necessary for trade and transportation of goods?
Are they necessary to preserve Palestinian historical monuments?


Or are they just ... reasons?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > There is no argument because context proves the argument is based on fiction.
> ...


You must be young.
International Jew hatred was alive and well until about less than 10 years ago when most nations realized Israel could wipe the Middle East map clean.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


Both questions. There were none.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


Poor little cactus...


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > ... the subjugation of and the mass HR violations of millions of people on a daily basis ...
> ...



Obviously the ongoing denial of the entire population of the OPTs , currently totalling nearly 5 million people, their right to self determination. A right denied to all of them every day for over half a century

The ongoing denial of thousands of people the right to return and their descendents living in squalor all over the ME

Restriction of movement of millions of people every day in Gaza and the WB is a mass human rights violation.

Denying people the right to fair judicial systems is a mass human rights violation affecting thousands of Palestinians. Recall the judges of Palestinians in the WB are Israeli military/judicialpeople. Allegations leading to convictions against Israelis abusing Palestinians there are embarrassingly transparent and thus constitute violations of their human rights.

Masses of people spending months or years in " administrative detention " read detention without trial , a violation of due process

The torture over years of Palestinian detainees including children at the hands of Israeli military/prison personnel

Extrajudicial executions of suspects over many years and the raft of innocent people killed along with them

The people of Gaza cannot leave or enter Gaza without Israeli say so, that's 1.8 million people every day being denied ther HR to leave and enter their territory.

The massive disparity in planning permission given to Israelis over Palestinians in Palestinian land is also a mass violation. Destruction of Palestinian homes and driving them out of area C

The deprivations on economic and social aspects of life with the building of the annexation wall which is built 85% of the time in Palestinian territory.

Guilty as charged , that's why people , normal people , want to put an end to it


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



He's playing us.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


I agree...Egypt, Syria and Jordan should allow these Arabs to enter their countries.
Egypt and Jordan pay Israel to stop them.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...





Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


He’s trying; very trying.
He’s not clever enough and he’s boring.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



Nope he's off to bed, it's cracking on here but be sure , like Arny said , " I'll be back "..........tomorrow all being well


----------



## Frankeneinstein (Jan 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats. It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> With a one state solution (Israel + West Bank) - assuming a scenario where ALL residents are offered the opportunity of citizenship up front, the plus side for Palestinians would be the potential of better representation, political stability, assumption of rights guaranteed by citizenship and funding for infrastructure, education, etc. that is in perpetual shortage with their Palestinian leadership.


A 2 state solution is the best idea, so as a plan B you are on to something here but it is still not the best solution IMO...this really is not my field here but is there still the issue of the "destruction of Israel" concerning the Palestinians to deal with? or have they recognized Israels right to exist?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > It is difficult to tell whether your ignorance is the result of your bigotry or your bigotry is the result of your ignorance.  Egypt's claim to Sinai is at best dubious since it was never a part of Egypt in modern times until the British attached it to their Egyptian colony.  Nevertheless, Egypt was powerless to take Sinai back from Israel, and it was only Israel's desire for peace that led it to trade Sinai for peace with Egypt.
> ...


Not that it is relevant to the discussion, but you are wrong on both counts.  While the same Ottoman governor ruled both Egypt and Sinai, they were administered as separate entities.  That is why when Egypt became a British colony in 1882, Sinai continued to be ruled by the Ottoman empire.  It was not until 1906 that Egypt and Sinai were made into one country by the British in order to better protect the Canal.  Rules made by foreign imperialists, whether Turkish or British can never supercede the judgements of the people living in the region, therefore Egypt's claim to Sinai is at best dubious.

In the Israel-Jordan peace treaty, Israel ceded ownership of land west of the river to Jordan and in return Jordan agreed to lease it back to Israel for twenty five years.  Jordan had no legitimate claim to the land and the Israeli farmers who have been working the land for the last twenty five years are enraged that they are being kicked off of it, but Israel's desire for peace was so great that it gave up this land anyway in return for peace.  

The point is that while you claim the Jews are always scheming to get more land, in all of these cases Israel is giving away land it was capable of holding on to.  It makes no difference if you think the land Israel traded for peace rightfully belonged to Egypt or Jordan since neither country was capable of wresting control of it from Israel.  Israel could have held on to Sinai for as long as it wanted to and when it gave it to Egypt in return for peace, it traded a land area nearly three time the area of all of Israel, showing that your claim the Jews are always scheming to get more land has no foundation in fact.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


good catch.

Are you thinking Pakistani or 5th form school boy?

in any case, this thread is all about seeking the destruction of Israel though demographics, so that is all that really matters.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Frankeneinstein said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...



I don't know if they modified their Declaration of Principles.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



Might be an arsehole.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jan 29, 2020)

why do we discuss historical borders why not deal in the now?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> why do we discuss historical borders why not deal in the now?


No, Jew haters only discuss *Israel’s* historical borders.
I say start another war because Israel could use Lebanon and Syria as a welcome mat for aliyah.


----------



## Hollie (Jan 29, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Of course there were. You just don’t understand.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 29, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > why do we discuss historical borders why not deal in the now?
> ...



The intense focus on Israel is out of all proportion.

Is anything going on in Sudan these days?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 29, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
But not a peep from the Jew haters.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Obviously the ongoing denial of the entire population of the OPTs , currently totalling nearly 5 million people, their right to self determination. A right denied to all of them every day for over half a century


LOL.  Nope.  Self-determination has been on the table for a hundred years.  As a matter of fact, you might be surprised to hear this, but YET ANOTHER framework for self-determination was put in front of them just, why, yesterday.  They refuse to read it.  The only people denying Arab Palestinians EVEN MORE self-determination is Arab Palestinians.



> The ongoing denial of thousands of people the right to return


There are a very small number of people who may still have a right to return, amongst a sea of people who do not have that right.  That return is on a case-by-case basis and is conditional on the requirement to live in peace. 



> and their descendents living in squalor all over the ME


People live in squalor all over the world.  Not Israel's responsibility and not a violation on the part of Israel.  Of course, it is an egregious violation on the part of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Palestine.  No Arab under Israel's sovereignty or control is living in conditions which violate their human rights, btw.  As a matter of fact, Arabs in Israel have a better quality of life than any other Arabs ... anywhere.  So this is bullshit. 



> Restriction of movement of millions of people every day in Gaza and the WB is a mass human rights violation.


Restriction of movement between one State and another State (or similar self-governed political entity) is NORMAL.  Not a violation. 



> Denying people the right to fair judicial systems is a mass human rights violation affecting thousands of Palestinians.


  Um, the Palestinians of the OCCUPIED TERRITORIES?  You do realize if you claim that the Palestinians are occupied, that Israel is required by law not to apply Israeli law to the occupied citizens, right?  If they did that, it would be an application of sovereignty.  So, um.  Either Israel is sovereign over those territories, or Israel is compelled by law to use a different legal system.  Oh.  Another not-a-violation.



> Masses of people spending months or years in " administrative detention " read detention without trial , a violation of due process


All perfectly legal in occupations, when people are suspected of committing or planning to commit violence.  see above. 



> The torture over years of Palestinian detainees including children at the hands of Israeli military/prison personnel


 There is no evidence of this.  Propaganda.



> Extrajudicial executions of suspects over many years and the raft of innocent people killed along with them


Elor Azaria excepted to prove the rule, LEOs facing violent, murderous criminals are well within the law to respond as appropriate in lethal and fast-moving situations where harm to themselves, or others is immanent.  Even if you suggest that those LEOs may sometimes be in error -- this is NOT a violation of human rights, let alone "millions". 



> The people of Gaza cannot leave or enter Gaza without Israeli say so, that's 1.8 million people every day being denied ther HR to leave and enter their territory.


 A ridiculous and intentional misinterpretation of international law.  Citizens have a right to leave their country (as in they can not be prevented from exiting) but they do NOT have a right to enter another country without the permission of the country they wish to enter.  This is the STANDARD.  Thus the government is prohibited from preventing Gazans from leaving their country but Israel and Egypt are well within their rights in law to restrict entry into their own countries.  So, no, again not a violation.



> The massive disparity in planning permission given to Israelis over Palestinians in Palestinian land is also a mass violation. Destruction of Palestinian homes and driving them out of area C


No Arab Palestinians are being driven out of Area C.  Outright lie. You mean the planning permission of Israel over Israeli citizens as opposed to non-citizens in territory it legal controls?  Yep, its different.  Because, treaties.  You mean the demolition of buildings built without permits?  Yep.  Permits are a thing.  None of these a violation of human rights.  BUT, having said that, I'm going to give you this one.  There are about 90,000 Arab Palestinians living in Area C who don't have access to building permits the way their Israeli counterparts do.  They should be incorporated into Israel.  But, here's the problem:  Would it be a violation of their human rights to force them to become Israeli citizens and be subject to Israeli law?



> The deprivations on economic and social aspects of life with the building of the annexation wall which is built 85% of the time in Palestinian territory.


  The security wall is a direct response to belligerent actions on the part of the Arab Palestinians against the citizens and sovereignty of Israel.  No one has a "human right" to murder people.  And its all built on Israeli land. 



You did a great job of demonstrating the double standard which Israel is held to.  Not a great job on proving "millions of daily human rights violations".  Just a bunch of sound bytes made from parroting "things you've heard" but are too tedious to research.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 29, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Both sides were demanding pre-conditions. Trump unilaterally screwed the Palestinians: with Jerusalem, closing their consulate, cutting all aid. They were also excluded from the negotiation process.
> 
> We have always said it needs to be settled with both sides. Now suddenly, no?



And yet, he offered the Palestinians a FULLY recognized capitol in E. Jerusalem.. AND total access to the Al Aqsa mosque in support of the Jordanian requirements that they've always demanded.. 

What "negotiations"??  This plan announcement has included talks with MULTIPLE countries... 



Coyote said:


> Should we treat the Ukraine Russia conflict in this manner? Just pointing it because normally both sides are in on the deal.



Perhaps we should.. But NOT unilaterally. And we don't KNOW the extent of the back table talks on this plan yet or WHO was consulted, but it was not done in a vacuum... 

As far as the aid cuts, Palestinians in SYRIA right now need that aid MORE than the West Bank.. AND -- most of it was targeted to Gaza.. And it's not in our interest really to support a regime we're blockading at the same time.. Let the UN use our massive dues portion to make up the difference and cut lobster from their menu...


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Chest thumping about how the Israelis defeated the Egyptians in 1973 acknowledged but it didn't alter the fact that Israel " gave back " only sovereign Egyptian territory , like I said.



Don't get your innuendo here.. Snarky or not.. What do you mean "ONLY sovereign Egyptian territory".. What OTHER territory were you hoping the victors would give back??  The Gaza STRIP???     Egypt -- LIKE Jordan wanted to wash their of the Palestinians..  I doubt they just FORGOT to ask for Gaza back... 



Spartacactcus said:


> It saw the PA being subcontracted in to assist in the subjugation of their own people. I could offer you 80% of Algeria and it would be entirely desert. Percentages should be viewed in terms of value . The percentage Israel allowed istelf to keep was virtually all of the illegal settlement/settlers and control over the water supply.



The PA was the ULTIMATE and fleeting bright side of Pali governance. Regardless of Oslo, they were on the road to getting AUTONOMOUS CONTROL of substantial parts of the Pali population..  Starting with the COMPLETE -- no strings -- return of Gaza to them.. And then all that crashed.. 

I think I addressed where the MAIN source of water is for that whole area.. Clue it's just barely in Israel and NOT in the West Bank or Gaza... So both Israeli and Pali persons building there will HAVE to IMPORT it from Israel.. And pay for infrastructure or share costs... 



Spartacactcus said:


> If Gaza was "given" to the Palestinians you would think that that would mean they could vote into power any one of their political parties ? I mean without the Israelis , US UK etc etc instigating an attempted coup ? That alone is indicative that Gaza was never " given " to the Palestnians



Hamas was not truely a POLITICAL operation before there was something to have power over.. That "nugget" was the rights to Gaza.. And Gaza was "their peeps"... They BECAME political when they had something to fight over with Fatah... That election was REALLY the fault of a US Administration PUSHING the PA to accelerate elections at a time when Palis were just LEARNING to pay attention.. Never should have PUSHED them to vote because of election time HERE in USA....  And NO -- you can't make peace with ONE team, and risk having your worst nightmare to contend with a year later... STABILITY is part of leadership and reliable representation..  Sometimes you DONT MAKE the deal if you feel your partner on the other side is in danger of losing their AUTHORITY to negotiate soon...  It was kinda a surprise to a LOT of folks.. Including probably the Israelis who were "making nice" with Hamas when they were a social aid organization there in Gaza.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Cut it out.. Does THEIR Declaration on Human Rights over-ride our law or Constitution? What wars did they EVER successfully win or defuse with resolutions? THey are a 3rd party to disputes.,.. At BEST -- a mediator and a poll of world diplomatic opinion .. 

And MOST of the resolutions you are referring to are SO old they don't represent the current political alignment of either Israel or the Palestinians...


----------



## Coyote (Jan 29, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Both sides were demanding pre-conditions. Trump unilaterally screwed the Palestinians: with Jerusalem, closing their consulate, cutting all aid. They were also excluded from the negotiation process.
> ...




I'm moving over here - seems a better spot to discuss the Trump plan 

Trump Deal - details, reactions and development on the ground


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 29, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Obviously the ongoing denial of the entire population of the OPTs , currently totalling nearly 5 million people, their right to self determination. A right denied to all of them every day for over half a century
> 
> The ongoing denial of thousands of people the right to return and their descendents living in squalor all over the ME
> 
> Restriction of movement of millions of people every day in Gaza and the WB is a mass human rights violation.



They don't want Israeli rights and passports..  So they remain occupied... As they were (semantically if not legally) under Jordan or for that matter the Ottoman Empire or Britain...

How about we cut this down to a couple fundamental questions that YOU really haven't offered any light on..

Let's make it just two.. The first is a softball pitch you can hit out of the park for your participation trophy.. THe second, although multiple choice and seemingly easy is gonna be rough for you...

Q1 --- Who is the responsible and ENDURING negotiator for Team Israel in making deals with the Palestinians??

Q2 -- Who is the responsible and ENDURING negotiator for Team Pali and speaks to Israel?

A. Your highly over-rated United Nations
B. The Arab League
C. Mammoud Abbas and team.. (YAY TEAM)
D. Donald Trump
E. None of the above
F. Hamas
G. Fatah
H. The ghost of Yassir Araffat.

Time's up.. Simple quiz...  

The only thing those 2 questions have in common is the wonky failure of democratic institutions to make more than 1/2 of the populace happy with an election result.. The other half is at best --- left feeling miserable and abused for the term of office;  Or at WORST -- actually develop symptoms of mental derangement. 

ARABS know this.. And they PREFER their representation be HIGHLY WEIGHTED at a local tribal, sectarian, level...


----------



## Mindful (Jan 30, 2020)

And it's not as if the jihad against the Jews hadn't been going on for 1,400 years.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 30, 2020)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> why do we discuss historical borders why not deal in the now?



That's a question Tinmore has been asked repeatedly.  He's still living in 1948.


----------



## José (Jan 30, 2020)

*THE OLD WILL DIE AND THE YOUNG WILL FORGET*




​Tinmore lives in 1948 because the palestinian people still lives in 1948.

Tinmore lives in 48 because Mr. Ben Gurion was only 50% correct.

The old did die but the young didn't forget.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats. It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> With a one state solution (Israel + West Bank) - assuming a scenario where ALL residents are offered the opportunity of citizenship up front, the plus side for Palestinians would be the potential of better representation, political stability, assumption of rights guaranteed by citizenship and funding for infrastructure, education, etc. that is in perpetual shortage with their Palestinian leadership.



I don't disagree, but then you have the issue of which Palestinians get to vote.  

Right now, there are 6 Million Jews and 1 million Arabs in Israel, with another 4.75MM living in the "Occupied Territories" 

Then you have 3 millon living as refugees in Jordan, half a million in Lebanon, etc.   

In short, they would very quickly become the majority in Israel, which means no more Israel. Wouldn't bother me in the least, but you think the Zionists are going to go along with being a minority? 

The two state solution would be better for Israel, but it has to be a fair one of returning a lot more land and Jerusalem as an international city.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 30, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
> But not a peep from the Jew haters.



Every day? Really?  

Even if there were, that would be an internal issue we shouldn't be involved in.  

We are involved in Israel because we are the ones subsidizing it and a large part of our foreign policy is to secure Israel.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 30, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
> ...



How do you feel about the USA making financial appropriations to Egypt?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 30, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
> ...


Check out some non-Jew related news once in a while.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 30, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
> ...


Shut off anything powered by an Intel chip.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 30, 2020)

José said:


> *THE OLD WILL DIE AND THE YOUNG WILL FORGET*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Nevertheless, Life does go on.  My parents were refugees at one time, but I never thought of them that way because they became very successful.

The young didn't forget because their elders never let them.

Why does a Spaniard like you care so much about the Israel/Palestine situation anyway?  You don't even know very much about Eretz Yisrael.  You once said that the Jews only have an attachment to Jerusalem, and not to the rest of the Land.  Yet almost every city and town, every nook and cranny in Israel, has some Jewish history attached to it.  If you want, I can give you some lessons on that.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 30, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> José said:
> 
> 
> > *THE OLD WILL DIE AND THE YOUNG WILL FORGET*
> ...




I once went to an archeological/excavation dig on the Golan, which proves it. 

So many people think they know what they are talking about, and they don't.

The intense over fascination with Jews and Israel is mind boggling at times.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 30, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Right now, there are 6 Million Jews and 1 million Arabs in Israel, with another 4.75MM living in the "Occupied Territories"



You're counting Gaza (maybe) and that's a special case of them being under Hamas occupation.. Not Israeli occupation.. Israel GAVE the PA the Gaza -- free and clear..  Hamas STOLE it.. And now NO elections are needed or anticipated... 

As for those Palis living in detention or squalor in Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and elsewhere, their CLAIMS to returning and chances are about the same as the "Reconquista" movement from militant Hispanic groups looking to RETURNING to "their homelands" in Phoenix or Los Angeles... 

HOWEVER -- ANY peace plan should be a NEIGHBORHOOD affair and should involve neighboring Arab countries to put those "detainees" close to their borders with the WB and provide infrastructure and connectivity to the West Bank and the region as a whole....


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Of course it makes  perfect sense.
> 
> And it's no secret.



You won't know this but judge representing the USA in the 2004 ICJ regarding the wall agreed with his co judges that the Israeli settlements in the OPTs were a violation of international law.

You won't know either that he is of German Jewish-Polish Jewish origin and was one of the youngest people to be liberated from the Nazi death camps.

So when you blanket smear people who disagree with Israeli policies and/or actions with the " Jew hater " card you are actually smearing the likes of him and others that either survived themselves or were born of parents who survived the death camps.

His humanity survived the camps , yours doesn't even survive the discussion

Just so you know and can never plead ignorance in the future


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Of course it makes  perfect sense.
> ...


Well he was clearly wrong and that doesn't make you any less of a Jew hater.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Of course it makes  perfect sense.
> ...



So we're done then?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

Shusha said:


> The above CLEARLY states that the Green Line exists only for military considerations.  It can not be used in any way to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party.
> 
> Black.  And.  White.  It can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel.  Period.  Full Stop.
> 
> ...



That agreement was settled prior to Israel consenting to be constrained by the UN Charter/4th GC. So when it decided it would violate that treaty and stake a claim for sovereignty it was already contractually bound by both the conventions mentioned and thus their applicability is surely legally correct.

Thus the territory acquired via warfare in 1967 was in contravention of both as is reflected in UNSC 242 which calls for the Israeli withdrawal from those territories. Why ? On the grounds that it is illegal to acquire territory through warfare. The experts , or the majority of them at least , agree that the UN Charter and the 4th GC are applicable to that conflict.

The Palestinian were not party to the treaties because they were in complete disarray prior to even the Partition Plan vote in the UNGA. They lost the battle for self determination in the years between 1936-39

The Zionists agreed to the partition plan and even referred to resolution 181 in it's declaration of independence statement conveying a wish to see it implemented. Then they conquered more territory and refused to go back to the PP lines. Then during the amistice talks they stated a view that they had no wish to try to claim the Jordanian occupied WB. Then , crucially , it agreed to be bound by treaties that would negate any legitimacy in trying to acquire territory via warfare.

That 's how I see it and that's what I see the others making the case on


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Well he was clearly wrong and that doesn't make you any less of a Jew hater.



He's the expert in international and humanitarian law and you are a troll on an anonymous board , call me a radical but I'm going to defer to his expertize over yours all day long


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



We were never anything else imo but you can maybe reflect on calling a holocaust survivor a Jew hater akin to those who concocted the abomination of the camps . My guess is you haven't the tiniest bit of introspection required to see how gross that actually is and will remain lost


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

José said:


> *THE OLD WILL DIE AND THE YOUNG WILL FORGET*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Oddly enough ben Gurion was far more understanding of the Palestinian antagonism to Zionism than many of the people in this forum living in the 21st century

Those who endure abuse tend not to forget , be they young or old imo


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> Q1 --- Who is the responsible and ENDURING negotiator for Team Israel in making deals with the Palestinians??



Whoever the Israeli electorate votes into office as the result of free and fair elections , their elected government .



> Q2 -- Who is the responsible and ENDURING negotiator for Team Pali and speaks to Israel?
> 
> A. Your highly over-rated United Nations
> B. The Arab League
> ...



The second question isn't rough at all, we just need to apply the same standards to both people , which seems to be the killer for many of the allegedly pro Israel ( read anti Arab/Muslim, as confirmed in the last part of your post I snipped )

The negotiators for the Palestinain side should be those Palestinians elected into government via free and fair elections to be held in the OPTs free from Israeli and/or anyone elses interference, so as to form the dreaded Government of National Unity for the Palestinian side.

The issue is that a divided Palestinian people offers so much more to Israel and its allies hence the constant interference and divide and conquer techniques on display for decades on end


----------



## Shusha (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The above CLEARLY states that the Green Line exists only for military considerations.  It can not be used in any way to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party.
> ...



You are wildly dodging the point here.  

The Green Line can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel.  Its considerations were military only.  It can not in any way be used as a border for Israel.  Period.  

So...this (again) brings us back to exactly WHERE Israel claims sovereignty.  You are trying to argue that Israel has no claim to sovereignty over the Green Line.  But you can not use that line as a claim for sovereignty, nor as a denial of sovereignty.  Nor can you use UN resolutions as they have no authority to create boundaries lines between States. So, WHAT line are you using instead?  And make a case for that line being the international boundary of Israel beyond which she has no further claims.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 30, 2020)

Let me help you out.  The international border between Israel and Jordan is the Jordan River.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

Shusha said:


> You are wildly dodging the point here.
> 
> The Green Line can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel.  Its considerations were military only.  It can not in any way be used as a border for Israel.  Period.
> 
> So...this (again) brings us back to exactly WHERE Israel claims sovereignty.  You are trying to argue that Israel has no claim to sovereignty over the Green Line.  But you can not use that line as a claim for sovereignty, nor as a denial of sovereignty.  Nor can you use UN resolutions as they have no authority to create boundaries lines between States. So, WHAT line are you using instead?  And make a case for that line being the international boundary of Israel beyond which she has no further claims.



It's pretty obvious that when you sign a contract saying you agree not to try to acquire territory through warfare and then try to acquire territory through warfare you are in breach of that contract regardless of what you agreed to prior to that point in time. Even the armistice agreements committed both sides to desist from military actions beyond that point.

So on both counts Israel was in breach of its contractual obligations. A feature of it's existence and the reason , imo , why it is seen by many as a pariah state.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > You are wildly dodging the point here.
> ...



Keep dodging.

Israel is not acquiring territory through warfare.  Israel makes a legal claim to the territory. 

The purpose of this thread is not to discuss the military actions of Jordan and Israel in breach of their mutual 1949 Armistice Agreement.  

The purpose of this thread, and its relevance to today, is establishing Israel's claims of sovereignty over territory which you label the OPTs.  You can not use the Green Line to limit Israel's claim to sovereignty of that territory.  You can not use the Green Line to claim that Israeli citizens have been transferred to "occupied territory".


----------



## jillian (Jan 30, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...


Your terrorists have had ample opportunity to make peace. They only want to destroy the only Jewish state

how many Muslim countries do you need? Jordanian bedouins certainly aren’t entitled to Israel


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > The above CLEARLY states that the Green Line exists only for military considerations.  It can not be used in any way to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party.
> ...


More ignorant bullshit from you.  The fourth Geneva Convention only applies to land taken from on signatory tot he Convention by another, and since Jordan's annexation of Judea and Samaria was recognized only by Pakistan and the UK, it was not legally part of Jordan, therefore when Jordan lost it to Israel in 1967 it did not qualify as occupied territory under the Geneva Conventions.  

242 addresses only the nations that participated in the Six Day War so it has no application to the Palestinians; further, it calls for Israel to withdraw to safe and secure borders which was impossible without first making peace with the warring Arab nations.  All of which means the term "occupied Palestinian territory" no more than a  propaganda term with no basis in fact, law or logic.  

At no point did Israel acquire any land through an aggressive war, and when it did capture land from enemies that attacked it, it offered to return it in exchange for peace.  Your posts show nothing but a deep seated anti semitism you try to defend with lies.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Keep dodging.
> 
> Israel is not acquiring territory through warfare.  Israel makes a legal claim to the territory.
> 
> ...



Of course Israel is guilty of 

A Breaching the armistice agreement

B Breaching the 4th GC

C  Violating both as a means to acquire territory

It got away with it's territorial gains in 1947-49 , THEN it decided to join the UN and sign the 4th GC and as such has tried to acquire territory through warfare


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > You are wildly dodging the point here.
> ...


Still more lies from you.  At no time did Israel try to acquire land through warfare.  In each case when it did capture land it was in the course of defending itself against attacks from the Arabs and in each case Israel offered to return the land in exchange for peace.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Well he was clearly wrong and that doesn't make you any less of a Jew hater.
> ...


lol  Clearly you agree with everything you've read or heard that is negative about Israel or Jews.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



I shouldn't let it bother you.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> More ignorant bullshit from you.  The fourth Geneva Convention only applies to land taken from on signatory tot he Convention by another, and since Jordan's annexation of Judea and Samaria was recognized only by Pakistan and the UK, it was not legally part of Jordan, therefore when Jordan lost it to Israel in 1967 it did not qualify as occupied territory under the Geneva Conventions.
> 
> 242 addresses only the nations that participated in the Six Day War so it has no application to the Palestinians; further, it calls for Israel to withdraw to safe and secure borders which was impossible without first making peace with the warring Arab nations.  All of which means the term "occupied Palestinian territory" no more than a  propaganda term with no basis in fact, law or logic.
> 
> At no point did Israel acquire any land through an aggressive war, and when it did capture land from enemies that attacked it, it offered to return it in exchange for peace.  Your posts show nothing but a deep seated anti semitism you try to defend with lies.



I referred them to not only the 4th GC but the UN Charter in which under chaapter 7 it states

"starting or waging a war against the territorial integrity, political independence or sovereignty of a state,* or in violation of international treaties or agreements"*

The " violation of international treaties or agreements " clearly refers to the Armistice Agreements of 1949

UN 242 reiterates the inadmissibility of acquiring territory through warfare and calls for an Israeli "withdrawal from the territories in the recent conflict "

Keep trolling


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

Mindful said:


> I shouldn't let it bother you.



It doesn't but the awful thing is it clearly doesn't bother you


----------



## Shusha (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Keep dodging.
> ...



Wow. You are still massively dodging the point. 

Israel claims sovereignty over those territories. She claims that she is not acquiring territory - it already belongs to her. 

Your job is to make an argument that the territories do not belong to her and you can’t use either the Green Line or UN solutions to do it because those are not authoritative in setting boundaries.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > I shouldn't let it bother you.
> ...


It doesn’t bother me either.
Now back to 2004, which is year N of Syria invading Lebanon and building thousands of underground terrorist structures under the watchful eye of the Jew hating UN, whose members employed there never uttered a peep.


How do you feel about Lebanese people being held hostage by Syria?
How do you feel about Israel telling Syria that the next attack on Israel will result in Syria becoming a parking lot.

You are so full of shit.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> lol  Clearly you agree with everything you've read or heard that is negative about Israel or Jews.



I know the Jew card is all a lot of you people have to rely on but it is amusing to see that reliance being played out

My view is that there are good and bad in all groups of people , you come across as one of those Jews that makes those bigoted stereotypes all the more believeable to some by ticking the boxes.

I have much to say that is negative about some members of other groups but I refuse to tar them all with the broad brush stroke of the bigot


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > lol  Clearly you agree with everything you've read or heard that is negative about Israel or Jews.
> ...


Because they won’t give you the time of day after all the evil they’ve done.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...





When you put on the charm , full blast , it's really easy to ignore your rants


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


The fact is that everything you post is out of context and you’re unwilling to admit such.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > More ignorant bullshit from you.  The fourth Geneva Convention only applies to land taken from on signatory tot he Convention by another, and since Jordan's annexation of Judea and Samaria was recognized only by Pakistan and the UK, it was not legally part of Jordan, therefore when Jordan lost it to Israel in 1967 it did not qualify as occupied territory under the Geneva Conventions.
> ...




Key point:  against the territorial integrity, political independence or sovereignty of another state. 

Which State is Israel violating?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 30, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


The State of Existence.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 30, 2020)

I figured it out!
Cactus is *Humanity*!!!!


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 30, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Wow. You are still massively dodging the point.
> 
> Israel claims sovereignty over those territories. She claims that she is not acquiring territory - it already belongs to her.
> 
> Your job is to make an argument that the territories do not belong to her and you can’t use either the Green Line or UN solutions to do it because those are not authoritative in setting boundaries.



Of course they are authoriatative in setting boundaries. The amistice agreement/green line set bounderies beyond which military activity was prohibited. Israel violated it in violation of chapter 7 UN Charter. Even if we were/are to accept that they were provisional bounderies, the Israeli violation of them was illegal


----------



## Shusha (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Wow. You are still massively dodging the point.
> ...



No, neither Armistice Agreements nor UN resolutions can create international boundaries between States. 

Try again.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > More ignorant bullshit from you.  The fourth Geneva Convention only applies to land taken from on signatory tot he Convention by another, and since Jordan's annexation of Judea and Samaria was recognized only by Pakistan and the UK, it was not legally part of Jordan, therefore when Jordan lost it to Israel in 1967 it did not qualify as occupied territory under the Geneva Conventions.
> ...


However Israel  never started started or waged war against any nation except in its own defense, so it has broken no treaties however much you want it to.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > lol  Clearly you agree with everything you've read or heard that is negative about Israel or Jews.
> ...


lol  Actually it was you who tried to play the "Jew card" by talking about the fact that an ICJ judge who ruled against Israel was Jewish.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 30, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


Clearly he means his own state of mind.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Wow. You are still massively dodging the point.
> ...


Let’s see...
You’ve been incorrect about everything until this post and you expect us to suddenly take your word for anything.

I would offer you a tissue for your tears but I don’t offer tissues for crocodile tears.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > I shouldn't let it bother you.
> ...



How awful.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 30, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



He got one sentence right.  Progress, I guess.  I'm pretty sure Jordan broke the Armistice, I'd have to look it up though.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 30, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> The negotiators for the Palestinain side should be those Palestinians elected into government via free and fair elections to be held in the OPTs free from Israeli and/or anyone elses interference, so as to form the dreaded Government of National Unity for the Palestinian side.



And the LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED WAS??????  And the next SCHEDULED ONE IS ?????

There is NO current duly elected representation for the Palis..  Polling on Abbas is ABYSMAL in all of the OPT..
Why don't you go organize an appropriate govt structure and get them to start campaigning...

Not stable, no mechanism to ASSURE peaceful continuity. And the plain fact IS -- they don't EVEN LIKE any type of top heavy "nation-hood"...  There are OTHER WAYS of selecting spokepeople and diplomats that don't REQUIRE the Palis to violate their instincts about powerful central govts..  I'm sensitive to that because I hate powerful central govts..

*So maybe we ought to stop pushing them into elections, take the leaders of the 5 or 6 biggest cities and their staffs and call it a day... *

Oh and GAZA???  Fatah and the PA want NOTHING To do with them.. They're gonna have to make their own peace... Or their own graveyard....


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



And to follow on from that:


The world, including the United Nations, Europe and other international human rights and "pro-Palestinian" organizations, have not moved to help the Palestinians of Syria in the past nine years -- so, why should this year be any different?


How has this terrible dismissal come to pass? Simple: Because these Palestinians' problems cannot be blamed on Israel. They are being killed and tortured in an Arab country, by their own brothers, and as far as the world is concerned, as long as there is no way to hold Israel responsible, it is fine for Arabs to commit atrocities against their Palestinian brothers.


The Arab countries have long proven that their sole interest in the Palestinians is to use them as puppets to serve the interests of Arab dictators and corrupt Arab regimes. The Palestinians in Syria have long known that, for them, no Arab country is a safe haven.






The London-based Action Group for Palestinians of Syria estimated the number of Palestinians who have died of torture in Syrian prisons at 614. Another 205 Palestinians died as a result of lack of proper medical treatment because of the Syrian army's siege on the Yarmouk refugee camp, the group said. Pictured: Yarmouk refugee camp, near Damascus, on May 22, 2018, days after Syrian government forces regained control over the camp. (Photo by Louai Beshara/AFP via Getty Images)

Palestinians in Syria: Another Year of Death and Misery


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> How do you feel about the USA making financial appropriations to Egypt?



I think we should stop paying Egypt and Jordan to play nice with the Zionists...

Here's what I would do. I would withdraw every troop from the Middle East, every subsidy to Israel and her neighbors who agree to play nice, and spend that money on alternative energy, proudly announcing, "None of what you do over there fighting over who The Imaginary Sky Pixie gave this strip of sand to is any of our concern."


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> You're counting Gaza (maybe) and that's a special case of them being under Hamas occupation.. Not Israeli occupation.. Israel GAVE the PA the Gaza -- free and clear.. Hamas STOLE it.. And now NO elections are needed or anticipated...
> 
> As for those Palis living in detention or squalor in Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and elsewhere, their CLAIMS to returning and chances are about the same as the "Reconquista" movement from militant Hispanic groups looking to RETURNING to "their homelands" in Phoenix or Los Angeles...



YOu keep fantasizing there, buddy. The fact is, the "Right of Return" is going to happen at some point.  The Zionist Entity can't maintain apartheid forever.  Most of the world is offended by it, and you can only fool American Evangelicals for so long with "We need Israel so Jesus can come back."  



flacaltenn said:


> HOWEVER -- ANY peace plan should be a NEIGHBORHOOD affair and should involve neighboring Arab countries to put those "detainees" close to their borders with the WB and provide infrastructure and connectivity to the West Bank and the region as a whole....



Again, it seems like any "Peace Plan" is designed to maintain the rights of the Zionist Invaders to keep their ill-gotten gains. And you wonder why the Arabs aren't too keen on going along with it.


----------



## mudwhistle (Jan 31, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...


What's the difference between a Democrat and a Palestinian?
Not a GD thing.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > How do you feel about the USA making financial appropriations to Egypt?
> ...




Why don't you talk about something you know something about?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Why don't you talk about something you know something about?



You asked how I felt.  I told you.   Sorry if that is upseting for you.  

I'm tired of watching young Americans come home in boxes because the Zionists are living out their religious fantasies.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Why don't you talk about something you know something about?
> ...



Upsetting? Surely you jest?

Your last sentence made no sense to me.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Upsetting? Surely you jest?
> 
> Your last sentence made no sense to me.



Were you dropped on your head as a baby?  

We are in year 30 of the War In Iraq because the Zionists were all scared of Saddam.  How's that going for us again?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Upsetting? Surely you jest?
> ...



Can't you focus on the positive implications, and not the negative?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Shusha said:


> No, neither Armistice Agreements nor UN resolutions can create international boundaries between States.
> 
> Try again.


 Really ?


How is the border of North and South Korea being defined ?

East and West Germany ?

North and South Vietnam ?

East Timor ?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > No, neither Armistice Agreements nor UN resolutions can create international boundaries between States.
> ...



How long have you been comatose?

East and West Germany don't have a border.

Though what this has to do with it?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> However Israel  never started started or waged war against any nation except in its own defense, so it has broken no treaties however much you want it to.




So now that it has been shown how the UN Charter was used to support and validate resolution 242 and it is there in black and white ,what do you do ? Completely ignore it and move to the next defensive line that Israeli actions are only ever in self defence ( even when they are clearly not )

Pathetic


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> lol  Actually it was you who tried to play the "Jew card" by talking about the fact that an ICJ judge who ruled against Israel was Jewish.




Cutting you some slack, obviously you have he attention span of an ameoba. 

Not cutting you some slack . You are lying

Mindless decided to play the Jew card ( as well as yourself ) prior to my mentioning the facts surrounding the US judge involved in the 2004 ICJ opinion

You know this , so it's fair to say you are just lying.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Let’s see...
> You’ve been incorrect about everything until this post and you expect us to suddenly take your word for anything.
> 
> I would offer you a tissue for your tears but I don’t offer tissues for crocodile tears.



Obviously you haven't been concentrating enough

And I got what I expected, a gang of people completely lost to pro Israeli propaganda.

So now you are the group spokesman ?

You need the tissues yourself to wipe away the mess made by the excitement you feel everytime Trump/Netanyahu and co ( or anybody else ) stick it to the Arabs

Comedy gold


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



For you, I agree.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Shusha said:


> He got one sentence right.  Progress, I guess.  I'm pretty sure Jordan broke the Armistice, I'd have to look it up though.



The Israeli violation of Chapter 7 UN Charter was what UNSC res 242 was based on. Fact

On Jordan

Jordan did violate it but only after Israel had in its attack on Egypt with the mutual defence pact kicking in

Not only that, Mosha Dayan admitted that around 80% of the " border skirmishes " ( interesting use of words considering your denial of this ) between Israel and Syria were initiated by the Israeli side due to incursion into the demilitarized zone. One of these led to the dog fight over Damascus just prior to the 67 Israeli attack on Egypt which started the 67 war


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Let’s see...
> ...


How’s your Mullah doing?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > He got one sentence right.  Progress, I guess.  I'm pretty sure Jordan broke the Armistice, I'd have to look it up though.
> ...


Funny how Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt recognize Israel’s borders.
You must be an amazing attorney to know international borders better than them.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> And the LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED WAS??????  And the next SCHEDULED ONE IS ?????
> 
> There is NO current duly elected representation for the Palis..  Polling on Abbas is ABYSMAL in all of the OPT..
> Why don't you go organize an appropriate govt structure and get them to start campaigning...
> ...



You asked me a question you thought I would struggle to answer and found out that it was no problem because this poster attempts to apply the same standards across the board and is thus a whole lot more objective than the resident pro Israeli shreikers here.

The first few sentences you write only support what I say is the issue. Both Israel and it's backers seek to keep the Palestinians divided and at war with themselves so as to scupper the chance of a negotiated settlement on anything other than Israeli claim while thet continue to change the fats on the ground , illegally !!.

The situation in Gaza just underscores the divide and conquer technique in operation in its starkest form imo Look at how many people here have bought into the idea/acceptance of seeing it as a seperate entity to the rest of the OPTs when it is absolutely not . You can see the conditioning even in members who have , imo , a fairer approach to the conflict and support Palestinian rights.

What we see on these boards and what is pumped out by the MSM , is the constant gripe about how the Palestinians cannot form a national committee able to negotiate a deal , the Israeli cry about " we have no partner to negotiate with bla bla junk " without any comment about how that situation is manufactured and manipulated so as to create that very situation by those complaining in a complete misrepresentation of the reality


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > And the LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED WAS??????  And the next SCHEDULED ONE IS ?????
> ...


Do you enjoy making an ass out of yourself?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Funny how you seem blissfully aware of the contents of the 2001 Arab Peace Initiative and how they actually define where they feel the Israeli borders with Palestine are or should be.

That said they are all collaborators to the Israeli mistreatment of and HR violations of the Palestinians today.

Every comment you make only shows a painfully obvious lack of knowledge about the subject. Did you become interested in the subject in the wake of the 9/11 attacks by any chance ?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Do you enjoy making an ass out of yourself?



Can't play the ball so you have to play the man ? How frustrating for you.

I haven't made an ass of myself but have watched how you have and thoroughly enjoyed it


----------



## RoccoR (Jan 31, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→  JoeB131,

I'm sorry, I'm confused...  I've been to the Middle East and Yemen.  None of the theaters/campaigns I saw had anything to do with "Zionism."

As far as to pro-Israeli position is concerned, I am NOT a true Advocate for their cause.  However, that does not mean that the Allied Powers of the early 20th Century were not right to make a change in Human Development by establishing the long overdue  "Jewish National Home."  Nor am I engaged in some manner of "Public Relations" on the part of the Israelis _(and I would suspect → they would NOT want someone like me as a spokesperson)_.  But I clearly understand that the Question of Palestine will never be solved with a solution that satisfies all the fractured parties concerned _(both Jewish and Arab)_. 



JoeB131 said:


> I'm tired of watching young *Americans come home in boxes* because the* Zionists* are living out their religious fantasies.


*(COMMENT)*

I am retired from the Army.  When did we _(respectfully)_ escort our casualties (KIA) to Dover from a theater of operations related to "Zionism?"  Now _(I don't know for sure)_ it is possible that some small number of covert special operators and _(possibly)_ those of the clandestine services may have come home under the flag, but I don't think you would have seen them.

When did we _(respectfully)_ escort our casualties (KIA) to Dover from a theater of operations related to "Zionism?"

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


Why should Israel care where their Arab neighbors want Israel’s borders to be?
Are you stupid or insane?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



Irony meters exploding all over the globe


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


Because JoeB knows nothing about everything.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> How long have you been comatose?
> 
> East and West Germany don't have a border.
> 
> Though what this has to do with it?



They should have a ball pool subforum where people who act like children should be allowed to play unhindered . You are a prime candidate and a quintessential example of why it could be useful.

Research the content of the post you didn't understand and get back to someone who cares about what you think


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...




Irony meters exploding all over the globe for a second time in quich succession...........irony is rendered immeasurable for the forseeable


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Why should Israel care where their Arab neighbors want Israel’s borders to be?
> Are you stupid or insane?



You decided to bring them into the debate , it blew up in your face and maybe set fire to that wonderful moustache, so you now decide to retract it in true black knight fashion

At least I have discovered who the subforum clown is ,which is always a bonus


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



Atheists don't have/need them. How's your neocon handler doing ?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



So you believe this universe just created itself out of nothing?


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > How long have you been comatose?
> ...



Which is you, the amount of posts you've addressed to me already. 


That said, you seem more intent on insulting me(taken on the chin) than discussing the issues at hand.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Why should Israel care where their Arab neighbors want Israel’s borders to be?
> ...


Do you enjoy making an ass of yourself?
Every claim you have made thus far is incorrect.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


It seems both parties are getting their neo-Con asses kicked by Trump.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > How long have you been comatose?
> ...


You want your own Forum already?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...


Why not?
Cactus creates his own “facts” out of nothing.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



He's a paid bot?


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


Yep!
And a shameless one at that.
And his ad hominems are quite bland.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



I do think, however, Gaza had the potential to become a sort of Monte Carlo of the Middle East. The location for instance; the sparkling Mediterranean.


----------



## RoccoR (Jan 31, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Indeependent,

Well, the borders of Israeli sovereign integrity ais established by various means. 



Indeependent said:


> Why should Israel care where their Arab neighbors want Israel’s borders to be?
> Are you stupid or insane?


*(COMMENT)*

It reduces confrontation.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...


Gaza along the Mediterranean is gorgeous.


----------



## Mindful (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



True. I'm often in Cyprus.

Israelis galore. We have a lovely young rabbi at the Chabad  centre there.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > No, neither Armistice Agreements nor UN resolutions can create international boundaries between States.
> ...



You are simply wrong.  You are trying to argue that Armistice lines create international borders when they do not.  Armistice lines are temporary demarcations for military purposes, nothing more.  Permanent international boundaries are created through negotiations and treaties.

For example,

The land border between Indonesia and Timore-Leste was negotiated based on a 1904 treaty between colonial powers and a 1914 arbitration of that treaty, and then agreed upon and formalized by treaty.  

The border between North and South Korea, while it exists in all practical forms, is not a _de jure_ international border, because there is no agreement between North Korea and South Korea.  It is disputed.  South Korea did not even sign the Korea Armistice Agreement because it takes the position that Korea is a single nation and not divided.  There is no peace treaty or border treaty between North Korea and South Korea.  Its an on-going dispute.

Now, back to Jordan and Israel.  The Armistice Agreement, as has been definitively shown, can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of the Parties to the Agreement.  Further, the Armistice Agreement is no longer in force since there is now a Peace Treaty between Jordan and Israel which demarcates the international boundary between their States as the Jordan River.  Arguing that the international border between Jordan and Israel is still the Green Line is beyond ridiculous.


----------



## Picaro (Jan 31, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Why don't you talk about something you know something about?
> ...



So you would much rather watch dumpsters fill up with dead aborted babies than bodies of adults killed in wars. Lots more fun for you, is it?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Which is you, the amount of posts you've addressed to me already.
> That said, you seem more intent on insulting me(taken on the chin) than discussing the issues at hand.



Maybe you misinterpreted my politeness for respect 

You cannot discuss the " issues at hand " with people who haven't the foggiest and I have only returned what you have dished out to me , also taken on the chin , the middle one in fact 

You cannot discuss the border between East and West Germany with people who didn't even know it was ever seperated etc etc

And you are the one who has displayed an unhealthy interest in who I am/might be etc etc get a grip woman!!


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Indeependent said:
> ...



Babble , burble , broohaha , balderdash, ballyhoo it's only talk


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



My bot isn't for sale and even if it was you haven't the money to buy it


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Indeependent said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


Carry on with your comedy.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Recall what I am saying. I said how is the border between North and South Korea being defined ? At present it is the armistice line isn't it ? If ever there was a peace treaty between the two that would be the line that would most likely be agreed as the border

North and South Vietnam. What served as the border for the years the country wasn't unified ?

Leste Timor. Who carried out the necessary negotiations and oversaw the referendum that assured self determination and an end to Indonesian/Portuguese involvement/occuaption , the UN and they used the old border as their reference point. Eitherway they played the crucial role in establishing East Timor as a UN state with the people enjoying authentic self determination.

I am not saying the border between Israel and Jordan is the green line , I am saying that myself and many others ,including many international law experts , class the green line as the border between Israel and Palestine


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


Subjective.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Subjective.



But still a whole lot more objective than your own commentary


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Subjective.
> ...


You have no context from which to have an opinion.


----------



## Indeependent (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Subjective.
> ...


You went from everything you post is hard fact to admitting everything you have posted is opinion.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> I am not saying the border between Israel and Jordan is the green line , I am saying that myself and many others ,including many international law experts , class the green line as the border between Israel and Palestine



Yes, I am aware that they do so. They are absolutely wrong.  You can not just impose borders on a sovereign nation at a say-so.  International law does not work that way. It especially does not work that way when the Line in question is prohibited from being a border.  International law is predicated on treaties and agreements between sovereigns and, more recently and still unsettled in international law, peoples represented by sovereigns. You can't just throw that out because ... Israel, shrug.

"International law experts" don't have the right to impose an arbitrary line within Israel beyond which Israelis "shall not pass!"  It is an egregious breach of the principles of sovereignty and international law.  And it is applied only to Israel.


----------



## Shusha (Jan 31, 2020)

And its especially egregious to then accuse Israel of committing "war crimes" by crossing this "border" which can not legally be a border.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > And the LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED WAS??????  And the next SCHEDULED ONE IS ?????
> ...



But you just took a victory lap without TELLING ME -- when was the LAST ELECTION?? WHEN IS THE NEXT ONE SCHEDULED???  And then freaked out about how it's all ISRAELS fault that they are divided.. 

You don't get it.. Doubt you ever will because you seem to have ZERO interest in analyzing the failures to achieve peace in the past.. And your image of the West B and Palestinians is too "impressionist" and not a real depiction of what their culture and traditions and political preferences are... 

So I doubt there's much to be acheived here if you just COMMAND that there WILL BE ELECTIONS, but have no fucking idea why forcing previous national elections on Palestinians is a VERY bad idea.... So have fun brawling and quoting 30 year old UN resolutions and such.. 

I'm gonna work on fixing the problem.. To that end -- I'm actually making a difference.. Just not on USMB with folks like you who dont have enough intellectual curiosity....


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

flacaltenn said:


> But you just took a victory lap without TELLING ME -- when was the LAST ELECTION?? WHEN IS THE NEXT ONE SCHEDULED???  And then freaked out about how it's all ISRAELS fault that they are divided..
> 
> You don't get it.. Doubt you ever will because you seem to have ZERO interest in analyzing the failures to achieve peace in the past.. And your image of the West B and Palestinians is too "impressionist" and not a real depiction of what their culture and traditions and political preferences are...
> 
> ...



There was no " victory lap " just an accurate account of how the divide and conquer technique is being applied to the Palestinian side . If you don't understand how the PA and Hamas are played against eachother and elections/the political system are interferred with you are really going to struggle understanding what is going on and how it is being manipulated to create the situation where there is no unified Palestinian national unity with which the negotiations can take place while the facts on the ground dictate the inevitable outcome seperately from any political dialogue.

I am happy to discuss the failure of past negotiations , no problem and have a wish to play a part in the discussion of how the conflict can be resolved.You seem to want out whilst flinging a load of assumptions and ad hominems around but think you alone are capable of intellectual curiousity.

A national unity government is CRUCIAL for the Palestinian side but a DISASTER to the Israeli side and if you don't understand how that is achieved and the status quo maintained you will not ,imo , have the necessary information to even attempt to play a role in a conflict resolution debate


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Yes, I am aware that they do so. They are absolutely wrong.  You can not just impose borders on a sovereign nation at a say-so.  International law does not work that way. It especially does not work that way when the Line in question is prohibited from being a border.  International law is predicated on treaties and agreements between sovereigns and, more recently and still unsettled in international law, peoples represented by sovereigns. You can't just throw that out because ... Israel, shrug.



You are wrong. Chapter 7 UN Charter states that any breach of an international agreement that threatens the peace is a violation of the law. Israel's attack on Egypt was the initial violation that led to the 67 war and you know it is. That's why UNSC 242 was unanimously accepted and it states that Israel should withdraw from the territories it has occupied 



> "International law experts" don't have the right to impose an arbitrary line within Israel beyond which Israelis "shall not pass!"  It is an egregious breach of the principles of sovereignty and international law.  And it is applied only to Israel.



They understand the laws mentioned above and have applied it to various conflicts not just Israel. Israel agreed not to pass the armistice line and then decided to violate that agreement and thus found itself in breach of the relevant section of the UN Charter it had also agreed to adhere to.

You just want special dispensation for Israel to violate agreements it has agreed to be bound by and if any challenge it you play the Jew card and it's pathetic


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Indeependent said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



So you are a troll as well as the forum clown. No worries have fun talking to yourself from now on


----------



## Shusha (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I am aware that they do so. They are absolutely wrong.  You can not just impose borders on a sovereign nation at a say-so.  International law does not work that way. It especially does not work that way when the Line in question is prohibited from being a border.  International law is predicated on treaties and agreements between sovereigns and, more recently and still unsettled in international law, peoples represented by sovereigns. You can't just throw that out because ... Israel, shrug.
> ...



You are conflating different issues in order to avoid the inevitable truth.  We are not discussing violations of the Armistice (though we could, because you are wrong on that too).  We are discussing how Israel's sovereignty is being taken away by having a Line which is prohibited from being a border being treated as a border for the express purpose of limiting Israel's rights, claims and positions and accusing Israel of "war crimes".  Its an egregious double standard applied only to Israel.


----------



## RoccoR (Jan 31, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→  Spartacactcus, et al,

Well, this is what we call in mathematics:  "Poor Notation"



Spartacactcus said:


> Really ?
> 
> How is the border of North and South Korea being defined ?
> 
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

✪  The Korean Conflict has not ended.  The Conflict is in a perpetual  ceasefire (cessation of hostilities) along the Armistice Lines; administratively maintained by the established the UN Military Armistice Commission.  While we refer to the Armistice Line as a Border, but it is not a true Border.  It is generall assumed that the Armistice Line will be managed under • Paragraph 1(1)(5) • *A/RES/26/2625 (XXV)* • as general demarcation roughly along the 38th Parallel. 

✪   The Iron Curtain _(ie of which the East Germany and West German segment)_ was established by the Allied Powers under the authority of the military governments of the Western occupying powers _(France, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States)_ separating the "Soviet Occupation Zone of Germany" from the adjacent Allied Occupation Zones _[British Army of the Rhine (BOAR) and the US Army Occupation Force]. _  It was dissolved 1989 when the Soviets Occupation Force and the East German Border Guards  collapsed as a functioning organization.  Ther German reunification Plan was activated on 1990  Article 23 in the Basic Law of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG).

✪  The Vietnamese Demiliterized Zone was also a demarcation that collapsed after the US withdrawal.  The a separation along the 17th Parallel at the end of the Indochina War.  It was also similar in nature to the to an Armistice Line. 

✪ For instance - the permanent boundary between Australia and East Timor for the first time, and set down a formula for sharing billions of dollars in future oil and gas revenues from the Timor Sea.​
The character of boundaries and demarcations are a thing of their own.  There is no one single set of protocols that govern the establishment of demarcations.

The Green Line, which outlined the separation between occupation forces _(Israeli, Jordanian, Egyptian)_ dissolved and is only a historical demarcation.   It remained in force until the peaceful settlement between the Parties was established _(the Peace Treaties)_. 

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > However Israel  never started started or waged war against any nation except in its own defense, so it has broken no treaties however much you want it to.
> ...


The only thing  you have shown is that your anti semitism is so passionate that you cannot understand the very documents you cite.  No reasonable person would claim that Israel violated the UN Charter or 242 or the Geneva Conventions.


----------



## Hollie (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I am aware that they do so. They are absolutely wrong.  You can not just impose borders on a sovereign nation at a say-so.  International law does not work that way. It especially does not work that way when the Line in question is prohibited from being a border.  International law is predicated on treaties and agreements between sovereigns and, more recently and still unsettled in international law, peoples represented by sovereigns. You can't just throw that out because ... Israel, shrug.
> ...


It's naive, (maybe deliberate), to suggest that the Israeli attack aimed the Egyptians was an "initial violation". Had you researched the matter, you would have learned that there were Arab provocations that lead to the Israeli actions. The Egyptians had blocked the Strait of Tiran (to be considered an act of war), while a week earlier Nasser had ordered the removal of the peace keeping force. As the Egyptians were massing troops and artillery near their border, those actions were a strategic preparation for war.   

As to UN opinions, we're left to understand that such opinions have no effective force of law as those opinions have no effective means of enforcement.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > lol  Actually it was you who tried to play the "Jew card" by talking about the fact that an ICJ judge who ruled against Israel was Jewish.
> ...


lol  There was no reason for you to talk about the fact that a judge who agreed with the ICJ advisory opinion on the barrier was Jewish or that his parents had survived the Holocaust other than to make an emotional plea to condemn Israel.  As bizarre as it sounds, a rabid anti semite like you has played the "Jew card" in order to condemn Jews.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> There was no " victory lap " just an accurate account of how the divide and conquer technique is being applied to the Palestinian side . If you don't understand how the PA and Hamas are played against eachother



Since you don't KNOW or don't CARE about the date of the last election, I doubt we could discuss with your lack of interest and effort... You go READ about the hostile standoff between Hamas in Gaza and PA and come back here WITH EXAMPLES of how the assassinations and all the FAILED compromise peace treaties between those parties are ALL ISRAEL'S fault and we can chat.. 

MAKING that assertion leads me to believe you haven't been following this whole affair with as much effort as I have... 

I could give a dozen links to the REAL AND DEEP divisions that are there, but in cases like this, the ignorance is only healed when the party makes their OWN effort to understand background and context.. 

Israel  could not be the primary instigator in keeping these parties from loving one another...


----------



## Shusha (Jan 31, 2020)

Hollie said:


> As the Egyptians were massing troops and artillery near their border, those actions were a strategic preparation for war.



And not just Egypt, with the mutual defense pacts in the Arab world, Jordanian and Iraqi forces were also being massed at the Jordan border.  This is a violation of the Armistice Agreement, which states:

_No aggressive action by the armed forces—land, sea, or air—of either Party shall be undertaken, *planned, or threatened* against the people armed forces of the other. _(emphasis mine).

Edited to add:  Not to mention exceeding the permitted defensive forces at the border is also a violation.  

Israeli response to this violation of the Armistice, is just that.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



 I don't see how Israeli violation of the treaty it signed with the Arabs is anything but a violation of Chapter 7 UN Charter as used to justify the UNSC 242. It's not denying Israels right it is trying to defend Palestinian rights that also have their roots in the treaties/agreements you cite to justify Israeli actions and policies.

You don't even have to be on your own territory to be found guilty of commiting war crimes. Those that accused Israel of war crimes also accused the Palestinian side of committing them but you want to ignore that because it stops your use of the Jew card doesn't it ?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> The only thing  you have shown is that your anti semitism is so passionate that you cannot understand the very documents you cite.  No reasonable person would claim that Israel violated the UN Charter or 242 or the Geneva Conventions.



UNSC 242 cites the 4th GC and the UN Charter as the reason Israel was deemed to have violated international law. It is yourself that cannot understan the document for the very reason you are trying to project onto me , complete bias


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> ✪  The Korean Conflict has not ended.  The Conflict is in a perpetual  ceasefire (cessation of hostilities) along the Armistice Lines; administratively maintained by the established the UN Military Armistice Commission.  While we refer to the Armistice Line as a Border, but it is not a true Border.  It is generall assumed that the Armistice Line will be managed under • Paragraph 1(1)(5) • *A/RES/26/2625 (XXV)* • as general demarcation roughly along the 38th Parallel.
> 
> ...



I agree that demarcation lines serve as temporary borders until either conflicts end or circumstances demand.

So all of the above are not counter arguments to what I have said imo , just a more detailed explanation

So to the green line. The Israelis , Jordanians and Egyptians can all agree to settle their differences along lines they agree to but they cannot , imo , decide what the borders of the Palestinan state can be. That's why I wish the US would just stop blocking a resolution of it at the UNGA with its veto power that is solely preventing negotiations between all parties and the UN in accordance with international law


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > The only thing  you have shown is that your anti semitism is so passionate that you cannot understand the very documents you cite.  No reasonable person would claim that Israel violated the UN Charter or 242 or the Geneva Conventions.
> ...


UNSC does not claim Israel violated international law.  It simply calls upon the nations that fought the Six Day War to come to a peace agreement and only calls upon Israel to withdraw to safe and secure borders, which would be impossible unless the Arabs agreed to peace, which they famously refused to do.  If you mind were not so consumed by hate, you would know that the land for peace formula that is the basis of 242 was presented to the SC by the US on behalf of Israel.  The fact that Israel immediately offered to return tot he warring Arab nations the land it had captured in driving their armies from Israel's borders, shows conclusively, to any reasonable person, that Israel had no territorial motives in fighting these war.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

Hollie said:


> It's naive, (maybe deliberate), to suggest that the Israeli attack aimed the Egyptians was an "initial violation". Had you researched the matter, you would have learned that there were Arab provocations that lead to the Israeli actions. The Egyptians had blocked the Strait of Tiran (to be considered an act of war), while a week earlier Nasser had ordered the removal of the peace keeping force. As the Egyptians were massing troops and artillery near their border, those actions were a strategic preparation for war.
> 
> As to UN opinions, we're left to understand that such opinions have no effective force of law as those opinions have no effective means of enforcement.



I have already researched the events up to and including the six day war so you assumption that I am ignorant of it is a false one. The reason Nasser decided to mass forces near the Israeli border was down to the fact that the Russians had told the Egyptians that Israel was massing troops near the Syrian border and planned to attack it. Egypt was in a mutual defence pact with Syria and Jordan so.

Do you want me to cite a whole host of quotes from the Israeli leadership/military of the time that will rubbish your claims about the lead up and prosecution of the six day war ?

That Moshe Dayan admitted that around 80% of the border skirmshes with Syria prior to the war and were a cause of the rising tensions were initiated by Israelis ? 
That the Israelis had sought a green light from the US for the attack and had been told that if they attacked they would whoop all the Arabs in next to no time ?

That according to the UN observer of the Straits the blockade wasn't even being enforced ?

My guess is you will have the Israeli propaganda systems rewriting of the history after the event  , also admitted by a top Israeli of the time so if you want to go for it feel free but don't expect an easy ride of it


----------



## Spartacactcus (Jan 31, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...



 What does UNSC res 242 claim as the reason for its issuance and it's insistance that Israel vacate the territories it had occupied ? I gave you the answers and you have chosen to drop their inclusion. You are nothing but an obvious troll


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > *(COMMENT)*
> ...


Still more ignorant bigotry from you.  No one has a veto in the UNGA and since the UNSC is limited by the UN Charter to only dealing with issues among member states except for issue like genocide, no resolution passed by the UNSC concerning the Israel-Palestinian conflict can be binding on any member state.  
The resolution Abbas will seek from the UNSC will have only propaganda value.


----------



## Hollie (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's naive, (maybe deliberate), to suggest that the Israeli attack aimed the Egyptians was an "initial violation". Had you researched the matter, you would have learned that there were Arab provocations that lead to the Israeli actions. The Egyptians had blocked the Strait of Tiran (to be considered an act of war), while a week earlier Nasser had ordered the removal of the peace keeping force. As the Egyptians were massing troops and artillery near their border, those actions were a strategic preparation for war.
> ...



That was quite an impassioned rant but it changes nothing related to the Egyptian preparations for war or facts of the Egyptian announcement to blockade the Strait, Nasser’s removal of the peacekeeping force and the massing of Egyptian troops. 

All of the above was in the context of the Arab-Moslem refusal to accept a Jewish State in an Islamist waqf. With the history of Arab-Moslem intentions to drive the Jews into the sea by machine gun fire, the IsraelI government would have foolish not to understand the intentions and strategic maneuvering by the Egyptians.


----------



## Hollie (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > *(COMMENT)*
> ...



You might be shocked to discover that the Israelis, Jordanians and Egyptians have already agreed to lines that demarcate their borders. 

I’m not clear that Israel is going to extinguish its borders to accommodate the Hamas charter and its claim to the entirety of the land area of the State of Israel as an Islamist waqf.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Jan 31, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > It's naive, (maybe deliberate), to suggest that the Israeli attack aimed the Egyptians was an "initial violation". Had you researched the matter, you would have learned that there were Arab provocations that lead to the Israeli actions. The Egyptians had blocked the Strait of Tiran (to be considered an act of war), while a week earlier Nasser had ordered the removal of the peace keeping force. As the Egyptians were massing troops and artillery near their border, those actions were a strategic preparation for war.
> ...


I have also read that the Soviets misled Nasser into believing Israel was about to attack but regardless of the reason Nasser violated the armistice by removing the UN observers from the border and again by massing more troops than the armistice allowed on the border.  Under international law, a preemptive strike is legal and considered an act of defense but a preventive strike is not, meaning that if someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't have to wait for him to fire before you start defending yourself, but you cannot take his gun away to prevent him from someday pointing it at you, so despite  the fact that Israel struck first, in the Six Day War, Israel fought a defensive war under international law.


----------



## RoccoR (Jan 31, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Spartacactcus, et al,

This is a hard concept.  



Spartacactcus said:


> I agree that demarcation lines serve as temporary borders until either conflict end or circumstances demand.


*(COMMENT)*

All boundaries fall under the general heading of "demarcations."  Some permanent and some temporary.  Some are established to end hostilities and some are ceasefires. 



Spartacactcus said:


> So all of the above are not counter-arguments to what I have said IMO , just a more detailed explanation


*(COMMENT)*

The extrapolation of the information places any boundary claimed by the Arab Palestinians is questionable...  The one thing that damn near any demarcation line has is that they are agreed upon by the parties thereto.  What the treaties, that include the territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, have in common is that they are signed by the parties to the original conflict (Jordanians and Egyptian).  But on one representing the Arab Palestinians. 



Spartacactcus said:


> So to the green line. The Israelis, Jordanians, and Egyptians can all agree to settle their differences along lines they agree to but they cannot, IMO , decide what the borders of the Palestinian state can be.


*(COMMENT)*

No, the Arab Palestinians did not enter into any agreement that stipulated what the PLO Negotiation Department (NAD) claims is the boundary.

"The 1967 border, which is defined as the 1949 Armistice Line along with all legal modification thereto up to June 4th 1967,  is the internationally-recognized border between Israel and the occupied State of Palestine. A basic principle of international law is that no state may acquire territory by force. Israel has no valid claim to any part of the territory it occupied in 1967."​
The 1949 Armistice Lines (Green Line) are not borders.  



Spartacactcus said:


> That's why I wish the US would just stop blocking a resolution of it at the UNGA with its veto power that is solely preventing negotiations between all parties and the UN in accordance with international law


*(COMMENT)*

In general, the UN General Assembly Resolution does NOT constitute "international Law."  I cannot overemphasize this point.  The UN does NOT make law.

While the Charter is often considered "International Law, it really is a pledge that amounts to nations to abide by the same protocols.  This is similar to a Covenant.

The *Covenant* ( pacte ) of the League of Nations is believed to be the fi rst use of the term “Covenant” to describe a treaty, and probably owes its existence to the Presbyterian origin of President Woodrow Wilson . It has also been applied to the draft Covenant of Human Rights’: McNair , Law of Treaties (2nd ed.), 25. See also the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights ( 993 U.N.T.S. 3 ; see Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, International Covenant on ) and the International Covenant on Civiland Political Rights ( 999 U.N.T.S. 171 ; see Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on ) both of 16 December 1966 .​
*International law* may be defined as ‘The standard of conduct, at a given time for states and other entities subject thereto’: Whiteman , Digest of International Law (1963 ), Vol. 1, 1. Or as ‘the body of rules which are legally binding on states in their intercourse with each other … International organizations and, to some extent, also individuals may be subjects of rights conferred and duties imposed by international law’: ​
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## gtopa1 (Jan 31, 2020)

Many years ago I suggested that Israel take over the West Bank and Egypt take over Gaza. Any who weren't happy could go to Jordan; the original Palestinian Homeland. Arafat stuffed up Pals in Jordan and that option is out. Could it work?? Who knows? Worth the risk?? Probably not. 

Greg


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> It's not denying Israels right it is trying to defend Palestinian rights that also have their roots in the treaties/agreements you cite to justify Israeli actions and policies.



Actually, Arab Palestinians have no rights entrenched in the treaties and agreements.  They are not even mentioned.  (Which is not to say they have no rights, just that their rights do not arise from existing treaties and agreements).

But it is absolutely an infringement of Israeli rights to pretend an international border where there is none.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > The only thing  you have shown is that your anti semitism is so passionate that you cannot understand the very documents you cite.  No reasonable person would claim that Israel violated the UN Charter or 242 or the Geneva Conventions.
> ...



UNSC 242 was resolved in 1994 with the Jordan Israel Peace Treaty, in which Jordan abandoned all claims to the territory.  Whether you look at it as Israel occupying Jordan or Jordan occupying Israel (which is the correct legal way to look at it), the occupation ended with the Peace Treaty between the two Parties.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> but they cannot , imo , decide what the borders of the Palestinan state can be.



Oh.  Bingo!  There we go. 

Now.  Who CAN decide what the borders of a Palestinian State will be?


----------



## Ethos Logos Pathos (Feb 1, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?...




Same reason Netanyahu recently kicked all of the Negro (African) refugees out of Israel;

*Too darkskinned!*


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 1, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Can't you focus on the positive implications, and not the negative?



Our involvement in the Middle East HAS no positive implications.  We are spending trillions of dollars and thousands of lives playing hall monitor, mostly because the Zionists have the whole region in turmoil playing "God Loves Us the Very Best!".

We need to wash our hands of the whole region and spend our money on DOMESTIC energy production.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 1, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Can't you focus on the positive implications, and not the negative?
> ...



Rubbish! All of it.

Calm down.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 1, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > but they cannot , imo , decide what the borders of the Palestinan state can be.
> ...



None of this was even mentioned during the Jordanian occupation.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 1, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Can't you focus on the positive implications, and not the negative?
> ...



Your conspiracy theory about the Zionists (_*The Zionists*_™️) having the whole region in turmoil is silly. The Arab, Moslem, Persian tribes use the Zionists (_*The Zionists*_™️) as only one of many reasons to slam away at one-another.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Still more ignorant bigotry from you.  No one has a veto in the UNGA and since the UNSC is limited by the UN Charter to only dealing with issues among member states except for issue like genocide, no resolution passed by the UNSC concerning the Israel-Palestinian conflict can be binding on any member state.
> The resolution Abbas will seek from the UNSC will have only propaganda value.



The UNGA consensus is a dead letter because of the US veto in the UNSC where it would be going if it were allowed to. I might have phrased it awkwardly but your attempt to try to exploit it is aknowledged and ignored seeing as there are many many posts here where it is beyond doubt that I understand the only veto power lies in the security council and not just in the UNSC but limited only to the 5 permanent members

The UNSC has the right to use the full force of themselves and all other member states against any state within the UN itself. That's how it threatened force against Iraq in 2002 if it didn't disarm. They can force issues if there is a threat to international peace , read the Charter and admit you are talking rubbish

As ever you are talking complete nonsense from a position of ignorance


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 1, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ gtopa1, et al,

Yes, in the eyes of many, this is a viable alternative.  _("Israel take over the West Bank and Egypt take over Gaza")_

But_*!*_  Is it really_*?*_



gtopa1 said:


> Many years ago I suggested that Israel take over the West Bank and Egypt take over Gaza. Any who weren't happy could go to Jordan; the original Palestinian Homeland. Arafat stuffed up Pals in Jordan and that option is out. Could it work?? Who knows? Worth the risk?? Probably not.
> 
> Greg


*(COMMENT)*

Once Israel annexes "any territory" → it has committed itself to the acceptance and support of _(as full and absolute full citizenship)_ the "habitual" inhabitance → every single pair of boots on the ground.  That is one hell of a commitment given: 

West Bank and another 2 Million in the Gaza Strip.  This 4 Million people is a very significant number given that it represents 50% of Israels current population _[8,675,475 (includes populations of the Golan Heights or Golan Sub-District and also East Jerusalem, which was annexed by Israel after 1967) (July 2020 est.)]_. 
CIA Factbooks:  • Israel • • West Bank • • Gaza Strip •

Israel's Unemployment Rate .......................... ≈ . 7.3%
West Bank & Gaza Strip Unemployment Rate ≈ 46,9%

If Israel were to accept that responsibility included in the Annexation, that would increase the unemployment rate by nearly a factor of 7 (7 x 7 = 49 → 49 = 7²).  A huge influx.​
By extrapolation of the GDP ratio, you would expect to see that the West Bank and Gaza would be in and about 50% of that seen in Israel.  But that is not the case.  The difference in the GDPs you see a separation of 10 times or greater.  The GDP and the unemployment rate are indicators of self-abuse in the population of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Israeli GDP (purchasing power parity): 

$317.1 billion (2017 est.)
$307 billion (2016 est.)
$295.3 billion (2015 est.)​
West Bank GDP (purchasing power parity):  

$21.22 billion (2014 est.)
$20.15 billion (2013 est.)
$19.95 billion (2012 est.)​
GDP (official exchange rate):  

$2.938 billion (2014 est.)​
 These are just a couple of factors that Israel would have to contend with in a hostile environment in which the Arab Palestinian cannot see any improvements without their active cooperation and citizenry contributions in labor and productivity.   This is an inspiration set which is not present in the Arab Palestinian population and has not been in the population for more than a hundred years.  And there are many more thresholds which make the Annexation a very bad (wrong) decision.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

Hollie said:


> That was quite an impassioned rant but it changes nothing related to the Egyptian preparations for war or facts of the Egyptian announcement to blockade the Strait, Nasser’s removal of the peacekeeping force and the massing of Egyptian troops.
> 
> All of the above was in the context of the Arab-Moslem refusal to accept a Jewish State in an Islamist waqf. With the history of Arab-Moslem intentions to drive the Jews into the sea by machine gun fire, the IsraelI government would have foolish not to understand the intentions and strategic maneuvering by the Egyptians.



Actually it does change , significantly, what you claimed to be the case. That you choose to dismiss it doesn't come as a surprise either


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

Hollie said:


> You might be shocked to discover that the Israelis, Jordanians and Egyptians have already agreed to lines that demarcate their borders.
> 
> I’m not clear that Israel is going to extinguish its borders to accommodate the Hamas charter and its claim to the entirety of the land area of the State of Israel as an Islamist waqf.



Why would I be shocked seeing as I am fully aware of the above ?

So far all you have done is assume you know more about the subject than I do without even having the foggiest about what I know and/or don't know

So do you know what quotes were coming your way regarding the events of 1967 and who I would be quoting ?

Why don't you just try to discuss the matter without the arrogance to assume you know more ?


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 1, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Spartacactcus, et al,

Like many such dreams, the UN Charter is idealistic.  It may take another hundred years before the nations of the world come together as a force for peace. 



Spartacactcus said:


> ....
> They can force issues if there is a threat to international peace, read the Charter and admit you are talking rubbish
> 
> As ever you are talking complete nonsense from a position of ignorance


*(COMMENT)*

There are a number of unmentioned factors that come together and generate energy for a major conflict.  The least of which was the nature of the Charter.  The least of which was the ambiguous way in which Washington and Baghdad presented themselves.  And of course, the truth behind the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).  Much of the facts that Scott Ritter, former UNSCOM Inspector, were not given the consideration that should have been shown.  And the saga of Ambassador Joseph Wilson and CIA Officer Valerie _(Plame)_ Wilson and the boldness in which they challenged the pre-War Intelligence were only to be vindicated after the war and the discovery of Zero WMD.

Much of the synergy that perpetuates the Arab-Israeli Conflict is the self-destructive nature of the various adjacent Arab League members.  

The charters and covenants on peace and rights are only as valid as the people that follow the ideals.  The fact that such documents came into existance is only evidence that (at one time) the ideals existed once. 



_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> I have also read that the Soviets misled Nasser into believing Israel was about to attack but regardless of the reason Nasser violated the armistice by removing the UN observers from the border and again by massing more troops than the armistice allowed on the border.  Under international law, a preemptive strike is legal and considered an act of defense but a preventive strike is not, meaning that if someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't have to wait for him to fire before you start defending yourself, but you cannot take his gun away to prevent him from someday pointing it at you, so despite  the fact that Israel struck first, in the Six Day War, Israel fought a defensive war under international law.



Are you going for some sort of record for BS claims here ?

Quick on the heels of your BS claim that the UNSC/UN cannot force anything on a member state, we are subjected to a pre emptive strike being deemed legal by the UN Charter. The only time it is deemed legal is when the UN/UNSC have decided it is legal as per a threat to international peace as per the Iraq situation in 2002 etc. Your claim is ,oncemore , complete BS

So, admit that the UNSC/UN CAN intervene  ,including the use of force , against any member state of the UN or retract it for the nonsense it has shown itself to be.

Show where it states in the UN Charter that a unilateral attack , without UNSC authority is ever deemed to be legal under the UN Charter.

And we can add to the list that Nassers troop movement and/or its kicking out of the UNEF Peacekeepers was a violation of precisely zero . Recall why they were there in the first place ?

 Because Israel had attacked Egypt in 1956 in a real and clear violation of the 49 armistice demarcation line.

The UNEF were positioned entirely on the Egyptian side of the line because Israel refused to have them on their side. At the discretion and permission of the Egyptian govt we should add

So, the troop movements were on Egyptian sovereign territory and never violated the line drawn up in 1949 and their removal was legitimate.

How many BS claims are you actually going for here ?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are a number of unmentioned factors that come together and generate energy for a major conflict.  The least of which was the nature of the Charter.  The least of which was the ambiguous way in which Washington and Baghdad presented themselves.  And of course, the truth behind the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).  Much of the facts that Scott Ritter, former UNSCOM Inspector, were not given the consideration that should have been shown.  And the saga of Ambassador Joseph Wilson and CIA Officer Valerie _(Plame)_ Wilson and the boldness in which they challenged the pre-War Intelligence were only to be vindicated after the war and the discovery of Zero WMD.
> 
> ...


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > It's not denying Israels right it is trying to defend Palestinian rights that also have their roots in the treaties/agreements you cite to justify Israeli actions and policies.
> ...



Stop it !!

The Balfour declaration, which was included in the Mandate , recognizes the rights of the non Jewish citizens of Palestine and demands they be respected.

Your wish to endow all " treaties and agreements " rights onto Jews and none onto others is sadly instructive  and could be considered bigoted in and of itself


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> *(COMMENT)*
> 
> There are a number of unmentioned factors that come together and generate energy for a major conflict.  The least of which was the nature of the Charter.  The least of which was the ambiguous way in which Washington and Baghdad presented themselves.  And of course, the truth behind the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD).  Much of the facts that Scott Ritter, former UNSCOM Inspector, were not given the consideration that should have been shown.  And the saga of Ambassador Joseph Wilson and CIA Officer Valerie _(Plame)_ Wilson and the boldness in which they challenged the pre-War Intelligence were only to be vindicated after the war and the discovery of Zero WMD.
> 
> ...





You are one of the few here who actually discusses issues without the recourse to insult first and I fully respect that approach

I agree with you regarding the failures of and dubious uses of international law but recall what the UN Charter starts off with ?

The UN Charter starts with " we the people " , note , not " we the governments" of the world and that's why I would like to see more people being aware of the laws , because I think they are reasonable enough , and having the integrity to try to hold their own governments to account with regards to their abiding by them.

I agree it is an idealistic and naive suggestion but that HAS to be the point of departure for every caring citizen around the globe if we are ever going to reach that point you mentioned


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > but they cannot , imo , decide what the borders of the Palestinan state can be.
> ...



 The UN , ICJ ,  in conjunction with the Israeli and Palestinian leaderships


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



You just complimented Rocco on his ability to discuss the topics without personal insult.  Why don't you try to do the same?

Perhaps I was not clear enough, and so for that I apologize.  I am in NO WAY saying that Arab Palestinians have no human rights.  Of course they do.  And yes, civil and religious rights according to the Mandate documents.  

We are discussing the treaties and agreements with respect to sovereignty.  There is no sovereignty for Arab Palestinians in any of the documents we have been discussing.  (After Palestinian declaration of independence in 1988, with Oslo, this changes).  I am in NO WAY saying that Arab Palestinians have no rights to sovereignty and self-determination, they do.  Those rights do not arise from any of the documents we've been discussing thus far.

For clarity:  I support the full sovereignty and self-determination for BOTH the Jewish people and for the Arab Palestinian people and always have.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



Neither the UN nor the ICJ can determine the borders, though they may have influence to enforce the borders.  The only way to determine borders is a Peace Treaty or other agreement between the government of the State of Israel and the government of the State of Palestine.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus 

You seem to be suggesting that the UN should enforce something with respect to Israel/Arab conflict.  What do you want them to enforce and how do you think it will end the conflict?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...




How was UNSC resolved when it stated the inadmisibility of acquiring territory through warfare ? 

It never withdraw from the WB or the Golan and has served to annexe both

The Jordanian attempts at annexation of the WB / East Jerusalem were rejected and so have the Israeli ones by the UN


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



The first sentence appears contradictory

And the above is what I support and what I proposed when you asked the question


----------



## rylah (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > I have also read that the Soviets misled Nasser into believing Israel was about to attack but regardless of the reason Nasser violated the armistice by removing the UN observers from the border and again by massing more troops than the armistice allowed on the border.  Under international law, a preemptive strike is legal and considered an act of defense but a preventive strike is not, meaning that if someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't have to wait for him to fire before you start defending yourself, but you cannot take his gun away to prevent him from someday pointing it at you, so despite  the fact that Israel struck first, in the Six Day War, Israel fought a defensive war under international law.
> ...



Ridiculous misinformation.
The Suez Canal war wasn't poor Arabs reacting to Israel attack,
that demarcation was violated for months by that time, with the Arab govts sending Fadayeen incursions.

How much more can your revisionism be detached?


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> How was UNSC resolved when it stated the inadmisibility of acquiring territory through warfare ?
> 
> It never withdraw from the WB or the Golan and has served to annexe both
> 
> The Jordanian attempts at annexation of the WB / East Jerusalem were rejected and so have the Israeli ones by the UN



UNSC 242 was a call to end belligerency and respect the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their rights to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries without threat or use of force.  

The belligerency by all States has come to an end, the boundaries have been recognized and all material and territorial matters between the States have been settled.  There is nothing in 242 which is still relevant.  Thus, its resolved.  

You continue to miss the claim Israel is making.  She is ALREADY sovereign in the territory.  Thus, she is not annexing anything.  She is applying sovereignty to her own territory.  (With exception to Golan Heights which is a separate matter).


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



The first sentence is not contradictory.  There is a difference between create and enforce.  

The important question on the table between us is whether or not a border between Israel and Palestine has already been created.  Has it?  If so, how?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus
> 
> You seem to be suggesting that the UN should enforce something with respect to Israel/Arab conflict.  What do you want them to enforce and how do you think it will end the conflict?



As the body responsible , allegedly , for the maintenance of international peace and security it is wholly reasonable imo to wish to see the UN/ ICJ and the relevant parties coming together to end/resolveto the conflict .

IMO the reps/lawyers of all three should first thrash out the appropriate framework for the negotiations and then facilitate and oversee those negotiations with the UN , in case of stalemate , having the capacity to enforce a just resolution of the conflict based on international law and pragmatic considerations on both parties


----------



## Death Angel (Feb 1, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?


They are not Israelis. They are enemies of israel


----------



## rylah (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



On the top of it, two words - 'defensive war'.

But in more depth, article 80 of The UN charter: "No right gained by a country through a mandate will expire as a result of the expiration of the mandate." This is further supported by article 70(1)(b) of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Basically the UN cannot vary treaties it inherited from the League of Nations, and constitutionally bound by, that vest sovereignty over the land in the Jewish Nation.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> ...in case of stalemate , having the capacity to enforce a just resolution of the conflict based on international law and pragmatic considerations on both parties



To be clear, are you suggesting the UN should have its powers greatly increased by being able to force States into binding agreements?  That is a violation of the very underpinnings of conventional and customary international law, whose principle is one of voluntary agreements, freely entered into by States recognized as equal and self-determining.  

How would you suggest such a system work?  Specifically, how would you temper large voting blocs in the UN from enforcing their will on other States?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 1, 2020)

Shusha said:


> The first sentence is not contradictory.  There is a difference between create and enforce.



If you see the UN as being able to enforce a border that is the de facto recognition than they can also determine that border , so the original comment is contradictory

[/quote]



> The important question on the table between us is whether or not a border between Israel and Palestine has already been created.  Has it?  If so, how?



I see the green line as the enforceable  border between the state of Palestine and the state of Israel but feel that this should only serve as the guide irrespective of past lines/historical lines/agreements etc etc. The two sides should be forced to use these as the point of departure for negotiations and both sides should be entitled to a VIABLE state at the end of it


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> If you see the UN as being able to enforce a border that is the de facto recognition than they can also determine that border , so the original comment is contradictory


No, it is not.  There is a difference between creating a border and enforcing an existing, legal border.  By creating a border in violation of Treaty Agreements, you are 1. undermining the entire idea of Treaties being binding documents and 2. stripping sovereignty from existing States.



> I see the green line as the enforceable  border between the state of Palestine and the state of Israel


Yes, I know you see this.  And while it may have practical applications, it would be ILLEGAL to enforce such a border.  See above.  It undermines the entire foundation of binding Treaties and strips both Israel and Palestine of their sovereign right to negotiate and make a Treaty.



> both sides should be entitled to a VIABLE state at the end of it


We agree.  On a practical note, the Green Line as an international boundary will not be VIABLE for Israel.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > That was quite an impassioned rant but it changes nothing related to the Egyptian preparations for war or facts of the Egyptian announcement to blockade the Strait, Nasser’s removal of the peacekeeping force and the massing of Egyptian troops.
> ...



Actually, there was nothing in your comment to support what you claim. The Egyptian preparations for war were clear. The intended blockade of the Strait was defined by Israel as an act of war and that act was carried out with the blockade and claimed mining of the waterway by the Egyptians.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 1, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > ...in case of stalemate , having the capacity to enforce a just resolution of the conflict based on international law and pragmatic considerations on both parties
> ...



It’s both impractical and undesirable to have the all-knowing, all-seeing UN as a global law making body. There would be a requirement then for an enforcement arm of the UN. 

The idea largely dismantles the notion of autonomous nations with the UN as some kind of global police force, judge and jury.


----------



## ph3iron (Feb 1, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> It is a terrible idea for Israel.  They would just end up being the next Lebanon.
> 
> Lebanon was formed as the Christian country of the Middle east, and despite the precautions set into place to try to protect that, Muslims simply bred themselves into a position of dominance and the country has suffered.  Beirut was called the Paris of the middle east when I was young, but now it is just another Islamic shit hole.
> 
> Jewish Israelis are fooling themselves if they don't understand the same thing will happen to them as happened to the Lebanese Christians. Within a generation or two they would be a persecuted minority.



An absolute hoot.
The Palestinians had been there for 2000 years and supported us in wwii.
Rothschild and his money created Israel.
It’s been like apartheid SA ever since.
Now they are stealing more Palestinian lands and expect the Ps to agree?
i hear god gave the uk to the romans 2000 years ago and now the brits areclaiming ownership?


----------



## Mindful (Feb 1, 2020)

ph3iron said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > It is a terrible idea for Israel.  They would just end up being the next Lebanon.
> ...



This _is _standup at the Apollo, is it not?


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Still more ignorant bigotry from you.  No one has a veto in the UNGA and since the UNSC is limited by the UN Charter to only dealing with issues among member states except for issue like genocide, no resolution passed by the UNSC concerning the Israel-Palestinian conflict can be binding on any member state.
> ...


It is gratifying to see I've been able to help you to understand no one has a veto in the UNGA, but clearly there are many other issues you still need help to understand.  Most importantly, you seem to think the UN is a world government; it is not.  The UN is a treaty organization that was formed primarily to prevent another WW.  A WW would require the participation of the major military powers which is why the main allies from WWII and later China were given veto power.  The UNGA is responsible for internal matters of the UN and the UNSC deals with issues between member countries and issues that rise to the level of genocide.  

The first Gulf war was between Iraq and Kuwait, so the UNSC had the authority to intervene,The UN never threatened military force against Iraq in 2003 and the UN has no military force of its own to speak of.  Furthermore, the UN has no authority for compel member states to provide military forces.  The UN has no effective military force at all unless the US chooses to provide it.  If you didn't limit your reading to anti semitic propaganda sites, you would know  this.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > I have also read that the Soviets misled Nasser into believing Israel was about to attack but regardless of the reason Nasser violated the armistice by removing the UN observers from the border and again by massing more troops than the armistice allowed on the border.  Under international law, a preemptive strike is legal and considered an act of defense but a preventive strike is not, meaning that if someone is pointing a gun at you, you don't have to wait for him to fire before you start defending yourself, but you cannot take his gun away to prevent him from someday pointing it at you, so despite  the fact that Israel struck first, in the Six Day War, Israel fought a defensive war under international law.
> ...


The authority of the UNSC is strictly limited to relations between member states and acts that rise to the levels of genocide.  Your confusion continues to stem from the belief that the UN is a world government and not merely a treaty organization with very limited jurisdiction.  While the UNSC may authorize military action against a member state because of an act of aggression by a member state against another member state, it cannot compel member states to provide military force, and that determination of aggression is always made after the act has already occured, not before as you erroneously claimed.  If you were capable of rational thought, you would realize no nation would want to be a member of the UN if it meant it waiting for a UNSC debate to determine if it could take action against an imminent threat before taking action.  Your bizarre argument that if someone is pointing a gun at you you must wait until he shoots before taking action betrays the alarming extent of your ability to think rationally.  

Your argument that Egypt is allowed to violate the armistice agreement after arguing that is not brings into question our mental health.  Surely this is the result of some serious mental deficit on your part.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 1, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...


Israel did not acquire land through warfare.  Immediately after the Six Day War, Israel offered to return the land it had captured while  pursuing Arab armies in exchange for peace.  242 only required Israel withdraw to safe and secure borders, not to the pre war border, and safe and secure borders means either a credible peace or keeping some of the captured land as a buffer zone since Israel has no strategic depth to protect it against an attack. 

So Israel returned the Sinai to Egypt but only on condition that Egypt severely restrict the military forces it stationed in Sinai.  Judea adn Samaria did not fall under the terms of 242, nonetheless Israel offered to turn over to the PA 93% of Judea and Samaria but only with conditions that would protect Israel from continuing Palestinian terrorist attacks and against a military force that might come through Jordan and Judea and Samaria.  The Palestinians responded with the second intifada.  For at least the last thirty years every Israeli PM, including Netanyahu, has been in negotiations with Syria offering to return the Golan in exchange for peace, but Syria has rejected all offers, which by any reasonable standard means Syria has abandoned its claim to the Golan.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 1, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> For at least the last thirty years every Israeli PM, including Netanyahu, has been in negotiations with Syria offering to return the Golan in exchange for peace, but Syria has rejected all offers, which by any reasonable standard means Syria has abandoned its claim to the Golan.



THIS is a very very interesting concept which I had not thought of.  At what point does a refusal to take up the mantle of self-determination and control over territory and peaceful agreements with your neighbors constitute a rejection of those rights?  

Could one make a legal argument that the rejection of self-determination by one Party is a valid choice which releases other claimants from their responsibilities to continue to advance self-determination for that Party?

If Palestine continues to reject self-determination, is Israel obligated to withhold her own claim over the territory and physically and militarily hold territory in limbo for an eventual Palestine?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Your conspiracy theory about the Zionists (_*The Zionists*_™️) having the whole region in turmoil is silly. The Arab, Moslem, Persian tribes use the Zionists (_*The Zionists*_™️) as only one of many reasons to slam away at one-another.



It's not a conspiracy when they do it pretty much in the open.  

Again, why is this our problem again?


----------



## Mindful (Feb 2, 2020)

Israel-hating dumbassery of the day:

In a now-deleted tweet, an Israel hater points out what he calls an “absurdity” of Trump’s peace plan





You can’t make this stuff, alright. I guess the hater did not get the memo: Israel _is _mostly desert.

It of course didn’t stop the Jews from “making the desert bloom” using our ingenuity to invent things like drip irrigation. Then again, we weren’t expecting everything to be given to us on a silver platter.

Israel-Hating Dumbassery of the Day


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2020)

Mindful said:


> It of course didn’t stop the Jews from “making the desert bloom” using our ingenuity to invent things like drip irrigation. Then again, we weren’t expecting everything to be given to us on a silver platter.



You did nothing of the sort.  That region has been known as the "Fertile Crescent" since ancient times... You didn't make the desert bloom, you just stole someone else's land.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 2, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > It of course didn’t stop the Jews from “making the desert bloom” using our ingenuity to invent things like drip irrigation. Then again, we weren’t expecting everything to be given to us on a silver platter.
> ...


----------



## rylah (Feb 2, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > It of course didn’t stop the Jews from “making the desert bloom” using our ingenuity to invent things like drip irrigation. Then again, we weren’t expecting everything to be given to us on a silver platter.
> ...



Was it why this the was most neglected and impoverished of lands under the Caliphate rule?

The Fertile Crescent, by the way, is not associated with the Arabs, neither were they those who made the region actually the fertile nest of civilization.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 2, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > It of course didn’t stop the Jews from “making the desert bloom” using our ingenuity to invent things like drip irrigation. Then again, we weren’t expecting everything to be given to us on a silver platter.
> ...



He we have the stereotypical *Stolen Land*™️ slogan barfed out by the slogan’istas. There’s just never any actual facts to identify what land was “stolen”.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

rylah said:


> Ridiculous misinformation.
> The Suez Canal war wasn't poor Arabs reacting to Israel attack,
> that demarcation was violated for months by that time, with the Arab govts sending Fadayeen incursions.
> 
> How much more can your revisionism be detached?



No it wasn't, you people just cannot ever admit that Israelis also start wars and engaged in border/demarcation line violations. For sure there were MINOR violations by BOTH SIDES prior to the Israeli invasion of Egypt in 1956 but to try to make out that they are a justification for the invasion of an entire country just about sums up the Israeli mentality and propensity to kill and and cry that they were forced into it. Ongoing

The people who were responsible were/are far more honest about this than the people on this board including yourself ,so to be claiming " revisionism " is just a pathetic ruse imo

Here's a letter from the UN archives that supports what Moshe Dayan admitted years later about Israeli forces initiating around 80% of the border skirmishes with Syria



			
				UN said:
			
		

> 6.    The aggressive policy of Israel with respect to the demilitarized zone is clearly indicated by the fact that Israel has committed no less than 259 aggressive acts in the said zone since 1 January 1960, regarding which the United Arab Republic Government has submitted complaints to the Israel-Syrian Mixed Armistice Commission.



Israeli violation of Syria/Israel Armistice Agreement - Letter from UAR - Question of Palestine

So now that we have found out who is actually engaging in the revisionism here some points

How did Nassers movement of troops in the Sinai , Egyptian sovereign territory btw , " violate " the armistice line ?

And, isn't it true that the UNEF were on the Egyptian side of the line at the invitation of the Egyptian government after Israel had refused them any access to their own territory ?

The were no troop movement violations of the 49 armistice agreement by Nasser and he had every right to ask the UNEF to leave. So the poster I was responding to was just plain wrong and your jumping in with accusations of revisionism after engaging in it yourself changed nothing and wasn't even a response worthy of reply imo[/quote]


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > ...in case of stalemate , having the capacity to enforce a just resolution of the conflict based on international law and pragmatic considerations on both parties
> ...



They already have the power to take actions including the use of force against any member state and that's what I was referring to , so no new powers are required.They don't have to be forced into it but refusal to cooperate in the spirit of good faith negotiations could and should bring into play the very mechanisms some other states have had to endure for their violations. You don't get away with it just because you are the Jewish state and that's what you people really do believe should be the case imo

The UN could choose to impose sanctions , embargoes , the use of peace keeping forces. To think pariah states are ever going to be dealt with without some consequences for their lawbreaking and/or unwillingness to commit to peace agreements in a reasonable way should have consequences and do have consequences. Even when it's the Jewish state , shock horror!!


----------



## rylah (Feb 2, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Ridiculous misinformation.
> ...


[/QUOTE]

By sending Fadayeen fighters beyond that line to massacre Israelis.
Can't you read your own links?

Maybe that's why you rely so much on cheap demagoguery.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Feb 2, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...



You mean Judea and Samaria? There is a proposal on the table, and a damned good one.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Feb 2, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Wait.  Why?
> 
> How would Israel benefit from this?



Nothing Coyote supports would benefit Jews or Israel, quite the opposite.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> The authority of the UNSC is strictly limited to relations between member states and acts that rise to the levels of genocide.  Your confusion continues to stem from the belief that the UN is a world government and not merely a treaty organization with very limited jurisdiction.  While the UNSC may authorize military action against a member state because of an act of aggression by a member state against another member state, it cannot compel member states to provide military force, and that determination of aggression is always made after the act has already occured, not before as you erroneously claimed.  If you were capable of rational thought, you would realize no nation would want to be a member of the UN if it meant it waiting for a UNSC debate to determine if it could take action against an imminent threat before taking action.  Your bizarre argument that if someone is pointing a gun at you you must wait until he shoots before taking action betrays the alarming extent of your ability to think rationally.
> 
> Your argument that Egypt is allowed to violate the armistice agreement after arguing that is not brings into question our mental health.  Surely this is the result of some serious mental deficit on your part.



You're such a dishonest BS artist and troll

Your claims outstanding without the strawmen in the above

The UN Charter permits a member state to attack another member state that it feels poses an imminent threat without UNSC approval, without an armed attack having taken place and doesn't count that attack as a violation after the event. That's BS and clearly BS. That you expect anyone to believe that tells me it is your own mental ability that is lacking.

Nassers removal of the UNEF in the Sinai breached the armistice agreement. BS


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

rylah said:


> By sending Fadayeen fighters beyond that line to massacre Israelis.
> Can't you read your own links?
> 
> Maybe that's why you rely so much on cheap demagoguery.



I already stated that both sides were guilty of violating the line and have shown , from two different sources , the UN and Moshe Dayan , that the Israelis violated more than anyone else.

I showed the UN evidence of attacks ( " aggression " ) by Israelis and the fact the Israeli claims about Arab forces were shown to be false and also that they never even bothered to attend the meetings themselves

You want people to believe the BS / lie that the opposite was true and have provided precisely zilch to back it yet here you are trying to criticize others lol


----------



## rylah (Feb 2, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > By sending Fadayeen fighters beyond that line to massacre Israelis.
> ...



No you just say that, but your own links show otherwise,
nowhere you brought a comparison including these facts.

Cheap demagoguery.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Actually, there was nothing in your comment to support what you claim. The Egyptian preparations for war were clear. The intended blockade of the Strait was defined by Israel as an act of war and that act was carried out with the blockade and claimed mining of the waterway by the Egyptians.



Why wouldn't Egypt prepare for a war in the face on an impending attack against another Arab state by Israel to which it was in a mutual defence pact ?

That state was Syria of which none other than Moshe Dayan has since claimed that the Israeli side were responsible for initiating around 80% of the border skirmishes with Syria that led to the tension prior to the movement of Egyptian troops.

The Israelis might have claimed the closure of the Straits of Tiran constituted an at of war but the right of passage in the law only refers to right of " innocent " passage. No country has the legal right to use the waterways of another country it is threatening or intends to attack, so the seizure/searching of vessels by the navy of a country within its territorial waters is wholly reasonable.

I could show you a whole raft of other data that undermines the claim that the leaders of the state of Israel thought the Egyptian preparations were not indicative of an impending attack but you have already made your mind up , clearly. It's those pesky Arabs , it's always those pesky Arabs.

That bigotry was never reasoned in so will not be reasoned out


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

rylah said:


> Spartacactcus said:
> 
> 
> > rylah said:
> ...



I have supplied one link on this and that is from the UN. I can supply a link to the Moshe Dayan comments about Israel initiating around 80% of the border skirmishes with Syria prior to the 67 war.

You have provided FA and have lied about the one link I supplied

Try again and show where the UN link doesn't state what I claimed it stated or just admit you are making it up as you go along . Spouting " foul " because you don't like the content is pathetic and not even worthy of the term discussion


----------



## rylah (Feb 2, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > Spartacactcus said:
> ...



No I get it, you think the "UN" is a word that magically turns your bs into divine revelation.
And when facts don't fit we jump to discussing Syria.

Where are you taking dance lessons?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Israel did not acquire land through warfare.  Immediately after the Six Day War, Israel offered to return the land it had captured while  pursuing Arab armies in exchange for peace.  242 only required Israel withdraw to safe and secure borders, not to the pre war border, and safe and secure borders means either a credible peace or keeping some of the captured land as a buffer zone since Israel has no strategic depth to protect it against an attack.
> 
> So Israel returned the Sinai to Egypt but only on condition that Egypt severely restrict the military forces it stationed in Sinai.  Judea adn Samaria did not fall under the terms of 242, nonetheless Israel offered to turn over to the PA 93% of Judea and Samaria but only with conditions that would protect Israel from continuing Palestinian terrorist attacks and against a military force that might come through Jordan and Judea and Samaria.  The Palestinians responded with the second intifada.  For at least the last thirty years every Israeli PM, including Netanyahu, has been in negotiations with Syria offering to return the Golan in exchange for peace, but Syria has rejected all offers, which by any reasonable standard means Syria has abandoned its claim to the Golan.



Are you a professional liar in RL too ?

Let's cut out the chaff from the above and deconstruct the dihonesty contained within

comment 1 of yours

" 242 only required Israel withdraw to safe and secure borders, not to the pre war border,"

You are splicing together two seperate parts of 242 so as to create a lie about what it states.

Here's the parts you have spliced together how they ACTUALLY appear

" (i) *Withdrawal of Israel armed forces* from territories occupied in the recent conflict;

 (ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within *secure and recognized boundaries* free from threats or acts of force; "

It's a deliberate attempt to dishonestly frame what 242 actually states

It calls for a withdrawal of Israeli forces from the territories occupied in the recent conflict THEN it goes on to say the stuff about working towards " secure " borders for EVERY state.

There are other lies and misrepresentations but I have to go out for a while and will systematically go through the dishonest BS you try to peddle as informed opinion


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

rylah said:


> No I get it, you think the "UN" is a word that magically turns your bs into divine revelation.
> And when facts don't fit we jump to discussing Syria.
> 
> Where are you taking dance lessons?



See , when you are asked to put up or shut up you just carry on regardless.

You claimed my link actually refuted what I claimed. It didn't and when I asked you to show evidence you chose to double down on that dishonesty

Additioally I used the words of Moshe Dayan to support my claim , which was just a repeat of his claim , and you dishonestly decide to make out that I just used the UN

The use of Syria was legitimate because it was actually YOUR introduction when you decided to cite " Arab govts" Note that means the relevant Arab governments involved in the armistice agreements which would include ? Syria

If I ever decide to take up the dancing lessons I will be sure to find out where you have been getting yours , it seems like the best dance school around


----------



## Shusha (Feb 2, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> They already have the power to take actions including the use of force against any member state and that's what I was referring to , so no new powers are required.They don't have to be forced into it but refusal to cooperate in the spirit of good faith negotiations could and should bring into play the very mechanisms some other states have had to endure for their violations. You don't get away with it just because you are the Jewish state and that's what you people really do believe should be the case imo
> 
> The UN could choose to impose sanctions , embargoes , the use of peace keeping forces. To think pariah states are ever going to be dealt with without some consequences for their lawbreaking and/or unwillingness to commit to peace agreements in a reasonable way should have consequences and do have consequences. Even when it's the Jewish state , shock horror!!



First, you would have to demonstrate how Israel is violating international law and what is entailed in their "lawbreaking" or failure to commit to peace agreements.  

You've utterly failed to do that so far. 

Again, the UN can enforce boundaries, but it can not make them.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 2, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, there was nothing in your comment to support what you claim. The Egyptian preparations for war were clear. The intended blockade of the Strait was defined by Israel as an act of war and that act was carried out with the blockade and claimed mining of the waterway by the Egyptians.
> ...



You offered nothing to indicate that Israel was preparing an impending attack. All indications are that Israel was preparing a defense against hostile Arab-Moslem armies with an announced goal of destroying Israel.

You chose to ignore that Israel had indicated a closure of the Strait would constitute an act of war. You also chose to ignore the later mining of the Strait which, in addition to the earlier closure was a tactical war effort to cut off a supply route to Israel.

It’s always those pesky Jews defending themselves from your gee-had.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2020)

Hollie said:


> He we have the stereotypical *Stolen Land*™️ slogan barfed out by the slogan’istas. There’s just never any actual facts to identify what land was “stolen”



Palestine. That's what the Jews stole.  It wasn't theirs.   



rylah said:


> Was it why this the was most neglected and impoverished of lands under the Caliphate rule?
> 
> The Fertile Crescent, by the way, is not associated with the Arabs, neither were they those who made the region actually the fertile nest of civilization.



It wasn't.  Again, this is a nice myth you guys have written, after you incited the Arabs to revolt against the Turks.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 2, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > He we have the stereotypical *Stolen Land*™️ slogan barfed out by the slogan’istas. There’s just never any actual facts to identify what land was “stolen”
> ...



No kidding? The Jews stole Palestine?

Aside from your continued retreat to silly slogans, please define how Palestine was stolen and from whom it was stolen.


Your conspiracy theory about magical Jew powers and using those powers to incite the Arabs to revolt against the Turks is not really entertaining. It’s just more conspiracy theory rattling.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 2, 2020)

Hollie said:


> No kidding? The Jews stole Palestine?
> 
> Aside from your continued retreat to silly slogans, please define how Palestine was stolen and from whom it was stolen.
> 
> ...



Um, no, it's history.  The British incited the Arabs to revolt against the Turk with the promise of independence. INstead, they turned most of the territories into British and French Colonies.  Then they passed the Balfour Declaration, to try to resettle the Jews of Europe in Palestine.  It was a two-fer. You rid Europe of Jews, and you get people willing to do your colonizing for you. 

Funny thing. Between 1919 and 1945, not a whole lot of them were willing to go in there and do it.  Until Hitler came up with his own plan to rid Europe of Jews,t hen they were all keen on it.  Sadly, those pesky Palestinians, they actually still were on the land.  

And this is the problem with the Zionist Entity. It was ALWAYS a bad idea.  But sometimes in the heat of the moment, people go along with bad ideas because they feel bad.  Everyone felt bad after WWII.  But instead of giving them a chunk of Europe to call their very own, they gave them a chunk of the middle east that wasn't really theirs to give away.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 2, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > No kidding? The Jews stole Palestine?
> ...



I was sure with a little nudge you would move from _*The Zionists*_™️ to 
_*The Zionist Entity*_™️. 

Your lates5 conspiracy theory about the British seeking to incite the Arabs to revolt against the Turk with the promise of independence is a slightly revised version of your earlier conspiracy theory. Making up conspiracy theories as you go along tends to color your comments as disjointed and nonsensical. 

I was hoping you could better define your earlier conspiracy theory, something about a stolen Palestine and magical Jew powers. 

Last I read, the loosely defined geographic area called Palestine was, at one time under the sovereign control of the Turks who released all rights and title to the territory, to be administered by the British Mandate. 

I was never aware that the Brits reported Palestine being stolen. If the Jews, by way of the magical Jew powers, stole Palestine, I’d have thought the Brits would have reported that to, you know, the Palestine police.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 2, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...





Hollie said:


> Last I read, the loosely defined geographic area called Palestine was, at one time under the *sovereign control of the Turks who released all rights and title to the territory, *to be administered by the British Mandate.


That is misleading. The rights and title were released to Palestine. The Mandate did not commence until about three months after the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne. Palestine had to exist before there could be a Mandate for Palestine.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 2, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Yes, yes, yes. The Treaty of Lausanne invented your _Magical Kingdom of Pal’istan™️_” (Where Dreams Come True”).

Thanks.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 2, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> It is a terrible idea for Israel.  They would just end up being the next Lebanon.
> 
> Lebanon was formed as the Christian country of the Middle east, and despite the precautions set into place to try to protect that, Muslims simply bred themselves into a position of dominance and the country has suffered.  Beirut was called the Paris of the middle east when I was young, but now it is just another Islamic shit hole.
> 
> Jewish Israelis are fooling themselves if they don't understand the same thing will happen to them as happened to the Lebanese Christians. Within a generation or two they would be a persecuted minority.


Yep, the scourge of religion, on display. There should be no religious countries on the planet.


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Immediately after the Six Day War, Israel offered to return the land it had captured while  pursuing Arab armies in exchange for peace.
> .



BS claim 2

Who did it make the " offer " to ? Not the UN or the Arabs but to the US in view of the fear that the US would tell them at the UN to get out again as they had in 1956. Correct?

And which part of those territories occupied did it NOT include in those proposed withdrawals ? The West Bank

So when you say it made an offer, you try to decieve people that this was a public offer , like you have tried to deceive them about 242, you don't mention it was a private offer to the US .

That "offer " also excluded the West Bank didn't it ?  So when you say  Israel offered to " return the land it had captured " you are lying again ?


----------



## Spartacactcus (Feb 2, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Your lates5 conspiracy theory about the *British seeking to incite the Arabs to revolt against the Turk with the promise of independence* is a slightly revised version of your earlier conspiracy theory. Making up conspiracy theories as you go along tends to color your comments as disjointed and nonsensical.



It's not conspiracy theory it is a reference to the McMahon Correspondents that preceeded the Balfour Declaration

I thought you were supposed to be knowledgeable about this subject


----------



## Hollie (Feb 2, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Your lates5 conspiracy theory about the *British seeking to incite the Arabs to revolt against the Turk with the promise of independence* is a slightly revised version of your earlier conspiracy theory. Making up conspiracy theories as you go along tends to color your comments as disjointed and nonsensical.
> ...



You might have been referring to the McMahon correspondence. Those letters don't support your conspiracy theory about the British fomenting an Arab revolt.

If you were knowledgeable about the subject, you would know that.

At any rate, it has nothing to do with this thread.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Feb 2, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > It is a terrible idea for Israel.  They would just end up being the next Lebanon.
> ...


You are incredibly stupid.

There are countless countries that describe themselves as Islamic republics.  There is only one country that represents the aspirations of the Jewish ethnicity, however.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 3, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Dogmaphobe, et al,

Well, you are almost correct.



Dogmaphobe said:


> You are incredibly stupid.


*(COMMENT)*

I started to mark your Post as one I agree with, but I felt that I might be endorsing this comment directed against a person rather than their content or the position they are maintaining.



Dogmaphobe said:


> There are countless countries that describe themselves as Islamic republics.  There is only one country that represents the aspirations of the Jewish ethnicity, however.


*(COMMENT)*

Well, you are almost correct, but you forget that Jewish Autonomous Oblast (JAO), a province _(one of a number of smaller nations)_ within the Far East District, Russian Federation.  

The JAO is about six times larger than the West Bank.  And the JOA is ≈ 36000 km² → whereas Israel is just over half the size of the Oblast (≈ 20770 km²).

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2020)

Hollie said:


> I was sure with a little nudge you would move from _*The Zionists*_™️ to
> _*The Zionist Entity*_™️.
> 
> Your lates5 conspiracy theory about the British seeking to incite the Arabs to revolt against the Turk with the promise of independence is a slightly revised version of your earlier conspiracy theory. Making up conspiracy theories as you go along tends to color your comments as disjointed and nonsensical.
> ...



Again, honey, imperialism is not a good thing... The British promised the Arabs independence, they turned them into colonies and imported a bunch of Zionists to do their dirty work.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> You are incredibly stupid.
> 
> There are countless countries that describe themselves as Islamic republics. There is only one country that represents the aspirations of the Jewish ethnicity, however.



That's awesome.  The countries that call themselves "Islamic Republics" (actually just Iran, but never mind) are places that Muslims have been the majority for hundreds of years. 

They didn't have to import them from Europe to steal someone else's land


----------



## Hollie (Feb 3, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I was sure with a little nudge you would move from _*The Zionists*_™️ to
> ...



That’s just a repeat of your usual conspiracy theory.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2020)

Hollie said:


> That’s just a repeat of your usual conspiracy theory.



You spelled "History" wrong.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 3, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > That’s just a repeat of your usual conspiracy theory.
> ...



That’s quite a dodge when your conspiracy theories are laughably inept.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2020)

Hollie said:


> That’s quite a dodge when your conspiracy theories are laughably inept.



Says the people who think the Zionists should have Palestine because a book with Talking Snakes in it says so.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 3, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > That’s quite a dodge when your conspiracy theories are laughably inept.
> ...



Your conspiracy theories are as inept as your understanding of history.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Your conspiracy theories are as inept as your understanding of history.



Again, your claim is in a book with Giants and Talking Snakes and Unicorns in it...


----------



## Hollie (Feb 3, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Your conspiracy theories are as inept as your understanding of history.
> ...


That’s not my claim. Another of your silly conspiracy theories.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 3, 2020)

Hollie said:


> That’s not my claim. Another of your silly conspiracy theories.



That's the claim of Zionists.  God promised them that land.  Even though they are from Europe, God promised that land to them.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 3, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > That’s not my claim. Another of your silly conspiracy theories.
> ...



Cartoons seem fitting as a part of your attempt at argument


----------



## toastman (Feb 3, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



All Joe has is conspiracy theories. Another Jew hater who can;t handle the truth.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 3, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > That’s not my claim. Another of your silly conspiracy theories.
> ...



More than half of Israelis are from Middle Eastern descent.


----------



## rylah (Feb 3, 2020)

Spartacactcus said:


> rylah said:
> 
> 
> > No I get it, you think the "UN" is a word that magically turns your bs into divine revelation.
> ...




I wasn't the one who brought up the Suez crisis.
A link that led to Fadayeen attacks committing exactly those violations of armistice agreements.

And you've been dancing around ever since...


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 4, 2020)

toastman said:


> All Joe has is conspiracy theories. Another Jew hater who can;t handle the truth.



Um, again, you spelled "History" wrong.  The reality- Most of the world hates the Zionist Entity now.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 4, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > All Joe has is conspiracy theories. Another Jew hater who can;t handle the truth.
> ...



This is the first I’ve heard that you speak on behalf of most of the world. 

Such a weighty burden you bear. 

It’s funny when the rabid Jooooo haters retreat to their silly 
*Zionist Entity*™️ slogans.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 4, 2020)

Hollie said:


> This is the first I’ve heard that you speak on behalf of most of the world.
> 
> Such a weighty burden you bear.
> 
> ...



It's funny to watch any criticism of the Zionist Entity be dismissed as "Jew Hating". 

I hate the people who do this...


----------



## Mindful (Feb 4, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...



Why do you even bother to acknowledge this  kind of individual?


----------



## Hollie (Feb 4, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > This is the first I’ve heard that you speak on behalf of most of the world.
> ...



So, you’re reduced to your usual, pointless *Zionist Entity*™️ slogan and now undated, unsourced images. 

I understand you hate, you hate yourself and you hate your miserable existence. 

Grab your Koran, a few more slogans and do a gee-had somewhere. Really, you’ll feel better about yourself.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 4, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



Just a gentle nudge and he’ll humiliate himself on a public forum.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 4, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...




The bottom line.

It comes down to this:

*Hatred of Jews*


*by Ali Salim
*

We Muslims the mistake of thinking Europeans really care about us, especially the Palestinians. We are wrong. Europeans simply hate the Jews more than they hate and fear us. The bitter truth is that Europeans usually intervene in a crisis only if it gives them an opportunity for Jew-bashing. It does not even mention Syria, or the rapes of women and children, and the beheadings, to say nothing of exploitation, discrimination, slavery, and other crimes against humanity.

No matter how hard or how often we Muslims try, we are never able finally to end the connection our lives seem to have with the lives of the Jews. Watching Arab and Islamic television, especially during the holy month of Ramadan, brings the viewer to the inescapable conclusion that we have no real lives of our own, no unity and no value: our only motivation is having the Jews as a common enemy, with our lives dependent on them. We treat the Jews the way the rabid Christian anti-Semites treated them in the Middle Ages, blaming them for every illness, tragedy and misfortune. We blame them for the failures of Islam while only we are at fault for the catastrophes that befall us.

Almost no Ramadan evening goes by without tedious "historical" dramas on Al-Jazeera and the other Arab TV channels, whose objective is to brainwash viewers with anti-Semitic propaganda. They deal with the Jews' denial of the Prophet Muhammad's message, Jewish attempts to poison him and their betrayal of him at the Battle of the Trench in Al-Medina. Almost all the series' end on the same note: the message is always that the fate of the Jews in the Palestine they stole from the Arabs will be the same as that Muhammad wreaked on them at Khybar, they will be slaughtered and their women and children will be sold into slavery.

Read more. 

Hatred of Jews


----------



## Mindful (Feb 4, 2020)

What the Arab citizens of Israel need now is to elect new leaders who will promote coexistence between Arabs and Jews in Israel, and not engage in anti-Israel rhetoric and actions.


Some of the leaders of the Arab citizens of Israel, particularly a number of Knesset members, have been acting against the interests of their constituents. It is almost as if these purported leaders represent the PA and Hamas instead of the Arab Israelis who voted for them with the hope that they would work to solve problems confronting their communities, such as unemployment.


The Arab citizens of Israel need real leaders who properly represent them in the Knesset and build -- not destroy -- bridges with Jews. Let the protests on the streets of Arab Israeli communities against becoming part of a Palestinian state serve as a fair warning to Israeli Arab leaders: stand by your people, or get out of the way.

The Real Reason Arabs in Israel Do Not Want to Live in 'Palestine'


----------



## CWayne (Feb 4, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> ...


Are you familiar with the cause of the downfall of Rome by any chance?


----------



## toastman (Feb 4, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > All Joe has is conspiracy theories. Another Jew hater who can;t handle the truth.
> ...


Morons like you don’t represent most of the world.


----------



## toastman (Feb 4, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


I ask myself the same question


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 5, 2020)

Hollie said:


> So, you’re reduced to your usual, pointless *Zionist Entity*™️ slogan and now undated, unsourced images.
> 
> I understand you hate, you hate yourself and you hate your miserable existence.
> 
> Grab your Koran, a few more slogans and do a gee-had somewhere. Really, you’ll feel better about yourself.



Honey, pretending your Imaginary Sky Fairy is better than their Imaginary Sky Fairy is so cute.  



Mindful said:


> Almost no Ramadan evening goes by without tedious "historical" dramas on Al-Jazeera and the other Arab TV channels, whose objective is to brainwash viewers with anti-Semitic propaganda. They deal with the Jews' denial of the Prophet Muhammad's message, Jewish attempts to poison him and their betrayal of him at the Battle of the Trench in Al-Medina. Almost all the series' end on the same note: the message is always that the fate of the Jews in the Palestine they stole from the Arabs will be the same as that Muhammad wreaked on them at Khybar, they will be slaughtered and their women and children will be sold into slavery.



I'm always curious about this use of the term "Anti-Semite".   The Palestinians are a Semitic people, probably more than the Jews are, who've been cross-breading with Europeans for centuries.  

You see, I remember this snuff film called "The Passion of the Christ", where the Jews were demonized as the people who killed Jesus.   Then the producer was caught in an anti-Jewish rant after being pulled over for a DUI.  

That was out of line.  

The Palestinians complaining about getting their land stolen, not so much.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 5, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > So, you’re reduced to your usual, pointless *Zionist Entity*™️ slogan and now undated, unsourced images.
> ...



Your continued use of pointless, cut and paste slogans does nothing to support your baseless claims. 

You’re never able to support your _*stolen land*_™️ meme. It seems you have the same tired slogans saved as a Microsoft Word document and you cut cut and paste that document across multiple threads.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 5, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Your continued use of pointless, cut and paste slogans does nothing to support your baseless claims.
> 
> You’re never able to support your _*stolen land*_™️ meme. It seems you have the same tired slogans saved as a Microsoft Word document and you cut cut and paste that document across multiple threads.



Naw, being unable to argue a point is your issue. 

Palestine was not vacant when the Zionists started showing up.  There were people there who had lived their for centuries. 

"A Land without a People for a People Without a Land" has always been a lie.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 5, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Your continued use of pointless, cut and paste slogans does nothing to support your baseless claims.
> ...


You might want to take your thread spam elsewhere as this thread is not about your pointless slogans.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 5, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...




He's not talking about anything.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 5, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Your continued use of pointless, cut and paste slogans does nothing to support your baseless claims.
> ...



That's a myth.  Most of those Arabs have not lived there for centuries, and they are not descendants of the ancient Canaanites.  A document from the 1920's says that most of them were nomads from Arabia.  In the 1800's, Mark Twain described the place as an empty wasteland, after visiting there.  Many of those Arabs came after the Zionists opened new employment opportunities, and after they had drained the swamps.  Churchill also wrote that there had been a recent influx of Arab immigrants.  Arabs are from Arabia, and Jews are from Judea.


----------



## Corazon (Feb 5, 2020)

Coyote said:


> Why not?
> 
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.
> 
> With a one state solution (Israel + West Bank) - assuming a scenario where ALL residents are offered the opportunity of citizenship up front,  the plus side for Palestinians would be the potential of better representation, political stability, assumption of rights guaranteed by citizenship and funding for infrastructure, education, etc. that is in perpetual shortage with their Palestinian leadership.


In theory this idea could work (maybe...) but there's a problem: the State of Palestine.
138 UN members recognize it and that State itself is a non member observer state in the UN
Annexation could be problematic... 
Also many Palestinian politicians wouldn't be happy if their State disappeared


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 5, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→  ForeverYoung436, JoeB131, Hollie, _et al_,

What difference does it make.  The stage was set for the establishment of a Jewish National Home by the authority of the Allied Powers on the defeat of the Ottoman Empire.  It had nothing to do with population density in the region.  The initial spark for the decisions which were to follow the Great War_ (World War I)_ was the arrangements agreed upon in the Syke-Picot Agreement (1916).  This was well before the Armistice of Mudros _(concluded - 30 October 1918)_; which ended the hostilities with the Ottoman Empire.



ForeverYoung436 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The key to take away here is that the decisions were made, as was customary in those days, between the parties in conflict.  They were not made in consideration of which people were habitual residents, or upon who was considered an immigrant.  It was not based on any particular ratio _(ie Arab:Jew)_.

As for "_*stolen land*_ " → the Arab Palestinian has no claim in terms of territorial integrity or sovereignty on the conclusion of the war in 1918 _(private property being an entirely different matter)_.  The Ottoman Empire relinquished the title to the territory by direct assignment to the Allied Powers by Treaty.  Consider:  It has been the "customary" protocol to adhere to the historical principles established   and the decisions made by the world leaders; especially decision more than a hundred years old.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hollie (Feb 5, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→  ForeverYoung436, JoeB131, Hollie, _et al_,
> 
> What difference does it make.  The stage was set for the establishment of a Jewish National Home by the authority of the Allied Powers on the defeat of the Ottoman Empire.  It had nothing to do with population density in the region.  The initial spark for the decisions which were to follow the Great War_ (World War I)_ was the arrangements agreed upon in the Syke-Picot Agreement (1916).  This was well before the Armistice of Mudros _(concluded - 30 October 1918)_; which ended the hostilities with the Ottoman Empire.
> ...



"_The Ottoman Empire relinquished the title to the territory by direct assignment to the Allied Powers by Treaty. Consider: It has been the "customary" protocol to adhere to the historical principles established and the decisions made by the world leaders; especially decision more than a hundred years old"_

The above really speaks to the heart of the matter. In thread after thread, there are those tender souls who refuse to accept the events, circumstances and principles of the past and endlessly drive around the Cul-de-sac of their need to re-write history. 

There is for some, an inability to accept the past and so they allow their hurt feelings to poison their day to day existence.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 5, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



We're on the same side, but this guy got you later when he revealed that he was an atheist.  So if you want to represent us and do a good job of it, you should know that anti-Semitic scum come in all denominations--Muslim, Christian, atheist, etc.  I think the book Mein Kampf even gets sold in China.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 5, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Coyote, et al,

Let's look at this Question of Palestine...



Coyote said:


> Why not?
> A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats.  It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.


*(COMMENT)*

"As originally envisioned," the concept of creating a Jewish and Arab state in the territory formerly under the British Mandate of Palestine, comes in the Peel Commission Report of 1937.  I think you are on the money.  It was rejected _(not just "waned") _almost immediately.



Coyote said:


> With a one state solution (Israel + West Bank) - assuming a scenario where ALL residents are offered the opportunity of citizenship up front,  the plus side for Palestinians would be the potential of better representation, political stability, assumption of rights guaranteed by citizenship and funding for infrastructure, education, etc. that is in perpetual shortage with their Palestinian leadership.


*(COMMENT)*

Yes, that is consistent with the customary practice at the time.  In fact, offering citizenship was expected.

However, the Arab Palestinians rejected all invitations for nation building.  And the steadfast adherence to the "All or Nothing" policy, is the beginning of the funeral procession of the Arab Sovereignty in the Question of Palestine today. The factors that cause the conflict to be prolonged this long (seven decades +) can be directly tied to the Arab Palestinian "All or Nothing Policy."



Corazon said:


> In theory this idea could work (maybe...) but there's a problem: the State of Palestine.
> 138 UN members recognize it and that State itself is a non member observer state in the UN
> Annexation could be problematic...
> Also many Palestinian politicians wouldn't be happy if their State disappeared


*(COMMENT)*

Again, recognition is NOT the same as having a functionally present state.

*Article 3
Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States
 •  UiO UiO The Faculty of Law  •
*
The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence, to provide for its conservation and prosperity, and consequently to organize itself as it sees fit, to legislate upon its interests, administer its services, and to define the jurisdiction and competence of its courts. The exercise of these rights has no other limitation than the exercise of the rights of other states according to international law.​
What the 138 UN members recognize is interesting, but irrelevant.  A "state" is self evident.  If you have a territory that looks like a state, acts like a state, and performs the functions of a "state."

◈  Does the Arab Palestinian leadership maintain the infrastructure to provide for the public order and safety of the citizenry? 

◈  Does the Arab Palestinian leadership actually provide for the protection of support for a given territorial sovereignty?

◈  Does the Arab Palestinian leadership set the conditions for economic growth and material prosperity?

◈  Does the Arab Palestinian leadership set the direction and distribute the fruits of prosperity? 

◈  Public goods are resources that Arab Palestinian leadership play a crucial role in providing.​
It must not only look like a duck (recognition), but it must act like a duck (performs functionally).  And it is that part acting like a "state" that there is trouble.  The State of Palestine (whatever you recognize that to be) does not act like a government.  It cannot even come close to being able to stand on its own.
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## José (Feb 5, 2020)

​Corazón de melón, de melón, melón, melón, melón, melón...CHA, CHA, CHA... Corazón!!!!

​The music "Corazón de Melón" is pure garbage (don't even bother watching de video) but our new member is fine.

Do you speak spanish or just Tagalog and English, Corazón?

I think nobody speaks this language in the Philippines anymore...


----------



## Corazon (Feb 6, 2020)

José said:


> ​Corazón de melón, de melón, melón, melón, melón, melón...CHA, CHA, CHA... Corazón!!!!
> 
> ​The music "Corazón de Melón" is pure garbage (don't even bother watching de video) but our new member is fine.
> 
> ...


Corazon the Melon...lol this could have been my nickname here 
A friend of mine took the picture I'm using here as my avatar...he said it was "artistic" 
With my family, friends et al I speak Filipino here. Filipino is our national language. 
We also speak Tagalog which is some kind of "regional language" similar to Filipino 
I've studied Spanish and I love it (but I'm not very fluent in Spanish )
My English...well as you can see José is awful...


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

Hollie said:


> You might want to take your thread spam elsewhere as this thread is not about your pointless slogans.



You might want to actually try answering a point...  

The Palestinians lived in Palestine for hundreds of years. It was their land. 

Then the Zionists started showing up from Europe and stole it. 



RoccoR said:


> What difference does it make. The stage was set for the establishment of a Jewish National Home by the authority of the Allied Powers on the defeat of the Ottoman Empire. It had nothing to do with population density in the region. The initial spark for the decisions which were to follow the Great War_ (World War I)_ was the arrangements agreed upon in the Syke-Picot Agreement (1916). This was well before the Armistice of Mudros _(concluded - 30 October 1918)_; which ended the hostilities with the Ottoman Empire.



Again, what gave the allied powers the right to give away someone else's land?  

So let's be honest, this was about a land grab by the British and French, using the Zionists as proxies to extend their imperial reach.  



RoccoR said:


> As for "_*stolen land*_ " → the Arab Palestinian has no claim in terms of territorial integrity or sovereignty on the conclusion of the war in 1918 _(private property being an entirely different matter)_. The Ottoman Empire relinquished the title to the territory by direct assignment to the Allied Powers by Treaty. Consider: It has been the "customary" protocol to adhere to the historical principles established and the decisions made by the world leaders; especially decision more than a hundred years old.



Here's the problem with that argument.  One of the Fourteen Points the Allies agreed to was "Self-Determination" of nations after the war.  Meaning that they were to encourage the national aspirations of Czechs, Poles, etc. in forming their own nations. In short, if the Allies were standing up for their own principles - or at least principles they adopted to rationalize the war after millions of people had died for nothing - then they should have recognized the rights of Arabs to self-determination. 

But this was yet another case of "Silly Darkies, Rights are for White People".  The Czechs get self-determination... but you Arabs, or you "wogs" living in Germany Colonies in Africa, then dammit, we're taking your land and setting up our own colonies.   And we certainly don't want people living in British or French Colonies to get some silly idea that THEY get self-determination.  

So, yes, the British STOLE Palestine, and used the Zionists as proxies to do so.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You might want to take your thread spam elsewhere as this thread is not about your pointless slogans.
> ...



Sounds like a comic strip.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

Hollie said:


> The above really speaks to the heart of the matter. In thread after thread, there are those tender souls who refuse to accept the events, circumstances and principles of the past and endlessly drive around the Cul-de-sac of their need to re-write history.
> 
> There is for some, an inability to accept the past and so they allow their hurt feelings to poison their day to day existence.



no, we just recognize the immoral racism of imperialism.  



Mindful said:


> Sounds like a comic strip.



Sounds like you are avoiding the issue, but that's fine.   If what the Zionists are doing is okay, what the Nazis did was okay. 

You can't have it both ways.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 6, 2020)

^ Palestinians lived in Palestine for hundreds of years. It was their land. 

Yeah. Jews.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > The above really speaks to the heart of the matter. In thread after thread, there are those tender souls who refuse to accept the events, circumstances and principles of the past and endlessly drive around the Cul-de-sac of their need to re-write history.
> ...



What issue?

Seems you're setting the premise, and demanding others adhere to it.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You might want to take your thread spam elsewhere as this thread is not about your pointless slogans.
> ...


The above is nothing more than your usual slogans. You even expanded your usual conspiracy theories to include the Brits as co-conspirators. 

You’re getting quite frantic. 

I think those crafty Jews STOLE your argument.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 6, 2020)

Mindful said:


> ^ Palestinians lived in Palestine for hundreds of years. It was their land.
> 
> Yeah. Jews.



The boy has STOLEN LAND from the Ottoman Turks. Somebody call the UN.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

Mindful said:


> What issue?
> 
> Seems you're setting the premise, and demanding others adhere to it.



We've established the issue.  What the Zionists are doing would be considered unacceptable if ANYONE else in the world were doing it.  

But the zionists whine "But, but, but, Hitler did a nasty to us 80 years ago."


----------



## Mindful (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > What issue?
> ...



"We" have not established any issue.

Your issue is not my issue.


As for the rest; unintelligible babble.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

Mindful said:


> We" have not established any issue.
> 
> Your issue is not my issue.
> 
> ...



Well, I can't use any smaller words for you.  

The Zionists established an Apartheid Colonial State that most of the world considers unacceptable.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > We" have not established any issue.
> ...



I'm not going to argue for the sake of it. And with you, I don't know what I'm arguing about.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

Mindful said:


> I'm not going to argue for the sake of it. And with you, I don't know what I'm arguing about.



Oh, honey, you know EXACTLY what the argument is.  The problem is that you like to pretend Israel is this wonderful bunch of people who made the "Desert Bloom", and not people who went in, stole someone else's land and can't possibly ever grant them equal rights out of sheer terror that they'd be looking for payback.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

Hollie said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...





Hollie said:


> "_The Ottoman Empire relinquished the title to the territory by direct assignment to the Allied Powers by Treaty. _


The territories were transferred to the new states.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > RoccoR said:
> ...



Indeed, your usual nonsense that Treaty of Lausanne invented the "country of Pally'land (_Where Dreams Come True_), right?

Indeed, you're still pressing that nonsense?


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 6, 2020)

Corazon said:


> Coyote said:
> 
> 
> > Why not?
> ...



Link?


----------



## Corazon (Feb 6, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Corazon said:
> 
> 
> > Coyote said:
> ...



State of Palestine - Wikipedia


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 6, 2020)

Corazon said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Corazon said:
> ...



According to the link you provided, the State of Palestine, declared in 1988, encompasses only the West Bank and Gaza.  So why does Tinmore claim that all of Israel is occupied territory?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Corazon said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


Whenever I ask when Israel legally acquired the land it occupied in 1948 everybody starts dancing.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Corazon said:
> ...


Indeed, that has been addressed repeatedly.

Indeed, you start dancing every time you get the answer you don't like.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Corazon said:
> ...



This insistence that all of Eretz Yisrael should become Palestine will eventually lead to the complete demise of any kind of Palestine at all, as we can see from Trump's peace plan that was laid out just last week.


----------



## rylah (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > Corazon said:
> ...


The one dancing is you.

Sovereignty over Palestine (in official administrative documents also called 'Eretz Israel') was vested with the Jewish nation under international law 20 years prior to that, with the San Remo resolution following the creation of the Mandate by the League of Nations and various other treaties.

It's a silly question, based on a false premise - like asking "when Leningrad legally acquired land it occupied in St. Petersburg?"


----------



## Likkmee (Feb 6, 2020)

Can we for once talk about a tiny irrelevant country like Chile, Colombia or Bolivia ?  Every time I go on the net it screams IsNtReal.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ Coyote, et al,
> 
> Let's look at this Question of Palestine...
> ...


The state of Palestine was established by international treaties in 1924. About 80 Palestinian officials declared independence on their own land and inside their own international borders in 1948.


RoccoR said:


> *Article 3*
> *Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States*
> * •  UiO UiO The Faculty of Law •*
> 
> The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states. Even before recognition the state has the right to defend its integrity and independence,...


A people do not need permission to declare independence.

A country does not cease to exist while under military occupation. An occupying power does not acquire territory or sovereignty.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 6, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ JoeB131, et al,

At the outset here, let's make a certain point perfectly clear:

Don't confuse territorial control, sovereignty, or the right to self-determination - with - ownership of private property.  They are two different claims (entirely_!_).



JoeB131 said:


> You might want to actually try answering a point...
> 
> The Palestinians lived in Palestine for hundreds of years. It was their land.
> 
> Then the Zionists started showing up from Europe and stole it.


*(COMMENT)*

Longevity as tenants on property:

•  Does not necessarily establish it as → "their Land."

•  Immigration and settlement by the Jewish People does not make a _prima facie_ case for land theft _(as in: "stole it")_.  As the plaintiff, the Arab Palestinian has not met the requirements for presenting a
the initial view of something, accepted as true until disproven, for a case to be made.​While the Arab Palestinians have made a tremendous amount of noise on these two issue, as a serious component set to the Question of Palestine, NOT ONCE has the Arab Palestinians attempted to seek early and just settlement of their international disputes _(territorial sovereignty or personal and private property)_ by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice.  Even today, the Arab Palestinians have not used the  Article XV of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements _(AKA:  Oslo I  September 13, 1993)_ to resolve the disputes.  In fact, the Arab Palestinians continue to this very day, to instigate roadblocks in further negotiation, as if they were operating under the notion of the 1967 Khartoum Resolution _(the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, *no negotiations*)_.  The reason for this is that the two issues you have here, while well known, have no substance → which would come to the public eyes of the world should some international monitor discover this in any  negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement.



JoeB131 said:


> Again, what gave the allied powers the right to give away someone else's land?
> 
> So let's be honest, this was about a land grab by the British and French, using the Zionists as proxies to extend their imperial reach.


*(COMMENT)*

Well, let's answer this in the simplified order:

•  (1) “Neither the British or the French authorized or directed the Zionists (or other Jewish parties) to act on their behalf in any fashion.”; 
•  (2) “Neither the British or the French granted authority by which the Zionists (or other Jewish parties) were place in a position of authority over the Arab Palestinian.”;
•  (3) “There was no document granting the Zionists (or other Jewish parties) authority, except as authorized by the Palestine Order in Council and the Mandate for Palestine.”​
In fact, in 1923, a third attempt was made to establish an institution through which the Arab population of Palestine could be brought into cooperation with the government in three distinct stages.  The second stage would have been the creation of a Legislative Council.  But without an Arab majority in participation, this proved to be impossible.  No matter how many time the Arab Palestinians were invited to participate in government, the offers were categorically rejected by the Arab Higher Committee (Arab Palestinians).   From 1922 until the termination of the Mandate, the High Commissioner governed Palestine with the aid of Councils consisting exclusively of British officials.  There was NO PROXY.



JoeB131 said:


> Here's the problem with that argument.  One of the Fourteen Points the Allies agreed to was "Self-Determination" of nations after the war.  Meaning that they were to encourage the national aspirations of Czechs, Poles, etc. in forming their own nations. In short, if the Allies were standing up for their own principles - or at least principles they adopted to rationalize the war after millions of people had died for nothing - then they should have recognized the rights of Arabs to self-determination.


*(COMMENT)*

U.S. President Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points was a Statement of Principles were in the background in the formulation of the Treaty of Versailles; not the Treaty of Lausanne.  However, the concept of self-determination was introduced in another form and just as applicable to the Ottoman/Turkish Theater of War as it was in the War with the Central Powers.  But the idea of self-determination is a 


Self-determination is NOT a "positive right" require the Allied Powers to provide the Arab Palestinians with either a good or service _(political, tangible or intangible)_.  On the other hand, self-determination is a "negative right," and only requires the Allied Powers to NOT interfere with Arab Palestinians self-determination.  The problem here is, that the Arab Palestinian "right to self-determination" does NOT mean that the Arab Palestinian can come in and just take the territory under the mandate with was lawfully relinquished to the Allied Powers by Treaty.

KEY:  The Arab Palestinian rights cannot be used as a justification to override Jewish rights to self-determination.

The Arab Palestinians were neither a party to the Treaty of Versailles and Treaty of Lausanne.  I don't know why they keep bringing that up.  The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties clearly states:  

“treaty” means an international agreement concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation;​​The Arab Palestinians did NOT have a state.  The treaty was between the Allied Powers and the Ottoman Empire/Turkish Republic.



JoeB131 said:


> But this was yet another case of "Silly Darkies, Rights are for White People".  The Czechs get self-determination... but you Arabs, or you "wogs" living in Germany Colonies in Africa, then dammit, we're taking your land and setting up our own colonies.   And we certainly don't want people living in British or French Colonies to get some silly idea that THEY get self-determination.


*(COMMENT)*

The British did not have any "colonies" in the Middle East.  

I'm not sure what the rest of that means.



JoeB131 said:


> So, yes, the British STOLE Palestine, and used the Zionists as proxies to do so.


*(COMMENT)*

Nonsense...  

Article 16 • Treaty of Lausanne
Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned.​KEY:  Treaty does NOT renounces all rights and title to the Arab Palestinian; but to the parties concerned _(meaning parties to the Treaty)_.

Every nation in the civilized world understood what was said here.  The Arab Palestinian can pretend that the Ottoman Sovereign renounced the rights and title to them, but it is simply NOT true.  
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Hollie (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...


What country is under occupation?


----------



## Hollie (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> The state of Palestine was established by international treaties in 1924.


No. It was not. Why continue with that nonsense?




> A people do not need permission to declare independence.


Israel thanks you.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ JoeB131, et al,
> 
> At the outset here, let's make a certain point perfectly clear:
> ...


Why is it that the Treaty of Lausanne says that the territory was transferred to the new states and you say it was transferred to the allied powers.

Here again, you are basing your conclusions on false premise.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

Hollie said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > The state of Palestine was established by international treaties in 1924.
> ...


It wasn't? link?


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...



The Treaty of Lausanne says no such thing.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

Shusha said:


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


“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become _ipso facto_, in the conditions laid down by the local law,* nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”*


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 6, 2020)

Shusha said:


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



It doesn't even mention Palestine.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Whenever I ask when Israel legally acquired the land it occupied in 1948 everybody starts dancing.



Your cognitive disconnect is simply astonishing.  This has been addressed repeatedly and thoroughly by several posters.  You even JUST said yourself that:


P F Tinmore said:


> A people do not need permission to declare independence.



As Rocco states above:  


RoccoR said:


> KEY:  The Arab Palestinian rights cannot be used as a justification to override Jewish rights to self-determination.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


Stupid post.

It doesn't mention Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, or Jordan either.-


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Yeah, yeah, you are predictable.  So, predictable I ALMOST, included in my last post, "and no Article 30 doesn't say what you think it says". 

Article 30 does not say what you think it says.  

1. It does not create a new state.
2. It does not transfer any territory to any state, let alone a new one.

All Article 30 says is that Turkish subjects in the territories which were transferred (to Italy, for example, in Article 15) will cease to be Turkish citizens and become citizens of the new territorial sovereign (Italy, for example).


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> It doesn't mention Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, or Jordan either.-



It DOES, however, mention ALL the States to whom territory was actually transferred.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


It doesn't say that.

But thanks for playing.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


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


No. It wasn't. You suffer from the affliction of selective editing and parsing of the Treaty of Lausanne. 

There are now some 215 instances of your nonsense claim that the Treaty of Lausanne invented your Magical Kingdom of Pally'land and those nonsense claims have been false every time. 

Why do you continue to make false claims?


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

And seriously, let's think this through.  Why is it, do you think, that territory wasn't actually transferred to a non-existent legal entity?  Here's an idea, because you can't transfer territory to something that does't legally exist.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Article 30 does not say what you think it says.
> ...



OMG.  Again, the cognitive disconnect is astonishing.  That is EXACTLY what it says.  

There is nothing in Article 30 which creates any new states nor transfers territory to any new states.  You are unbelievable.  It's like arguing that Article 30 transferred territory to the State of Rivendell and the State of Lothlorien.  And Oz.  

Made even more ridiculous by your claim that Article 30 transferred territory to Palestine, Jordan, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon, Rivendell, Lothlorien, and Oz even though none of those non-existent states are mentioned (you know, because they didn't exist).  But territory could not POSSIBLY have transferred to Israel. Because ... shrug ... "Israel isn't mentioned".

You just get more and more ridiculous.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> We've established the issue.  What the Zionists are doing would be considered unacceptable if ANYONE else in the world were doing it.



Wait, just to be clear.

Do you mean that its unacceptable to colonize a foreign land with Europeans and create a state there?

Or do you mean that its unacceptable to re-establish sovereignty and self-government in your own homeland?

Because either way .... seems to be perfectly acceptable.  Oh wait ... except Jews.


----------



## José (Feb 6, 2020)

> Originally posted by Corazón
> With my family, friends et al I speak Filipino here. Filipino is our national language.
> We also speak Tagalog which is some kind of "regional language" similar to Filipino



Fantastic, Corazón...

And here was I thinking "Filipino" was just the new name the government gave to "Tagalog" in order to make it a national language.

Learn something new everyday...



> Originally posted by Corazón
> I've studied Spanish and I love it (but I'm not very fluent in Spanish )
> My English...well as you can see José is awful...



Forget about Spanish... it's too complicated like all latin languages... (hablo, hablas, habla, hablamos, hablais, hablan... compare this unintelligible mess with the simplicity of the english equivalent: talk, talks). Besides it'll only help you in Spain, Latin America and the American Southwest... With English  you won't starve even in a little village in Botswana. : )

Your english is absolutely fine... no need to worry... and anyway there's a saying that goes like this:

*Someone who speaks your native language poorly or with an accent is someone who speaks more languages than you do. *


----------



## Mindful (Feb 6, 2020)

José said:


> > Originally posted by Corazón
> > With my family, friends et al I speak Filipino here. Filipino is our national language.
> > We also speak Tagalog which is some kind of "regional language" similar to Filipino
> 
> ...



Does it matter how many languages one speaks? They all say the same crap, in the end.

I speak German, but I try not  to.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 6, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ "P F Tinmore, et al,

There is no false premise.



P F Tinmore said:


> Why is it that the Treaty of Lausanne says that the territory was transferred to the new states and you say it was transferred to the allied powers.
> 
> Here again, you are basing your conclusions on false premise.


*(COMMENT)*

I quoted you the exact Article "verbatim."  What article are you referring to?

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

Hollie said:


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


I don't. You say that.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


You think like a Zionist.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ "P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> There is no false premise.
> ...


Article 16 does not mention who received the territories.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 6, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

You have to remember that the treaty was not written to cover the once single place (Palestine) that was so small, it is not mentioned by name in the treaty.



P F Tinmore said:


> The Treaty of Lausanne says no such thing.


“Turkish subjects habitually resident in territory which in accordance with the provisions of the present Treaty is detached from Turkey will become _ipso facto_, in the conditions laid down by the local law,* nationals of the State to which such territory is transferred.”*[/QUOTE]
*(COMMENT)*

You are looking at Article 30 in the Section for "nationality."  The concern in Article 30 is that the Nationality of any new state covers the people living within that territory.

The territory, we now call the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (a new state) must extend the habitual residents citizenship of the Kingdom - the new state - and the people become nationals of Jordan.

This is not about territory.  Section I of the Treaty covers the "TERRITORIAL CLAUSES."
Section II covers "NATIONALITY."   Don't confuse the two.

In my example _(Hasemite Kingdom of Jordan)_ there is a Treaty of 1946.  In that treaty it says:

Who, having communicated their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed as follows: - 

ARTICLE 1.

His Majesty The King recognises Trans-Jordan as a fully independent State and His Highness The Amir as the sovereign thereof.  There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between His Majesty The King and His Highness The Amir of Trans-Jordan.​
At that point, anyone living as a resident in that territory which the Mandatory carved-out for Jordan, is now a citizen (not of Palestine) of Jordan.  That is what Article 30 is all about.

Do you get it?

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Logically and intelligently.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...



Yes. We know. 

So where does you magical treaty mention who received the territories abandoned by Turkey?


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 6, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ "P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh for heaven's sake.



P F Tinmore said:


> Article 16 does not mention who received the territories.


*(REFERENCE)*

ARTICLE 16.

Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title whatsoever over or respecting the territories situated outside the frontiers laid down in the present Treaty and the islands other than those over which her sovereignty is recognised by the said Treaty, *the future of these territories and islands being settled or to be settled by the parties concerned. *

*(COMMENT)*

Here they are talking about the "Parties to the Treaty."  There are two elements representing the "parties to the Treaty:"

◈  The Group of Countries that represent the Allied Powers.
◈  The Government of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey.​
In Article 16, it specifies that "Turkey hereby renounces all rights and title" so that mean it leaves the future to the "*parties concerned."*

It is the way things are.
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 6, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> You have to remember that the treaty was not written to cover the once single place (Palestine) that was so small, it is not mentioned by name in the treaty.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

You are looking at Article 30 in the Section for "nationality."  The concern in Article 30 is that the Nationality of any new state covers the people living within that territory.

The territory, we now call the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan (a new state) must extend the habitual residents citizenship of the Kingdom - the new state - and the people become nationals of Jordan.

This is not about territory.  Section I of the Treaty covers the "TERRITORIAL CLAUSES."
Section II covers "NATIONALITY."   Don't confuse the two.

In my example _(Hasemite Kingdom of Jordan)_ there is a Treaty of 1946.  In that treaty it says:

Who, having communicated their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed as follows: -

ARTICLE 1.

His Majesty The King recognises Trans-Jordan as a fully independent State and His Highness The Amir as the sovereign thereof.  There shall be perpetual peace and friendship between His Majesty The King and His Highness The Amir of Trans-Jordan.​
At that point, anyone living as a resident in that territory which the Mandatory carved-out for Jordan, is now a citizen (not of Palestine) of Jordan.  That is what Article 30 is all about.

Do you get it?

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R[/QUOTE]
You are trying to pretzel this into what you want to believe.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 6, 2020)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Actually, some of these states ARE mentioned in the Treaty, namely Syria and Iraq (as well as Egypt, Cyprus and Libya), which makes the non-mention of Palestine even more pronounced.  Palestine, Transjordan and Lebanon had not even been formed yet, obviously.  They were not established states or territories, it seems.

Besides which, any sports teams from Palestine (the geographic territory, not any independent state) from the early 1900's usually consisted of Jewish players.  Jews were always associated with the geographic area known as Palestine.  In the 1960's and 70's, the hoodlums in my old neighborhood of Bensonhurst in Brooklyn, would taunt my parents and say, "Go back to Palestine!"


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 6, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> While the Arab Palestinians have made a tremendous amount of noise on these two issue, as a serious component set to the Question of Palestine, NOT ONCE has the Arab Palestinians attempted to seek early and just settlement of their international disputes _(territorial sovereignty or personal and private property)_ by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. Even today, the Arab Palestinians have not used the Article XV of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements _(AKA: Oslo I September 13, 1993)_ to resolve the disputes. In fact, the Arab Palestinians continue to this very day, to instigate roadblocks in further negotiation, as if they were operating under the notion of the 1967 Khartoum Resolution _(the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, *no negotiations*)_. The reason for this is that the two issues you have here, while well known, have no substance → which would come to the public eyes of the world should some international monitor discover this in any negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement.



I'm not sure why you keep changing fonts, but never mind.   A just solution from the Palestinian perspective would be for the Zionists to all go back to Europe where they came from.  The notion that the issue is one of personal property (People with money coming in by force, forcing an impoverished people off their land and giving them only a fraction of what it was worth, if anything) is obscene on it's face.  

The Zionist Entity is a colonial, apartheid state.  If they allowed "one person, one vote" the Arab majority would vote to end Israel and then ask the Zionists to kindly go back to where they came from.  

Now, yes, a moderate position is we give you SOME land and let you have your own state, but even then the Zionists are trying to take advantage.  A two-state solution based on the 1967 borders would be reasonable....  but the Zionists won't even go for that.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...





> You are trying to pretzel this into what you want to believe.



Indeed, you just don’t get it.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> You are trying to pretzel this into what you want to believe.



Oh, the irony.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Now, yes, a moderate position is we give you SOME land and let you have your own state, but even then the Zionists are trying to take advantage.  A two-state solution based on the 1967 borders would be reasonable....  but the Zionists won't even go for that.



A two-state solution with territory for both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people which addresses Israel's security and Palestnians prosperity is the just solution.  This obsession with the 1949 Armistice Lines as the ONLY possible territorial boundaries is silly.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > While the Arab Palestinians have made a tremendous amount of noise on these two issue, as a serious component set to the Question of Palestine, NOT ONCE has the Arab Palestinians attempted to seek early and just settlement of their international disputes _(territorial sovereignty or personal and private property)_ by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. Even today, the Arab Palestinians have not used the Article XV of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements _(AKA: Oslo I September 13, 1993)_ to resolve the disputes. In fact, the Arab Palestinians continue to this very day, to instigate roadblocks in further negotiation, as if they were operating under the notion of the 1967 Khartoum Resolution _(the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, *no negotiations*)_. The reason for this is that the two issues you have here, while well known, have no substance → which would come to the public eyes of the world should some international monitor discover this in any negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement.
> ...


A two state solution was offered to Arafat and again to Abbas, but Arafat responded with the second intifada and Abbas never responded at all.  Time's up, the world has moved on.  

Basing the proposed Arab state on the 1949 ceasefire line was nothing but arbitrary and now negotiations, if they ever happen again, will not be based on everything the Arabs want to achieve but will start with the conditions on the ground, which are area A, probably all or nearly all of area B and perhaps a small part of area C.  Trump's plan would give them half of area C if they can credibly offer peace to Israel within four years.  If they reject it, they get nothing.


----------



## toastman (Feb 6, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > While the Arab Palestinians have made a tremendous amount of noise on these two issue, as a serious component set to the Question of Palestine, NOT ONCE has the Arab Palestinians attempted to seek early and just settlement of their international disputes _(territorial sovereignty or personal and private property)_ by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice. Even today, the Arab Palestinians have not used the Article XV of the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements _(AKA: Oslo I September 13, 1993)_ to resolve the disputes. In fact, the Arab Palestinians continue to this very day, to instigate roadblocks in further negotiation, as if they were operating under the notion of the 1967 Khartoum Resolution _(the main principles by which the Arab States abide, namely, no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, *no negotiations*)_. The reason for this is that the two issues you have here, while well known, have no substance → which would come to the public eyes of the world should some international monitor discover this in any negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement.
> ...


I know you have little to no knowledge on Israel, but even someone as misinformed as you should no that Israel is FAR from being an apartheid state.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 6, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
 ⁜→  JoeB131, et al,

Yeah, There are a few points you need to consider.



JoeB131 said:


> The Zionist Entity is a colonial, apartheid state.  If they allowed "one person, one vote" the Arab majority would vote to end Israel and then ask the Zionists to kindly go back to where they came from.


*(COMMENT)*

*First Point*

While it is correct to say that the US Still has what are considered "colonial holdings" or "Non-Self-Governing-Territories" (NSGTs), it is NOT CORRECT to call Israel a colonial anything.  And Israel has no NSGTs under its control.  In fact, there are NO NSGTs anywhere in the Middle East.  This myth persists because people do not understand what NSGTs are (definede) and what it means to implement the implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence of Colonial Countries.

◈  In accordance with GA resolution 1654 (XVI), the C-24 was mandated to (i) examine the application of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (GA resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, hereafter referred to as the "Declaration") and (ii) to make suggestions and recommendations on the progress and extent of the implementation of the Declaration. The C-24 commenced its work in 1962.


◈  The C-24 annually reviews the list of Non-Self-Governing Territories to which the Declaration is applicable. It also hears statements from representatives of the Non-Self-Governing Territories at its annual sessions, dispatches visiting missions to Non-Self-Governing Territories and annually organizes regional seminars.​
The current table of NSGT (all of them) can be found on the C-24 Web Site Map.  The importanct of this Web Site is that it show what NSGTs are under what Administrative Power.  AGAIN, note that: 

◈  The UN does not consider any territory in the Middle East to be a NSGT.

◈  The UN does not consider Israel an Administrative Power in control of a NSGT and subject to Granting of Independence of Colonial Countries. _(See __GA Resolution 1514 (XV) and GA Resolution 1514 (XVI)_​
There might be any number of states that could be considered to be an Apartheid State, but Israel is not one of them. In fact, Israel is more diversified in both culture and races that any country in the Middle East.  Most people perpetuate this fallacy because they do not understand the Legal Definition under International Law.

◈  • Article 7(2h) Crimes Against Humanity - Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court •

"The crime of apartheid" means inhumane acts of a character similar to those referred to in paragraph 1, committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by *one racial group over any other racial group* or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime; ​
As you can see, it is about one race dominating another race.  The fact is, a person can be of any race and be Jewish.  Even the Jewish Autonomous Oblast, two-thirds of which borders China, has a strong oriental influence, while there are a number of Jewish communities all throughout Sub-Saharan Africa (ie Black Jews).  And of course you are aware that, in Israel, there are only 15.9% Europe/America/Oceania-born compared with 20.9% Arab born population.

The Arab Palestinians want to make the Apartheid issue about religious beliefs.  Well the UN Human Rights Commission holds that the International standards on freedom of religion or belief have a strong foundation:

◈  The primary sources of law underpinning the mandate of the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief are article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. ​
The people of Israel not only have the right of self-determination, but they have the right to religious freedoms under International Law.  



JoeB131 said:


> Now, yes, a moderate position is we give you SOME land and let you have your own state, but even then the Zionists are trying to take advantage.  A two-state solution based on the 1967 borders would be reasonable....  but the Zionists won't even go for that.


*(COMMENT)*

Who says that that is reasonable.  And the (so called) 1967 borders were based on the 1949 Armistice Agreements which basically said the Armistice lines are no longer in force on the agreement of a Peace Treaty.  Well that has happened.

A little tid-bit here.  The Israelis never occupied any territory that was in the sovereign control of the Arab Palestinians.  The West Bank and Jerusalem were under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control.  



JoeB131 said:


> A two-state solution based on the 1967 borders would be reasonable....  but the Zionists won't even go for that.


*(COMMENT)*

Well, I suspect that "might" be true.  But the fact of the matter is, the Israeli _(not Jewish, not Zionists)_ Government has never been give the opportunity to seek early and just settlement of their international disputes by negotiation, inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, resort to regional agencies or arrangements or other peaceful means of their choice.  This would include the restitution and reparations to account for the damage, destruction and mobilization cost for Israeli to protect its borders for the Hostile Arab Palestinians.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha (Feb 6, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> While it is correct to say that the US Still has what are considered "colonial holdings" or "Non-Self-Governing-Territories" (NSGTs), it is NOT CORRECT to call Israel a colonial anything.



In fact, the IDEA that the Jewish people are just some "proxy" for a some other "colonial" or "Imperialist" state is both ridiculous and a bit insulting, as though Jewish self-determination is so incomprehensible that it HAS to have arisen from some Imperialist state.  

A. people. returning. to. their. homeland. is. not. Imperialist.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 7, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→  JoeB131, et al,
> 
> Yeah, There are a few points you need to consider.
> ...





RoccoR said:


> ◈ The UN does not consider any territory in the Middle East to be a NSGT.


Yes it does.

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;

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;

Right of peoples to self-determination - GA resolution - Question of Palestine


----------



## rylah (Feb 7, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...



There's a reason why they didn't make that a binding resolution,
because its actually illegal for the UN, that is vested with its function and bound by obligations from the League of Nations that all confirm the sovereignty of the Jewish nation in Palestine to prevent it - that is binding international law.

In General Assembly they can vote that the earth is flat,
it has no relevance to actual UN legal body.

By the way, when were Jews excluded from "Palestinians"?


----------



## Mindful (Feb 7, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...



I'm getting rather fed up with your tiresome tales of fairies at the bottom of the garden.


*Palestinian Jews* were Jewish inhabitants of Palestine (known in Hebrew as _Eretz Israel_, the "Land of Israel") prior to the establishment of the modern state of Israel.

The common term for the Jewish community of Ottoman Syria during the 19th century,[1] and British Palestine prior to the establishment of the State of Israel[1] is _Yishuv_ ("settlement"). A distinction is drawn between the "New Yishuv", largely composed of and descended from immigrants after the First Aliyah in 1881, and the "Old Yishuv", the pre-existing Jewish community of Palestine prior to the First Aliyah.

In addition to applying to Jews who lived in Palestine during the British Mandate era, the term "Palestinian Jews" has also been applied to Jewish residents of Southern Syria, the southern part of the Ottoman province of Syria, and there are scholarly instances of referring to the Jews of the Palaestina Prima and Palaestina Secunda provinces (4th to 7th centuries CE) of the Byzantine Empire in Late Antiquity as "Palestinian Jews".[_citation needed_]

After the establishment of Israel in 1948, the Jews of Mandatory Palestine became Israeli citizens, and the term "Palestinian Jews" has largely fallen into disuse and is somewhat defunct, in favor of the term Israeli Jews. 

From Wiki.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

Shusha said:


> A two-state solution with territory for both the Jewish people and the Arab Palestinian people which addresses Israel's security and Palestnians prosperity is the just solution. This obsession with the 1949 Armistice Lines as the ONLY possible territorial boundaries is silly.



In short. the Jews steal all the good land, leave the Arabs with the crappy land, and call it "just".  

This is what got them driven out of Europe to start with...


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

Mindful said:


> *Palestinian Jews* were Jewish inhabitants of Palestine (known in Hebrew as _Eretz Israel_, the "Land of Israel") prior to the establishment of the modern state of Israel.



Yeah, big problem with that.  There weren't any before the British started settling them there.  

Why is it every prominent Jewish Leader in the Zionist Entity can trace his ancestry back to Europe within one or two generations?  

Netanyahoo's dad came from Poland. 
Benny Gantz's parents came from Romania and Hungary
Shimon Peres was born in Poland. 
Moshe Dayan's parents emigrated from the Ukraine.

I can go on and on, but oddly, NONE of these people can really trace their family trees back centuries in Palestine... they are what they are, invaders.  

So my plan.  The Palestinians get their land back, the Zionists go back to Europe where they came from.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> A two state solution was offered to Arafat and again to Abbas, but Arafat responded with the second intifada and Abbas never responded at all. Time's up, the world has moved on.
> 
> Basing the proposed Arab state on the 1949 ceasefire line was nothing but arbitrary and now negotiations, if they ever happen again, will not be based on everything the Arabs want to achieve but will start with the conditions on the ground, which are area A, probably all or nearly all of area B and perhaps a small part of area C. Trump's plan would give them half of area C if they can credibly offer peace to Israel within four years. If they reject it, they get nothing.



Or they can simply wait the Zionists out...  As young kids in Israel decide that living next to people who want to justifiable kill you isn't a smart life strategy.  

Demographics are NOT the Zionist's friend.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 7, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > *Palestinian Jews* were Jewish inhabitants of Palestine (known in Hebrew as _Eretz Israel_, the "Land of Israel") prior to the establishment of the modern state of Israel.
> ...



I think the ummah has been waiting for you, their savior, to start rounding up them-their Jews for deportation.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

Hollie said:


> I think the ummah has been waiting for you, their savior, to start rounding up them-their Jews for deportation.



Again, you guys do this to yourselves... you manage to wear out your welcome no matter where you go.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 7, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > I think the ummah has been waiting for you, their savior, to start rounding up them-their Jews for deportation.
> ...



Well, that’s the problem isn’t it? Your tedious, flaming tirades about “send them-there Jooooos back” doesn’t really come with a plan. 

Basically, your cut and paste tirades are just pointless, right?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Well, that’s the problem isn’t it? Your tedious, flaming tirades about “send them-there Jooooos back” doesn’t really come with a plan.
> 
> Basically, your cut and paste tirades are just pointless, right?



Sure there's a plan. One Person. One Vote. Then the Jews can decide if they want to live with Muslim leaders when they win the majority, or go back to Europe where they came from.   I couldn't really care which they do at that point.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 7, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



I shall not post to his babble anymore. It's pointless.

Shan't iggy. But scroll I will.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 7, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Well, that’s the problem isn’t it? Your tedious, flaming tirades about “send them-there Jooooos back” doesn’t really come with a plan.
> ...



In your program of cleansing the ummah of Joooos, are the Arabs going back to Arabia? 

I’m still not seeing your plan in place to cleanse the ummah of Joooos. Shouldn’t we expect to see some action on your part as the ummah’s savior?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 7, 2020)

Mindful said:


> shall not post to his babble anymore. It's pointless.
> 
> Shan't iggy. But scroll I will.



Your concession is duly noted.  Look, I know the problem is that there's a disconnect between your noble fantasies and the reality of the Zionist Entity.   We Americans had a similar issue when we realized that Jim Crow was an ugly reality.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 7, 2020)

Mindful said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...



He’s just a clown.


----------



## Mindful (Feb 7, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



Yes!

A troll.


----------



## toastman (Feb 7, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Mindful said:
> 
> 
> > *Palestinian Jews* were Jewish inhabitants of Palestine (known in Hebrew as _Eretz Israel_, the "Land of Israel") prior to the establishment of the modern state of Israel.
> ...


You named four people out of millions on Israelis. I mean really? 
Also, Israel and Israelis are going nowhere , and I know that kills you inside. Can’t deal with it? Go cry to David Duke...


----------



## Hollie (Feb 7, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Well, that’s the problem isn’t it? Your tedious, flaming tirades about “send them-there Jooooos back” doesn’t really come with a plan.
> ...


Israel has one person, one vote now. One person, one vote rarely occurs in your Islamist paradises. 

What's your plan for exporting Jews to Europe?


----------



## Corazon (Feb 7, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Corazon said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


I have no idea!
I only know that the Palestinian government claims the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza Strip. Nothing more


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 7, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
 ⁜→  JoeB131, P F Tinmore, et al,

This is another one of those tricky worded and nonbinding snowflakes that the Propaganda Machine generates periodically.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > ◈ The UN does not consider any territory in the Middle East to be a NSGT.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

As I said in Posting #694_ (supra)_,


			
				Special Committee on Decolonization (C-24) said:
			
		

> *C-24 Mandate*
> -------------------------
> In accordance with GA resolution 1654 (XVI), the C-24 was mandated to →
> 
> ...






There is a Catch 22 here for the Arab Palestinian Leadership.  *IF* they claim that they are a NSGT under the colonial domination of Israel, *THEN* the Arab Palestinians cannot have a sovereign state.



			
				Dictionary of Modem Legal Usage said:
			
		

> *nation; state*. → These two words have different meanings.
> 
> ◈  *A nation* is a group of people inhabiting a defined territory, that group being distinct from other groups of people by the fact of its having allegiance to a single government exercising jurisdiction directly over each individual in the group.
> 
> ...



You will notice that both of these terms, having a common theme, referring to either a:

◈  "a single government exercising jurisdiction directly over each individual in the group."

◈  "which jurisdiction is exercised over individuals within the group."​
*IF* the State of Palestine has either more than one "system of rules—or the machinery" [Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) -- and -- Palestinian Authority (PA)] *THEN* it cannot be a "nation."

*IF* the State of Palestine does not exercise jurisdiction directly over each individual in the group_ [Area A* (full civil and security control by the Palestinian Authority)* • Area B *(Palestinian civil control and joint Israeli-Palestinian security control)* • Area C *(full Israeli civil and security control)*]_ *THEN* it cannot be a "state."

It cannot be the case that the State of Palestine can claim both to be a State or a Nation - and - also claim to be a Non-Self Governing Territory (NSGT) simultaneously.

It does not matter what the General Assembly Resolution might say, a GA Resolution cannot change International Law or Customary Interpretation.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## MJB12741 (Feb 7, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > You might want to take your thread spam elsewhere as this thread is not about your pointless slogans.
> ...




How do ya like that?  And here I actually believed the Jews Solomon's Temple existed since the 10th century BCE long before the Palestinian's Al Asqa Mosque.  And those European Zionists "stole Palestinian land."  Amazing what we can learn here from JoeB.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 7, 2020)

toastman said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Mindful said:
> ...



During the past 80 years, many, many Jewish Israelis have been born in Israel.  Plus, over half of Jewish Israelis have roots from the Middle East, and not Europe.  Also, I would like to ask JoeB if he is Native American, like Cherokee or Apache, or one of those such tribes.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 7, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > A two state solution was offered to Arafat and again to Abbas, but Arafat responded with the second intifada and Abbas never responded at all. Time's up, the world has moved on.
> ...


lol  Waiting the Jews out has not been a winning strategy for Palestinians so far.  The fact is they homicide rate in Israel, including the settlements in Judea and Samaria is less than half that of the US, and it is much safer to live in Israel, including the settlements in Judea and Samaria than to live in most large US cities.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 7, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→  JoeB131, P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> This is another one of those tricky worded and nonbinding snowflakes that the Propaganda Machine generates periodically.
> ...


The bottom line is that conquest is illegal. Occupations cannot annex occupied territory. They do not acquire sovereignty.

Territory and sovereignty remanms in the hands of the permanent population.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 8, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...



Unsupported opinion.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 8, 2020)

toastman said:


> You named four people out of millions on Israelis. I mean really?
> Also, Israel and Israelis are going nowhere , and I know that kills you inside. Can’t deal with it? Go cry to David Duke...



I named four who happen to be the leaders of the Apartheid Entity...  

The point you guys keep making is that the Zionists have a right to that land because they were there first.  But they all came from Europe.  



toomuchtime_ said:


> lol Waiting the Jews out has not been a winning strategy for Palestinians so far. The fact is they homicide rate in Israel, including the settlements in Judea and Samaria is less than half that of the US, and it is much safer to live in Israel, including the settlements in Judea and Samaria than to live in most large US cities.



The fact that most of the Zionist Entity's good will in the rest of the world has evaporated tells me that waiting them out is just fine.  They are becoming as much of an international pariah as South Africa was before Apartheid fell.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 8, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You named four people out of millions on Israelis. I mean really?
> ...



_*The Apartheid Entity*_™️ 

Did that slogan come from the prayer leader at your madrassah?

Otherwise, no, “they” did not all come from Europe. Your uneducated, flaming tirades really speak to your utter lack of credibility. You even stumble over basic definitions.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 8, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...


When they find that they are living next door to Palestinians, they will move.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 8, 2020)

Hollie said:


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


Which part is not true?

Links?

Of course not. You are just shoveling Israeli crap.


----------



## MJB12741 (Feb 8, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You named four people out of millions on Israelis. I mean really?
> ...



Isn't it just awful Joe how those "Zionists from Europe" claim it's Israel's land just because the Jews were there first & the overwhelming number of today's Palestinians have no titles or deeds whatsoever to the land they stole.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 8, 2020)

Hollie said:


> Did that slogan come from the prayer leader at your madrassah?
> 
> Otherwise, no, “they” did not all come from Europe. Your uneducated, flaming tirades really speak to your utter lack of credibility. You even stumble over basic definitions.



Yawn, honey, I'm an atheist. Zionism offends me because the notion of people using "God" as an excuse for bad behavior offends me.  

The stupidity that we are throwing a whole section of the world into turmoil because you guys are under the delusion that your magic sky pixie loves you the very best is silly.  You all should have figured that out when Hitler turned half of you into lampshades.  There is no God, he doesn't care about you because he's too busy not existing.  

Living next to people who want to kill you because God said so is just... stupid.  



MJB12741 said:


> Isn't it just awful Joe how those "Zionists from Europe" claim it's Israel's land just because the Jews were there first & the overwhelming number of today's Palestinians have no titles or deeds whatsoever to the land they stole.



This is where you are a little confused.  The Zionists from Europe had nothing in common with the people who lived there 2000 years ago other than a corrupted version of their religion. Christianity and Islam are equally corrupted versions of that religion. 

It would be like saying that Japanese people have a right to own Northern India, because, Gosh darn, the people who lived there back then were Buddhists, just like they are.  That's how absurd it is.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 8, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Did that slogan come from the prayer leader at your madrassah?
> ...



What a shame you're not offended by the ignorance you project.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Feb 8, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > Did that slogan come from the prayer leader at your madrassah?
> ...


No. You are just a piece of human filth who hates Jews.

It has been explained to you countless times that Zionism was a secular movement to create a home for the persecuted Jewish ethnicity.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 8, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
 ⁜→  P F Tinmore, et al,

There is no "International Law" that uses your words:  "conquest is illegal"  For more than half a century, that has been repeated over and over again, but it is an unsupported extrapolation of the facts.  The International Law, binding to Charter Members, on the matter says:



			
				Article 2(4) • Chapter I • Purpose and Principles • UN Charter said:
			
		

> All Members shall refrain in their 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.



What the Security Council "Emphasized" (giving special importance to the Charter) said still did not mention the conditions of territorial gains in the face of an aggressor (the Arab League participants).



			
				Security Council Resolution 242 of 22 November 1967 said:
			
		

> Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,



And neither the Charter of the Security Council Resolution prohibit the territorial boundaries set by mutual consent (ie the Treaties Israel has with Egypt and Jordan).



P F Tinmore said:


> The bottom line is that conquest is illegal. Occupations cannot annex occupied territory. They do not acquire sovereignty.
> 
> Territory and sovereignty remanms in the hands of the permanent population.



Unsupported opinion.[/QUOTE]





P F Tinmore said:


> Which part is not true?
> 
> Links?
> 
> Of course not. You are just shoveling Israeli crap.


*(COMMENT)*

Let's get one thing here clear.



			
				Article 22 • Part III • Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court said:
			
		

> _*Nullum crimen sine lege*_
> 
> 1. A person shall not be criminally responsible under this Statute unless the conduct in
> question constitutes, at the time it takes place, a crime within the jurisdiction of the
> ...



Many have claimed that the "anti-conquest norm" and associated corollaries are so important that in the view is held → that even conquest through lawful self-defense (in this case Israel) against an aggressor (principally Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon) is forbidden.  But the International Law does not say that.

In the case of the Jordanian holding, HM The King of Jordan officially announced the complete abandonment of their holdings, leaving it into the hands of the only government having effective control.  That could be considered Terra Nullius:



			
				Page 596 • ENCYCLOPÆDIC DICTIONARY OF INTERNATIONAL LAW said:
			
		

> ‘The expression “ terra nullius ” was a legal term of art employed in connection with “occupation” as one of the accepted legal methods of acquiring sovereignty over territory. “Occupation” being legally an original means of peacefully acquiring sovereignty over territory otherwise than by cession or succession, it was a cardinal condition of a valid “occupation” that the territory should be terra nullius— a territory belonging to no-one—at the time of the act alleged to constitute the “occupation” . . .’: Western Sahara Case 1975
> I.C.J. Rep. 6 at 39. Cf . Eastern Greenland, Legal Status of, Case ( 1933 ) P.C.I.J., Ser. A/B,
> No. 53 at 44 and 63. In the words of 1 Oppenheim 687 , ‘



Remembering of course, that there are other factors involved in the contemporary histories of the former sovereign Jordanian territories of the West Bank and Jerusalem.



			
				Disengagement from the West Bank said:
			
		

> On July 31 King Hussein *announced the severance of all administrative and legal ties* with the occupied West Bank.



But I say again, the law is strictly construed.  You cannot play with the wording and expect to get a proper outcome.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 8, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You named four people out of millions on Israelis. I mean really?
> ...


lol  Are you Rip Van Winkle?  Years ago what you say was true, but today Israel's foreign relations today improve everyday.  Some European nations are considering moving their embassies to Jerusalem and several European countries are blocking the EU's anti Israel policies.  Even Arab countries are seeking improved trade and diplomatic relations with Israel.  Today, the Palestinians have no leverage at all to bargain with.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 8, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> Remembering of course, that there are other factors involved in the contemporary histories of the former sovereign Jordanian territories of the West Bank and Jerusalem.


You bring this up a lot. This is where you play hopscotch with the law.

Before the war the West Bank (it wasn't called the West Bank then.) was Palestinian territory. After the war it was occupied by Jordan. It was occupied Palestinian territory. Jordan attempted to annex the West Bank but since it is illegal to annex occupied territory, and occupations do not acquire sovereignty. most of the world did not recognize this attempt at annexation. It was still occupied Palestinian territory.

In 1967 Israel took that occupation from Jordan. It was still occupied Palestinian territory. Jordan could not give that territory to anyone. It was not theirs to give or to lose.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 8, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> Many have claimed that the "anti-conquest norm" and associated corollaries are so important that in the view is held → that even conquest through lawful self-defense (in this case Israel) against an aggressor (principally Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon) is forbidden. But the International Law does not say that.


International law makes no distinction between aggressive or defensive conquest. It is just illegal.

BTW, if the Arab countries lost the 1948 war:
What did Lebanon lose?
What did Syria lose?
What did Jordan lose?
What did Egypt lose?


----------



## Shusha (Feb 8, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Remembering of course, that there are other factors involved in the contemporary histories of the former sovereign Jordanian territories of the West Bank and Jerusalem.
> ...



"Palestinian territory" has no legal meaning in this context.  It does not mean what you intend to force it to mean which is "territory to be held indefinitely in anticipation of the emergence of an Arab government capable of sustaining the self-determination of Arab peoples currently and formerly resident in the territory labelled 'Palestine' while specifically preventing the Jewish peoples of the same territory from exercising their self-determination in the form of a State."

"Palestinian territory", the way you use it, is a nonsense word which attempts to give the illusion of something that doesn't exist.  "Palestinian territory" is nothing more than a description of a place.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 8, 2020)

Shusha said:


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





Shusha said:


> "Palestinian territory" has no legal meaning in this context.


Another bullshit Israeli talking point.

Link?


----------



## toastman (Feb 8, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > You named four people out of millions on Israelis. I mean really?
> ...


International pariah? Really? My goodness you know even less about Israel than I thought! The opinion of you and your friends do not represent what most people think.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 8, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Another whiny non-response.  

"Palestinian territory" has no legal meaning.  It was not a State, nor was it any other type of legal entity.  You are trying to insist the term "Palestinian territory" means "territory to be held aside pending the emergence of a legal sovereign which isn't Jewish".  It isn't a thing.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 8, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



Where is this “Pal’istanian territory” you claim exists but fail to provide evidence for?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 8, 2020)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


No link?

Of course not.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 8, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...



RoccoR and P F Tinmore,

If you have anything at all which proves “Palestinian Territory” had some other legal meaning than a geographical descriptor prior to 1948, I’d kindly suggest you bring it to the thread. 

Tinmore has LONG argued that the State of Palestine came into existence in 1924, in spite of failing to meet the criteria of Statehood right up to the present day. 

I’m surprised you are agreeing with Tinmore here Rocco. Perhaps you can state your reasoning.


----------



## toastman (Feb 8, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Many have claimed that the "anti-conquest norm" and associated corollaries are so important that in the view is held → that even conquest through lawful self-defense (in this case Israel) against an aggressor (principally Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon) is forbidden. But the International Law does not say that.
> ...



Are you kidding me? All it takes is a simple google search . Israel won the war. Countries don’t have to lose something in order to lose a war. Israel succeeded by completing its goals while the Arab states failed at theirs, that simple. Got a link that says Israel did not win the way? I suspect not. I imagine you have nothing but lies, as usual.


----------



## toastman (Feb 8, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...





P F Tinmore said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


You have failed to provide links for as long as I can remember for basically anything I ask you, yet you have the nerve to ask other people for links ? 
Honestly Tinmore , I have NEVER seen anyone make up history as you have. Nothing but Palestinian lies.


----------



## toastman (Feb 8, 2020)

Shusha said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...



Ask Tinmore this: If Palestine was a state in 1924 , why did they need to declare Independence in 1948? I suspect there will be no answer


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 8, 2020)

toastman said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > P F Tinmore said:
> ...


They were under British occupation during that time. When Britain left in 1948 the Palestinians declared independence.

I don't see a problem with that. It was a valid declaration.


----------



## toastman (Feb 9, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


If it was valid, then why did they not become an actual country after the declaration?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 9, 2020)

toastman said:


> P F Tinmore said:
> 
> 
> > toastman said:
> ...


That depends on who you ask.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→  Shusha, P F Tinmore, et al,


Shusha said:


> RoccoR and P F Tinmore,
> 
> If you have anything at all which proves “Palestinian Territory” had some other legal meaning than a geographical descriptor prior to 1948, I’d kindly suggest you bring it to the thread.
> 
> ...


*(DOCUMENTATION)*

The short answer:

◈  Palestine as a Legal Entity 1929 - 1948
•  MEMORANDUM “A”  LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE”  •

◈  Memorandum: UN Under-Secretary General - Legal Affairs 11 December 2012
•  Issues Relating to the General Assembly Resolution 67/19 on the Status of Palestine in the UN  •

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

You've asked a "complex" question.  So, I have to break it up into two parts:

✦  Conquest:  Aggressor 'vs' Defensive

✦  The Matter of "Losses​


RoccoR said:


> Many have claimed that the "anti-conquest norm" and associated corollaries are so important that in the view is held → that even conquest through lawful self-defense (in this case Israel) against an aggressor (principally Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon) is forbidden. But the International Law does not say that.





P F Tinmore said:


> International law makes no distinction between aggressive or defensive conquest. It is just illegal.
> 
> BTW, if the Arab countries lost the 1948 war:
> What did Lebanon lose?
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

*Part One*
On the Issue of Aggression as use in these discussions.


			
				Encyclodedic Dictionary of International Law said:
			
		

> *aggression*    This term fi rst acquired technical signifi cance by reason of the stipulation
> of art. 10 of the Covenant of the League of Nations that members undertook ‘to respect
> and preserve as against external aggression the territorial integrity and existing political
> independence of all Members’. It was adopted by the U.N. Charter, art. 1(1) specifying
> ...




			
				A/RES/29/3314 • Defining Aggression said:
			
		

> *Article 1*
> *Aggression* is the use of armed force by a State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations, as set out in this Definition.





			
				A/RES/29/3314 • Defining Aggression said:
			
		

> *Article 2*
> The *First use of armed force* by a State in contravention of the Charter shall constitute prima facie evidence of an act of aggression although the Security Council may, in conformity with the Charter, conclude that a determination that an act of aggression has been committed would not be justified in the light of other relevant circumstances, including the fact that the acts concerned or their consequences are not of sufficient gravity.


On the Issue of Defense as Used in these Discussion:


			
				Encyclopedic Dictionary of International Law said:
			
		

> *self-defence*   (1) Under customary law, it is generally understood that the correspondence
> between the United States and the United Kingdom of 24 April 1841 , arising out of the
> Caroline Incident (Moore, Digest of International Law , Vol. 2, 25) expresses the rules
> on self-defence: self-defence is competent only where the ‘necessity of that self-defense
> ...


For the time being, I will avoid the issue of the entanglement between a "Non-International Armed Conflict (NIAC)" and an "International Armed Conflict (IAC)."  But there is an important distinction to be made about when dealing with the first use of an armed force.  The Conflict started in May 1948 with the Arab League forces crossing the frontier into territory other then their own did NOT end until the Peace Treaties were signed 1979 in the case of Egypt (pertaining to the Gaza Strip) and 1994 in the case of Jordan (pertaining to the West Bank and Jerusalem).  The Armistice Agreements did not bring an "end to the International Armed Conflicts between these nations; merely temporarily suspended military operations.


			
				Encyclopedic Dictionary of International Law said:
			
		

> *armistice*   The Regulations annexed to the Hague Convention with respect to the Laws and
> Customs of War by Land of 29 July 1899 ( 187 C.T.S. 429 ) provide (art. 36) that an armistice
> suspends military operations by mutual agreement between the belligerent parties. An
> armistice is either general or local: art. 37. It must be notified in due time to the competent
> ...


Under these considerations, the 1967 Six-Day War and the 1973 Yom Kipper Surprise Attack were extensions of the original conflict with the Arab League Forces in 1948.
; in which the Arab League was the "aggressor" under the "first use rule."  That makes Israel the "defender" under the "self-defense rule."

*Part Two*



			
				Encyclopedic Dictionary of International Law said:
			
		

> *claim*   Although the term ‘claim’ is utilized in a number of contexts in international law, its
> proper meaning (cases involving direct damage to the State apart) is the intimation and possible
> prosecution of a demand by one State for redress in respect of a breach of international
> law by another State causing injury to one of the former State ’ s nationals. Only the State
> ...


In addition to the loss of control over the Gaza Strip (Egypt) and the West Bank including Jerusalem (Jordan): _ {Note:  Using Wiki Approximations in Numbers; and not including several conflicts that were in between those listed.}_
◈  In terms of the 1948 War of Independence:

✦  Between +5,000 and 20,000 (inc civilians) among which 4,000 soldiers for Egypt, Jordan and Syria​
◈ 1967 Six-Day War

✦  Egypt: 10,000–15,000 killed or missing • 4,338 captured[14]
✦  Jordan: 696 killed or missing • 533 captured
✦  Syria: 2,500 killed • 591 captured
✦  Iraq: 10 killed • 30 wounded
✦  Lebanon: One aircraft lost
✦  Hundreds of tanks destroyed
✦  452+ aircraft destroyed​
◈  1973 Surprise Attack on Yom Kipper

*Total casualties:
*
✦  8,000 –18,500 dead
✦  18,000 –3 5,000 wounded
✦  8,783 captured
✦  2,250 – 2,300 tanks destroyed
✦  341 – 514 aircraft destroyed
✦  19 naval vessels sunk​
Now, I have not mentioned the intangible losses (of which there were many), but as you can see, losses include much more than just the territorial control or the numbers in casualties.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R​


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> No. You are just a piece of human filth who hates Jews.
> 
> It has been explained to you countless times that Zionism was a secular movement to create a home for the persecuted Jewish ethnicity.



Um, if was "secular", why not have that state in Europe or America?  You know, places where people won't try to kill you because you stole their land.  

Nope, it's about religion.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> lol Are you Rip Van Winkle? Years ago what you say was true, but today Israel's foreign relations today improve everyday. Some European nations are considering moving their embassies to Jerusalem and several European countries are blocking the EU's anti Israel policies. Even Arab countries are seeking improved trade and diplomatic relations with Israel. Today, the Palestinians have no leverage at all to bargain with.



You keep telling yourself that. 

How does the world feel about Israel/Palestine?

That being said, Israel is extremely unpopular worldwide. In one BBC poll of 22 countries, Israel was the fourth-most-disliked nation (behind only Iran, Pakistan, and North Korea).

It’s clear that West Bank settlements are a key cause of Israel’s poor global standing. Most of the world believes that Israel’s continued control of the West Bank is an unlawful military occupation, and that settlements violate the Fourth Geneva Convention. Though this view is supported by most legal scholars, Israel and pro-Israel conservatives dispute it. They argue that the West Bank isn’t occupied, and even if it were, the Fourth Geneva convention only prohibits “forcible” population transfers, not voluntary settlement.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

toastman said:


> International pariah? Really? My goodness you know even less about Israel than I thought! The opinion of you and your friends do not represent what most people think.



See above. Around the world, Israel is the world's fourth most hated nation.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > International pariah? Really? My goodness you know even less about Israel than I thought! The opinion of you and your friends do not represent what most people think.
> ...



So.... basically...... you’re surprised that Arab-Islamist nations don’t like Israel. Arab-Islamist nations don’t even like each other. That’s why they’re at war with each other.

Your online gee-had is actually pretty funny.

You suffer from “Shaken Baby Syndrome”, right?


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→  JoeB131, et al,

OK, What does International Law say?  _(Do you know?)_



JoeB131 said:


> It’s clear that West Bank settlements are a key cause of Israel’s poor global standing. Most of the world believes that Israel’s continued control of the West Bank is an unlawful military occupation, and that settlements violate the Fourth Geneva Convention. Though this view is supported by most legal scholars, Israel and pro-Israel conservatives dispute it. They argue that the West Bank isn’t occupied, and even if it were, the Fourth Geneva convention only prohibits “forcible” population transfers, not voluntary settlement.


*(COMMENT)
*
Well, it would appear that the argument by the Israelis has some merit... _"(Israel and pro-Israel conservatives dispute it. They argue that the West Bank isn’t occupied, and even if it were, the Fourth Geneva convention only prohibits “forcible” population transfers, not voluntary settlement.)"_
*​*

			
				Paragraph 2d • Article 7  Crimes Against Humanity • Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court said:
			
		

> [LINK • *Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court*}
> "Deportation or forcible transfer of population" * means forced displacement of the persons* concerned by expulsion or other coercive acts from the area in which they are lawfully present, without grounds permitted under international law;


 

So, if the court went to the trouble to clarify the criminal definition, why is anyone still arguing about it.  

I tend to think this is caused by people act like sheep and easily lead in the wrong direction.  We call this the:




 ​The Key Take-Away:  As more people come to believe in something, others also "hop on the bandwagon" _*regardless of the underlying evidence*_.
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

Hollie said:


> So.... basically...... you’re surprised that Arab-Islamist nations don’t like Israel. Arab-Islamist nations don’t even like each other. That’s why they’re at war with each other.



They aren't just hated in the Islamic World. 

They are hated in Asia.
They are hated in Latin America
They are hated in Europe.

The only place they are "loved" is in the USA, where the Jews control the media and all these stupid Christians think they need Israel so Jesus can come back.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> The Key Take-Away: As more people come to believe in something, others also "hop on the bandwagon" _*regardless of the underlying evidence*_.



You can keep smearing the shit all day, but most of the world realizes what the Zionist Entity is doing in Palestine is akin to what the Afrikaaners did in South Africa.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Hollie said:
> 
> 
> > So.... basically...... you’re surprised that Arab-Islamist nations don’t like Israel. Arab-Islamist nations don’t even like each other. That’s why they’re at war with each other.
> ...



Well gee. It doesn’t take much to launch you into your usual, flaming tirades.

Your keyboard gee-had is funny.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Key Take-Away: As more people come to believe in something, others also "hop on the bandwagon" _*regardless of the underlying evidence*_.
> ...



Completely false, of course. But don’t let facts get in the way of your silly tirades.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ JoeB131, et al,



JoeB131 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The Key Take-Away: As more people come to believe in something, others also "hop on the bandwagon" _*regardless of the underlying evidence*_.
> ...


*(QUESTION)*

So tell me, be specific about it, what is it that the Zionist Entity is doing in Palestine is akin to what the Afrikaaners did in South Africa?
The very basics to the interrogatives.  Who • What • Where • When • How...
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> So tell me, be specific about it, what is it that the Zionist Entity is doing in Palestine is akin to what the Afrikaaners did in South Africa?
> The very basics to the interrogatives. Who • What • Where • When • How...



You are kidding, right? 

Let's see now. You have the White European Jews living in the nice neighborhoods while the Arabs are all concentrated in slums...  Just like South Africa.  You have a militarized police state designed to keep them all in line.  

Because if you had one person, one vote, they'd be gone.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 9, 2020)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



He can't be accused of a gee-had because he's an anti-Semitic atheist.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> He can't be accused of a gee-had because he's an anti-Semitic atheist.



Again, the Palestinians are as "Semitic" as the Zionists, probably more so since they haven't been interbreeding with Europeans for 1000 years. 

I'm tired of young American boys coming home in boxes because the Zionists keep dragging us into their fights.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > lol Are you Rip Van Winkle? Years ago what you say was true, but today Israel's foreign relations today improve everyday. Some European nations are considering moving their embassies to Jerusalem and several European countries are blocking the EU's anti Israel policies. Even Arab countries are seeking improved trade and diplomatic relations with Israel. Today, the Palestinians have no leverage at all to bargain with.
> ...


Apparently the BBC poll hasn't affected the governments of these nations since most, including many Arab countries, are pushing ahead with plan for greater trade and better diplomatic relations with Israel.  Even the EU's foreign minister is facing a backlash over his words about Israel's policies in Judea and Samaria.  While there is still some sympathy for the Palestinian people, there is much less sympathy for the political leadership of the Palestinians.  Today, even in Nigeria, the place where the Arab world convened to issue its famous three no's - no peace with Israel, not recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel - the leadership is seeking normalization of relations with Israel.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > He can't be accused of a gee-had because he's an anti-Semitic atheist.
> ...



OK, "anti-Jewish" to be perfectly clear.  Is that better?


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ JoeB131, et al,

OK, I'm confused.  Just where in the hell are you taking about.



JoeB131 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > So tell me, be specific about it, what is it that the Zionist Entity is doing in Palestine is akin to what the Afrikaaners did in South Africa?
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Slums:  Most countries have tiers of income distribution, some of which lead to lower-income housing.  Israel is no different.  Even America has lower-income and welfare housing.  Just because Israel lower-income and welfare housing can be noticed - has no being on the issue of herding.

Arabs in Israel have equal voting rights.

As far as the Law Enforcement community of Israel goes → they have very similar civil operators → in very similar uniforms → performing very similar jobs → as the European police.  It is not unusal for countries in Europe to have _Gendarmes (National Police) _in addition to the local City Police.  Almost all the major counties in Europe have some form of para-military police like the Gendarmes and Carabinieri are a special branch with similar police functions and criminal investigation activities.  Border Guard Group (GSG-9) function as a tactical unit for the German Federal Police, very similar to Israeli Special Operations Units.  The Israel National Police have Border Police that handles tactical situations as well.  Israel has absolutely nothing on the order of South Africa Slums.    To suggest so is irresponsible and totally misinformation.

What specifically is your claim?

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Apparently the BBC poll hasn't affected the governments of these nations since most, including many Arab countries, are pushing ahead with plan for greater trade and better diplomatic relations with Israel. Even the EU's foreign minister is facing a backlash over his words about Israel's policies in Judea and Samaria. While there is still some sympathy for the Palestinian people, there is much less sympathy for the political leadership of the Palestinians. Today, even in Nigeria, the place where the Arab world convened to issue its famous three no's - no peace with Israel, not recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel - the leadership is seeking normalization of relations with Israel.



You keep fantasizing that the world is going to love Zionism...


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> Slums: Most countries have tiers of income distribution, some of which lead to lower-income housing. Israel is no different. Even America has lower-income and welfare housing. Just because Israel lower-income and welfare housing can be noticed - has no being on the issue of herding.
> 
> Arabs in Israel have equal voting rights.



NO, buddy, Equal Voting rights would be all 6 Million Arabs being able to vote.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Apparently the BBC poll hasn't affected the governments of these nations since most, including many Arab countries, are pushing ahead with plan for greater trade and better diplomatic relations with Israel. Even the EU's foreign minister is facing a backlash over his words about Israel's policies in Judea and Samaria. While there is still some sympathy for the Palestinian people, there is much less sympathy for the political leadership of the Palestinians. Today, even in Nigeria, the place where the Arab world convened to issue its famous three no's - no peace with Israel, not recognition of Israel, no negotiations with Israel - the leadership is seeking normalization of relations with Israel.
> ...


Most of the world's governments seem to interested in good relations with Israel and there is a marked diminution of interest in the Palestinians in most of these governments.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> Most of the world's governments seem to interested in good relations with Israel and there is a marked diminution of interest in the Palestinians in most of these governments.



Okay, keep telling yourself that.  

Experts say BDS having a growing economic impact

DS was a major factor behind the 46% drop in foreign direct investment in Israel in 2014, according to a UN report. Israeli exporters have repeatedly complained that it is getting harder to export products to Europe. An Israeli business leader has said that European businesses are increasingly unwilling to invest in Israel because of BDS. A World Bank report reveals that Israel’s exports to the Palestinian economy dropped by 24% in the first quarter of 2015.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > Most of the world's governments seem to interested in good relations with Israel and there is a marked diminution of interest in the Palestinians in most of these governments.
> ...


lol  Yet every year Israel's exports to Europe have grown and the Israeli economy continues to grow.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ JoeB131, et al,

What the hell?
*❖  Population:  Israeli People 2019  ❖*
8,424,904 (July 2017 est.) (includes populations of the Golan Heights or Golan Sub-District and also East Jerusalem, which was annexed by Israel after 1967) (July 2018 est.) 
 _*note: * approximately 22,000 Israeli settlers live in the Golan Heights (2016); approximately 201,000 Israeli settlers live in East Jerusalem (2014)_



JoeB131 said:


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


*(COMMENT)*

Where in the world do you get "6 Million Arabs" in Israel. 

Ethnic groups:

Jewish 74.4 ≈ 6,268,129
Arab 20.9% ≈ 1,760,805
Other 4.7% (2018 est.) ≈ 310,970​
There are well less than 2 Million Arab Israelis and each has an equal vote as the rest of the Israeli population.
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Indeependent (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > No. You are just a piece of human filth who hates Jews.
> ...


Um...because nobody wanted the JOOS.
And the US and the Soviets used the JOOS and the Arabs to test out, in real life, their military equipment.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> ◈ Palestine as a Legal Entity 1929 - 1948
> • MEMORANDUM “A” LEGAL MEANING OF THE “TERMINATION OF THE MANDATE” •


2. After the 15th May, 1948, Palestine will continue to be a legal entity but it will still not be a sovereign state because it will not be immediately self-governing. The authority responsible for its administration will, however, have changed.

3. Where the sovereignty of Palestine lies at the present time in a disputed and perhaps academic legal question about which writers have expressed a number of different conclusions. Where the sovereignty of Palestine will lie after the 15th May, 1948; is perhaps also a question on which different views will be held but so far as His Majesty’s Government are aware, it is a question which it is unnecessary to answer in connection with any practical issues.

4. After the 15th May, 1948, the United Nations Commission will be the Government of Palestine. It does not seem very material whether it is considered to be the _de facto_ or the _de jure_ Government. In any case, its title to be the Government of Palestine will rest on the resolution of the General Assembly.​
Interesting twist here. Britain released its Mandate over Palestine to the United Nations Commission. However the UN did not accept that transfer. The territory and sovereignty were left to the Palestinians. So the Palestinians declared independence on their own territory inside their own international borders.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> Where in the world do you get "6 Million Arabs" in Israel.



You know damned well that the 4.5 Million Arabs in the Occupied territories and the 2 million living in exile aren't allowed to vote. 

Quit being disingenuous.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 9, 2020)

toomuchtime_ said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > toomuchtime_ said:
> ...


The political elites have mostly favored Israel,

The People? Not so much.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ JoeB131, et al,
> 
> OK, I'm confused.  Just where in the hell are you taking about.
> ...





RoccoR said:


> Slums: Most countries have tiers of income distribution, some of which lead to lower-income housing. Israel is no different.


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 9, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> toomuchtime_ said:
> 
> 
> > JoeB131 said:
> ...


The people who run the governments in most countries support Israel, and now even some Arab governments want to improve relations with Israel, and the long time anti Israel EU is facing a backlash from member countries over the EU's hostile attitudes towards Israel.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Slums: Most countries have tiers of income distribution, some of which lead to lower-income housing. Israel is no different. Even America has lower-income and welfare housing. Just because Israel lower-income and welfare housing can be noticed - has no being on the issue of herding.
> ...


Why would 6 million non-IsraelI citizens be allowed to vote in Israeli elections?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> There are countless countries that describe themselves as Islamic republics. There is only one country that represents the aspirations of the Jewish ethnicity, however.


Thank you captain obvious. And yes, Israel should cease to be a Jewish state.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 9, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > ◈ Palestine as a Legal Entity 1929 - 1948
> ...



Indeed, interesting twist. No “country of Pal’istan”.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> And yes, Israel should cease to be a Jewish state.


 
You are simply another ignorant leftist antisemite.

They seem to grow on trees around here.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> You are simply another ignorant leftist antisemite.


Wrong, as usual. I am on Israel's side in this. They are the ones trying to peacefully co exist with their neighbors. 

Sorry crybaby, your overwrought whining and fallacies don't work on me.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > You are simply another ignorant leftist antisemite.
> ...




Yet you just said Israel should cease to be a Jewish state.


 I realize from previous conversations that you are a very illogical individual, but you cannot say you are on Israel's side while seeking its destruction.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Dogmaphobe said:


> Yet you just said Israel should cease to be a Jewish state.


Correct. It should just be a state. 

If you think that is "anti semitic", then you are a fool.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→  Shusha, P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> 
> ...



_Palestine is today a legal entity but it is not a sovereign state. Palestine is a territory administered under mandate by His Majesty (in respect of the United Kingdom), who is entirely responsible both for its internal administration and for its foreign affairs._

Ah, yes.  I've seen that before, though it comes up rarely.  I should not have used the term "legal entity".  

But I think my original question still stands.  What meaning does it have as a legal entity, since it can not act in any legal capacity and has no sovereign?  It is a territorial designation, the responsibility for which passed from the British Mandate to the UN Commission.  

Are you arguing indeed that it is "territory held pending the emergence of local self-government"?


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > Slums: Most countries have tiers of income distribution, some of which lead to lower-income housing. Israel is no different. Even America has lower-income and welfare housing. Just because Israel lower-income and welfare housing can be noticed - has no being on the issue of herding.
> ...



In other words, you want Israel to apply sovereignty to the entire territory -- a one-state solution:  Israel.

BUT you want this so Israel will be eliminated.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> BUT you want this so Israel will be eliminated.


How would that "eliminate" Israel?


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> Interesting twist here. Britain released its Mandate over Palestine to the United Nations Commission. However the UN did not accept that transfer. The territory and sovereignty were left to the Palestinians. So the Palestinians declared independence on their own territory inside their own international borders.



The Arab Palestinians declared independence and the Jewish Palestinians declared independence.  But only one of them became self-governing. and a State.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > BUT you want this so Israel will be eliminated.
> ...



Well, the assumption is that Arabs would out number and therefore out vote Jews and in short order would be just another Arab Islamic State, with a minority of resident Jews and all the inherent issues of discrimination and antisemitism.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


How would that work? There are more Jews in Israel than total people in the Palestinian territories combined, I thought.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Dogmaphobe said:
> 
> 
> > Yet you just said Israel should cease to be a Jewish state.
> ...



Do you oppose the statehood of Catalonia?  Tibet?  Quebec?  Scotland?  Of Korea?  Pakistan?  Bosnia?  Serbia?  Jordan?

Why or why not?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Dogmaphobe said:
> ...


Irrelevant. I don't oppose the statehood of Israel.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



Not everyone does think it will work that way.  (see: Caroline Glick's One State Solution).  But most people subscribe to the idea that the Arab population will overrun the Jewish one in numbers.  Especially when the "right of return" (meaning for Arabs, not for Jews) is enacted.  

But both you and JoeB seem to be arguing for the same thing -- the elimination of the Jewish character of the state.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Fort Fun Indiana said:
> ...



Just the Jewish character of the statehood of Israel.  You support Israel's statehood as long as it has no Jewish character.  

So, would you insist that if Catalonia gained independent Statehood, that is must have no Catalan character?  Or if Scotland gained independence that it must have no Scottish character?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> But most people subscribe to the idea that the Arab population will overrun the Jewish one in numbers.


And, like them, I am inviting you to argue why this is, when there are more Jews just in Israel than there are all people combined in the Palestinian territories.

I am arguing that Israel should become a truly secular state with no deference to any religion or its followers. If that means losing the "jewish character" to you, then you are correct.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > But most people subscribe to the idea that the Arab population will overrun the Jewish one in numbers.
> ...



First, I'd ask why you "demand" that Israel -- of all the states in the world which are not "truly secular" -- be compelled to be so?

Then, I'd ask what "deference to religion" means here.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> First, I'd ask why you "demand" that Israel -- of all the states in the world which are not "truly secular" -- be compelled to be so?


I would ask that of every state. But since this is a more immediate and worse problem, and also the thread topic, I speak of Israel. You're fishing hard, my friend. You are wasting your time.

Now...your argument I requested? Please explain how a minority of Muslims will turn Israel into an Arab Muslim state.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > First, I'd ask why you "demand" that Israel -- of all the states in the world which are not "truly secular" -- be compelled to be so?
> ...



Totally fair.  If you demand that every state be secular and apply that equally, I can't argue.  

Now, "deference to religion"?  What does that mean?

I already answered your question.  It won't be a minority of Arabs, it will be a majority of Arabs -- 6 million Jews + 8 million Arabs, plus the expected larger Arab population growth, plus the "right of return" for Arabs (but not Jews).


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Damn it_!_  The Memo does not say that at all.  And your description here is nowhere near the reality.



P F Tinmore said:


> Interesting twist here. Britain released its Mandate over Palestine to the United Nations Commission. However, the UN did not accept that transfer. The territory and sovereignty were left to the Palestinians. So the Palestinians declared independence on their own territory inside their own international borders.



I would like to draw your attention to:

◈  CableGram DTD 15 MAY 1948 Addressed to the UN Secretary-General  Press Release S/745 15 May 1948 Department of Public Information • Press and Publications Bureau
_(Note:  This was the essentially a notice of First Actor and Aggression)_
"On the occasion of the intervention of Arab States in Palestine to restore law and order and to prevent disturbances prevailing in Palestine from spreading into their territories and to check further bloodshed, I have the honour to request your excellency to bring following statement before General Assembly and Security Council."​◈  Press* Release PAL/169** 17 May 1948*  Department of Public Information • Press and Publications Bureau
During today's brief meeting, Dr. Eduardo Morgan (Panama) said that this resolution of the Assembly merely "relieves responsibility. The Commission has not been dissolved. In fact the resolution of last November 29 has been implemented."​◈  Press *Release PAL/170** 17 May 1948*  Department of Public Information • Press and Publications Bureau
"The High Commissioner confirms that he had appointed Mr. Evans as Municipal Commissioner for Jerusalem before his departure under the Jerusalem Municipal Government Order of 1948 and he also appointed Mr. Azcarate as Mr. Evans' deputy until his arrival."​
Your response was intentional disinformation, in an attempt to deceive the members of the Discussion Group.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> I already answered your question. It won't be a minority of Arabs, it will be a majority of Arabs -- 6 million Jews + 8 million Arabs, plus the expected larger Arab population growth, plus the "right of return" for Arabs (but not Jews).


Better check those numbers.

6.7 million Jews in Israel.

1.7 million Muslims in Israel

4.7 million people total in the Palestinian territories, and not all are muslims

So your answer was not a good one. Would you like to recant or modify it?


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > I already answered your question. It won't be a minority of Arabs, it will be a majority of Arabs -- 6 million Jews + 8 million Arabs, plus the expected larger Arab population growth, plus the "right of return" for Arabs (but not Jews).
> ...



Would you like to read my answers again?  

(Yes, I over-estimated the number of Arabs in Gaza and the WB, my apologies).  


Now, "deference to religion"?  Seems hypocritical of you to demand I answer and then ignore my requests.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Would you like to read my answers again?


No, I would like you to recant your answer and present a new one that is factual. Or you can recant your claim altogether, as not only have you not supported it, it seems to be contrary to the evidence.

No, you are not going to sidestep this with your bait and switch. One thing at a time.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > I already answered your question. It won't be a minority of Arabs, it will be a majority of Arabs -- 6 million Jews + 8 million Arabs, plus the expected larger Arab population growth, plus the "right of return" for Arabs (but not Jews).
> ...



So it's about even, more or less, with the Jews having a slight majority.

So there are 4.7 million ppl in the "territories."  The Christian Arabs mainly identify as Palestinians, but there aren't much of them anymore, since they have fled from the Muslims, like in most Middle Eastern countries.  Do the 4.7 million include the Jewish "settlers?"


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> it's about even, more or less, with the Jews having a slight majority.


The numbers seem to show that. And it would require much more than a "slim majority" on the part of Muslims (a slim majority that doesn't even exist) to convert Israel to a Muslim state. 

So I find this claim to be dubious and unsupported and, in fact, contradicted by the factual info available.


----------



## ForeverYoung436 (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> ForeverYoung436 said:
> 
> 
> > it's about even, more or less, with the Jews having a slight majority.
> ...



It would be a binational state.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Shusha, et al,


Shusha said:


> But I think my original question still stands.  What meaning does it have as a legal entity, since it can not act in any legal capacity and has no sovereign?  It is a territorial designation, the responsibility for which passed from the British Mandate to the UN Commission.
> 
> Are you arguing indeed that it is "territory held pending the emergence of local self-government"?


*(COMMENT)*

Several attempts were made to establish an institution through which representatives for the Arab Palestinian population could be integrated into a cooperative effort with the High Commissioner. The High Commissioner proposed “the establishment of an Arab Agency in Palestine which will occupy a position exactly analogous to that accorded to the Jewish Agency”.

The Arab Palestinians maintained an uncooperative stance throughout the Mandate Period.  But if they had cooperated, the High Commissioner could have governed Palestine with the aid of Councils which would have included Arab Palestinian input at the Commissioner's level of staff officials.  We will never know what a difference would have been made if the Arab Palestinians had cooperated when asked in 1923.

But the Arab Palestinians give the sob story impression that they were completely cut off from the process leading to self-governing Institutions.  The hamstrung themselves.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 9, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > ForeverYoung436 said:
> ...


It would be a failed state, but fortunately there is no support in Israel for annexing all of Judea and Samaria but only for annexing some or all of area C so the premise this whole conversation is based on bears no relation to reality.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Would you like to read my answers again?
> ...



Sigh. I have already apologized for my initial overestimation of the Arabs in Gaza and the WB.  And I have already noted that not all people believe this will be the outcome. (again, see: Caroline Glick's One State Solution).

Kindly address my points.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

ForeverYoung436 said:


> It would be a binational state.


I suppose so.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Sigh. I have already apologized for my initial overestimation of the Arabs in Gaza and the WB.


But yet you have not retracted or better qualified your claim that Israel would then be overrun by Arab Muslims, turning it into an Arab Muslim state.

So...?

No, I will not be addressing your bait and switch yet. One thing at a time.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ Shusha, et al,
> 
> 
> ...




Yes.  But that doesn't address my point.  

Or rather, I guess it adds another layer to my point.  What is the point of the territory as a "legal entity" if self-government is not only failing to emerge, but refused?!


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Sigh. I have already apologized for my initial overestimation of the Arabs in Gaza and the WB.
> ...



Its a bit bold of you to ignore fully half of my points, and then complain that I haven't made any.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
 ⁜→  Fort Fun Indiana, et al,

I think you are confused.



Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > I already answered your question. It won't be a minority of Arabs, it will be a majority of Arabs -- 6 million Jews + 8 million Arabs, plus the expected larger Arab population growth, plus the "right of return" for Arabs (but not Jews).
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

The Palestinians in the disputed territories outside the sovereign Israeli Territory are not part of the Israeli citizenry.  They belong to the "State of Palestine" as President Mahmoud Abbas likes to point out.  And those 4.7 Million people have their own elections _(if their government allows them)_.


Israeli Citizens don't participate in Palestinian Government _(except when the Arab Palestinians want money)_ and the Arab Palestinian citizens don't vote in Israeli elections; but, do vote in State of Palestine elections → just as they did a decade ago.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Its a bit bold of you to ignore fully half of my points, and then complain that I haven't made any.


I didn't claim you haven't made any points. You tried a bait and switch, and now you are making up lies. This isn't helping your credibility.

We are still discussing your claim that the Arab Muslims will overrun israel and turn it into an arab muslim State. Considering the factual info presented since you made the claim, I fully understand why you don't want to talk about it anymore. But you will be talking to someone else, then.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> The Palestinians in the disputed territories outside the sovereign Israeli Territory are not part of the Israeli citizenry. They belong to the "State of Palestine" as President Mahmoud Abbas likes to point out. And those 4.7 Million people have their own elections


You are not following. We are discussing the scenario in which they are all deemed "Israelis" overnight. Slow down.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Shusha, et al,

That is called the Ostrich Effect _(bury their head in the sand)_.



Shusha said:


> Yes.  But that doesn't address my point.
> 
> Or rather, I guess it adds another layer to my point.  What is the point of the territory as a "legal entity" if self-government is not only failing to emerge, but refused?!


*(COMMENT)*

In 1945, when the original members of the UN wrote Article 70 in the Charter and created the Trusteeship, no one envisioned a situation that the Arab Palestinians created.  And without the cooperation and positive effort on the part of the Arab Palestinians, they will stay in the gray zone until they collapse, and everyone has to start shipping in medicine, food and water.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> n 1945, when the original members of the in the Charter and created the Trusteeship, no one envisioned a situation that the Arab Palestinians created.



The trusteeship was created precisely because the Arabs were violently preventing a two State reality. So I don't get your point, here.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > Its a bit bold of you to ignore fully half of my points, and then complain that I haven't made any.
> ...



Actually, we were discussing a number of different issues, all related.  It is your bullying and gaslighting behaviour which has narrowed it down to this singular point.  You seem to want to hide behind this in order to avoid the larger questions.  

To re-iterate my points, should Israel apply sovereignty to the entire territory:

1.  The demographics will immediately change to roughly even numbers of Arabs and Jews.
2.  The Arab population growth is expected to be higher than the Jewish population growth.
3.  The Arab right of return will significantly change the demographics.
4.  Not everyone believes that the Arab population will outgrow the Jewish one.
5.  Many who wish to see the elimination of the Israel (the Jewish state) make this argument on these discussion boards because they do believe the Arab population will outgrow the Jewish one and convert Palestine into an Arab Muslim state.  They often justify this as the morally correct thing to do.  (As JoeB has, and as you seem wont to do).

Now, we can talk about the projected demographics if you want.  Its a fascinating discussion. And relevant to this thread.  Have you read Caroline's book? 

But its also important to discuss what these potential changes MEAN to the Jewish people and, also, to the Arab Palestinians who will lose their chance for an independent state.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> Actually, we were discussing a number of different issues, all related. It is your bullying and gaslighting behaviour which has narrowed it down to this singular point. Y


No, your apparently spurious claim which is contradicted by the factual information, and which you refuse to recant or modify, is what is causing the focus on this point.

It's simple: recant or modify it. Sorry, I am immune to your Gish Gallop attempts and your bait and switch. I am not letting it stand.

Like I said, you can recant it and admit your error, or talk to someone else.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Shusha, et al,

Well, I see your point, but it is not recognized.

[QUOTE="Fort Fun Indiana, post: 24030124, member: 62138"You are not following. We are discussing the scenario in which they are all deemed "Israelis" overnight. Slow down.[/QUOTE]
*(COMMENT)*

If the general population of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip were all to become citizens overnight, the burden placed on Israel would be so great that you risk having two failed states and a very accomplished set of Terrorist Groups unleashed upon the world.  Already, the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS) has been essentially declared *persona non grata* _(for activities inconsistent with their status)_ in Saudi Arabia.

See:  
* Why does Saudi Arabia describe Hamas as a terrorist organisation?*
 March 9, 2018 at 11:25 am | Published in: Article, Asia & Americas, Israel, Middle East, Opinion, Palestine, Saudi Arabia,

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ Shusha, et al,
> 
> That is called the Ostrich Effect _(bury their head in the sand)_.
> ...



Well, yes, I agree.  Are you arguing that the legal entity is a Trusteeship for Arab Palestinians (as distinct from Jewish Palestinians) which continues to exist?


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> If the general population of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip were all to become citizens overnight, the burden placed on Israel would be so great that you risk having two failed states and a very accomplished set of Terrorist Groups unleashed upon the world.


Why would Israel be at risk of becoming a failed state?

Terrorists unleashed on the world? How? What new, magical power or access would they have?

I keep seeing a lot of frightening claims, but I am seeing very little or no evidence presented for them.


----------



## Shusha (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> No, your apparently spurious claim which is contradicted by the factual information ....



You have not demonstrated that my claims are contradicted by the factual information, other than my initial over-estimation of Gaza and WB Arab population, which I have addressed, three times now.


----------



## Fort Fun Indiana (Feb 9, 2020)

Shusha said:


> You have not demonstrated that my claims are contradicted by the factual information


Your claim that Israel would be overrun and converted to an Arab Muslim state is absolutely contradicted by the facts presented. If you think it is not, then it is up to you to account for these facts and tell us how a minority would accomplish such a thing.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Fort Fun Indiana, et al,

Hummm, I guess you might not.



Fort Fun Indiana said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > n 1945, when the original members of the in the Charter and created the Trusteeship, no one envisioned a situation that the Arab Palestinians created.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

In 1945, the Leaders of the Greatest Generation could not conceive of a general population that would be satisfied to have a failed state and a dismal human development record for more than four more generations, and working on a fifth.

Where Israel _(Ranked 22/189)_ is in the Top 25 of the Developed Nations of the World, the Arab Palestinians _(Ranked 119/189)_ and are satisfied with that having made no significant development since the creation of the PLO.
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Feb 9, 2020)

Fort Fun Indiana said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > If the general population of the West Bank, Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip were all to become citizens overnight, the burden placed on Israel would be so great that you risk having two failed states and a very accomplished set of Terrorist Groups unleashed upon the world.
> ...


You are certainly an ignorant young fellow, aren't you?

Lebanon had a Christian majority when it was established. Look at it now.

You know absolutely nothing, yet wade in and try to intimidate people with your double talk, anyway.
Have you been taking lessons from the person who started this thread as a disingenous attempt at gaining support for the destruction of Israel?


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 9, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ Shusha, Fort Fun Indiana, et al,

I have to admit, I did not read her whole book.

But what I want you to think about is WHY the Suadi Arabians kicked-out the Islamic Resistance Movement, or why the Hashemite Kingdom kicked out the PLO in the 1970s; breaking all ties in the late 1980s.



Shusha said:


> Fort Fun Indiana said:
> 
> 
> > Shusha said:
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

This is a risk that is for Israel to consider; and for Israelis to decide all on their own.

I don't think that the Israeli's are going to immediately embrace and allow their treasury to bleed when you dump all those unemployed on the Israeli economy...

_• _ The ILO’s annual report on the situation of workers of the occupied Arab territories calls for dialogue and a joint search for solutions to bring about decent work._  •_​The Arab Palestinians will be are going to want instant change.  There will be friction.  There will be generations of displeasure.  The hardworking Israels are not going to want to pay for what it is going to cost to bring the Palestinian Infrastructure up to speed.  Few Israelis are going to want to pay for the free-loading Arab Palestinians.  The employment opportunities are on a very different level than the West Bank and Gaza Strip.  There is going to be frustration on both sides.

The police will be happy.  Their continued employment will be assured.  But what do you do with a market of out-of-work Jihadist, Fedayeen Activist, Hostile Insurgents, Radicalized Islamic Followers, and Asymmetric Fighters?  You see them in every march,→ children on bomb vests → entire families.  And then there will be those that are living off the terrorist stipen.



​There is a "risk."  We in America have first-hand knowledge of just what kind of havoc 12 terrorists can do.  But we can sit back and watch as several thousand are released into the general population.  We can sit back as we watch them get identity and travel documents and new passports → the tools needed to distribute themselves around the Middle East and North Africa.

Do you think for one moment that the fighting stops and the guns are turned-in just because their citizenship changes?

Just wondering.
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Damn it_!_  The Memo does not say that at all.  And your description here is nowhere near the reality.
> ...





P F Tinmore said:


> Interesting twist here. Britain released its Mandate over Palestine to the United Nations Commission. However, the UN did not accept that transfer. The territory and sovereignty were left to the Palestinians. So the Palestinians declared independence on their own territory inside their own international borders.


What part of my post was incorrect?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> ◈  CableGram DTD 15 MAY 1948 Addressed to the UN Secretary-General Press Release S/745 15 May 1948 Department of Public Information • Press and Publications Bureau
> _(Note: This was the essentially a notice of First Actor and Aggression)_


Good read, thanks.

BTW, how is restoring law and orders an aggression?


----------



## Hollie (Feb 10, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...



The parts delineated for you.


----------



## Dogmaphobe (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> That is called the Ostrich Effect _(bury their head in the sand)_.
> 
> 
> R



That is ONE explanation.  There are actually two.

 Acting like an ostrich would indicate a person is ignoring reality through stupidity, naivete', lack of knowledge, lack of reason or some combination thereof, and allows for the possibility that the person is acting with sincerity and something other than ill intent.

The more likely explanation, however, is subterfuge and that those who seek to destroy Israel through demographics are doing so with full intent and with full understanding of the outcome.

Considering that some people here have been advocating this for years, and people point out the implications time after time, that removes the possibility of naivete' from the equation and points in an undeniable fashion towards malicious intent.

If anybody is acting like an ostrich here, it is you for giving people the benefit of the doubt time after time after time even though they have proven beyond doubt that they are not naïve, are not particularly stupid and know fully well that what they advocate is nothing less than the destruction of Israel. They do not do this for ANY other state, so logic dictates that their animus towards Jewish people is the driving force in their seeking Israel's destruction.

There is that old adage "fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me".  By assuming people are acting out of naivete' rather than malice, that shame is now upon you, especially considering that you have been fooled thousands of times by now into thinking people are acting in good faith when they most certainly have a malicious agenda, instead.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 10, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I think I copied this somewhere.

I also think that it was a conspiratorial and attempted coordinated attack by the Arab League participants to cross the frontier in military force under the excuse of "restoring law and orders."



P F Tinmore said:


> BTW, how is restoring law and orders an aggression?


*(COMMENT)*

• *Article 5(1) A/RES/29/3314 Definition of Aggression* •
"No consideration of whatever nature, whether political, economic, military or otherwise, may serve as a justification for aggression."​
_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 10, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→  Fort Fun Indiana, et al,

BLUF:  Whether or not the Israeli People want a Jewish State [_BTW: That we the terminology and description used by the *UN in 1947 • *__*A/RES/181(II)* Future of Palestine • Part II Boundaries_] is a decision they have to make as a matter of self-determination.



Fort Fun Indiana said:


> Shusha said:
> 
> 
> > But most people subscribe to the idea that the Arab population will overrun the Jewish one in numbers.
> ...


*(REFERENCE)*

_*Article 18 •
◈  International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ◈*_

1. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This right shall include freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching.

*2. No one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice. *

3. Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.

4. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and, when applicable, legal guardians to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with their own convictions.​
*(COMMENT)*

My understanding is that the State of Israel does not have laws would impair a citizen's freedom of adopting a religion or belief of his choice.  Not does international law have prohibitions against the right of self-determination relative to a  religious or a spiritual basis.

*(COUNTER-QUESTIONS)*

Are you of a mind that opposes the International Covenant?

Why should non-citizens (of Israel) care either way on the people's decision?

It is not our decision to make.  And to say that the Israeli decision to have a Jewish State somehow threatens the regional peace and security runs counter to the covenant.  The Neighboring Arab League States know the Covenant.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## Indeependent (Feb 10, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...


Link?


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I think I copied this somewhere.
> ...


So you think that defending the Palestinians is aggression?

Interesting concept.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 10, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,



P F Tinmore said:


> Interesting twist here. Britain released its Mandate over Palestine to the United Nations Commission. However the UN did not accept that transfer. The territory and sovereignty were left to the Palestinians. So the .





P F Tinmore said:


> What part of my post was incorrect?


*(ANSWER to WHAT IS INCORRECT)*

◈  "the UN did not accept that transfer."

*Article 77 UN Trusteeship • UN Chater*

1. The trusteeship system shall apply to such territories in the following categories as may be placed thereunder by means of trusteeship agreements:
a. territories now held under mandate;​*Part 1B • A/RES/181 (II) •  Steps Preparatory to Independence*

A Commission shall be set up consisting of one representative of each of five Member States. The Members represented on the Commission shall be elected by the General Assembly on as broad a basis, geographically and otherwise, as possible.​
*A/AC.21/7 29 January 1948 • United Nations Palestine Commission (UNPC) • UN First Monthly Progress Report*

As regards the Arab Higher Committee, the following telegraphic response was received by the Secretary-General on 19 January:


“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”
*A/AC.21/SR.44 REPORT BY MR. FEDERSPIEL ON NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE MANDATORY POWER CONCERNING TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY*

He observed that Memorandum “A” of the United Kingdom delegation on the Legal Meaning of the “Termination of the Mandate” (Informal Paper UK/42) was satisfactory. It recognized the Commission as the successor Government of Palestine upon the termination of the United Kingdom Mandate after 15 May, its title resting on the resolution of the General Assembly. ​
◈  "territory and sovereignty were left to the Palestinians"

*A/AC.21/SR.44 REPORT BY MR. FEDERSPIEL ON NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE MANDATORY POWER CONCERNING TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY*

The point regarding the *question of the sovereignty of Palestine* he thought to be quite unimportant for the specific task assigned to the Commission. As regards the transfer of the assets of the Government of Palestine, he was informed that the Mandatory Power would deal with it immediately.​
◈  "Palestinians declared independence on their own territory inside their own international borders"

*A/C.1/330 14 October 1948 All Palestine Government (APG) •  Pertaining to the APG Constitution*

"Declare Palestine in its entirety and with the Boundaries as established before the termination of the British Mandate an Independent State and Constituted a Government."​
*(COMMENT)*

The acceptance of the transfer was automatic under the charter.  Before the termination of the Mandate, the Jewish People cooperated with the UNPC and the Arab Higher Committee did NOT cooperate.

The Government of Palestine was transferred from the UK to the UNPC, less the territory previously coordinated and assigned as the Jewish State by the name the State of Israel.

The territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine was not available for the unestablished government.  The State of Israel was already established under the right of self-determination by the Jewish People through the emergence of an independent government.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 10, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I did not say that.



P F Tinmore said:


> So you think that defending the Palestinians is aggression?
> 
> Interesting concept.


*(COMMENT)*

What the issue is:

The territory was either under the administration of the UN through the Trusteeship Program, or under the independent sovereignty of Israel.  And attempt to cross out of their sovereignty and into the UN or Israeli controlled territory is unlawful.  You see the citations.

What you are advocating is the contradictions to the Civil and Political Right under law that you love to hide behind.  You cannot have it both ways.  The _*◈ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ◈* _applied equally to all - or it is irrelevant; and none of the Civil and Political Rights are protected by law.

What is it_ to be?



_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> 
> ...





RoccoR said:


> The territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine was not available for the unestablished government. The State of Israel was already established under the right of self-determination by the Jewish People through the emergence of an independent government.


Show me where Palestine's declaration encroached on Israels defined territory.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 10, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...



The Hamas Charter.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I did not say that.
> ...





RoccoR said:


> The territory was either under the administration of the UN through the Trusteeship Program, or under the independent sovereignty of Israel.


Links?


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 10, 2020)

RE: What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

For some reason, the Links did not take.



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The territory was either under the administration of the UN through the Trusteeship Program, or under the independent sovereignty of Israel.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Take Two:

*Article 77 UN Trusteeship • UN Chater*
*Part 1B • A/RES/181 (II) *
_*A/AC.21/SR.44 REPORT BY MR. FEDERSPIEL ON NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE MANDATORY POWER CONCERNING TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE RESPONSIBILITY*_
_





_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 10, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

Oh for heaven sake_!_



P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > The territory formerly under the Mandate for Palestine was not available for the unestablished government. The State of Israel was already established under the right of self-determination by the Jewish People through the emergence of an independent government.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Doesn't the damn cablegram say that they want the entirety,  And wasn't it the case that Egypt took by force and held the Gaza Strip?  And wasn't it the case that the Jordanian came and took the West Bank and portions of Jerusalem?  And wasn't it the case that the territory, less that was declared Israel, under UN Trusteeship?

•  10/14/1948 A/C.1/330 All-Palestine Government - Cablegram from Premier and Acting Foreign Secretary to SecGen  •

RESOLVED TO DECLARE PALESTINE* IN ITS ENTIRETY* AND WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES AS ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE TERMINATION OF THE BRITISH MANDATE AN INDEPENDENT STATE

They _(the Arab Palestinians under Egyptian Direction)_ were set to steal the land, all of it.  It was actually the Israeli Defense Force that saved the Middle East from the creation of another slow developing country.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman (Feb 10, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > International pariah? Really? My goodness you know even less about Israel than I thought! The opinion of you and your friends do not represent what most people think.
> ...


Now ask yourself of all the people or countries that voted , how many were Arab/Muslim? Ya, that’s what il I thought ...


----------



## Indeependent (Feb 10, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> toastman said:
> 
> 
> > International pariah? Really? My goodness you know even less about Israel than I thought! The opinion of you and your friends do not represent what most people think.
> ...


It’s called envy.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> 
> ...





RoccoR said:


> ◈ "the UN did not accept that transfer."


Sure, the UN accepted the transfer until May 15, 1948 and then they disappeared.

BTW, what part of the UN Charter gives the UN the authority to divide a territory.


----------



## P F Tinmore (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> Oh for heaven sake_!_
> ...





RoccoR said:


> They _(the Arab Palestinians under Egyptian Direction)_ were set to steal the land, all of it.


The Palestinians wanted to steal Palestine.

WTF


----------



## toomuchtime_ (Feb 10, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...


The territory was land surrendered by Turkey to the allies at the end of WWI.  It was a trust held by the League of Nations and then the UN, and as such it was an internal matter of the UN and fell under the jurisdiction of the UNGA and not the UNSC, which deals with issues between member countries.  With the Partition resolution, which was passed by the UNGA and not by the UNSC, the UN divested itself of all  interest and jurisdiction over the territory and since the parts of it that are not formally parts of Israel do not constitute a member state, neither the UNGA nor the UNSC have any jurisdiction over it and no resolutions passed by either body are binding on UN member states.


----------



## Hollie (Feb 10, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...



It’s remarkable that you have learned nothing in all the time you have been cutting and pasting those same comments,


----------



## toastman (Feb 10, 2020)

P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ...


Whenever Rocco puts you against the wal, as he does quite often, you reply by asking stupid unanswerable questions. BTW, where is your link?


----------



## toastman (Feb 10, 2020)

Hollie said:


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



There is no way that he believes any of the crap he posts.


----------



## Indeependent (Feb 10, 2020)

toastman said:


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


He is mentally ill.


----------



## RoccoR (Feb 10, 2020)

RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,

I tried to answer your question_! _
If you don't want to accept the answers, then don't; but don't twist them around.


P F Tinmore said:


> RoccoR said:
> 
> 
> > They _(the Arab Palestinians under Egyptian Direction)_ were set to steal the land, all of it.
> ...


*(COMMENT)*

Well, --- it was really the Egyptians putting a pretty Arab Palestinian face on the territorial project.  The face took the form of the provisional All Palestine Government.  In 1959, the Egyptians tired of the project and disband and dissolved the All Palestine Government.

Meanwhile, the Jordanians are trying to position themselves such that they become the great protector of the various site of religious importance; to include the Temple Mount.  This would be similar to the position of the influence his father had as the Protector of Mecca.

_

_
Most Respectfully,
R


----------



## toastman (Feb 10, 2020)

RoccoR said:


> RE:  What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote
> ⁜→ P F Tinmore, et al,
> 
> I tried to answer your question_! _
> ...


That’s exactly right, he simply cannot accept your answers because they speak the truth , which of course, contradicts his Palestinian Propsganda and lies....


----------

