Israel's Legal Right To Exist

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

Well, that is your interpretation; not the correct interpretation.

You are laughing about the killing of Christians and Jews? What's the matter with you? And why are you claiming that a Christian, such as myself, who despises Islam would support the killing of Christians?

(COMMENT)

There are many things about the Arab Palestinian that are comedic and draw laughter. One of which is that the self-proclaimed Arab Palestinian Jihadists and the Radical Islamic Resistance try to present themselves as some sort of heroic militant rather than the state population that supports Asymmetric Violence.

As long as the various Palestinian Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters, insist on putting their general population at a disadvantage, and as long as they condemn their population to poverty and the drawbacks associated with their continuation of hostilities, so will it be their fault (a self-inflicted wound) for the lack of positive development.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[montelatici]

So, what would heroic and patriotic resistance to military occupation be, Rocco. Do you think that they should passively accept military occupation?

 

[RoccoR]

montelatici, et al,

Oh, you act like this has not been discussed.

So, what would heroic and patriotic resistance to military occupation be, Rocco. Do you think that they should passively accept military occupation?

(COMMENT)

• Chapter I, Article 1(1), UN Charter: To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

• A/RES/25/2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States Paragraph 1 --- Solemnly proclaims the following principles: Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip --- ARTICLE XXI Settlement of Differences and Disputes: Any difference relating to the application of this Agreement shall be referred to the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism established under this Agreement. The provisions of Article XV of the DOP shall apply to any such difference which is not settled through the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism, namely:

1. Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Agreement or any related agreements pertaining to the interim period shall be settled through the Liaison Committee.

2. Disputes which cannot be settled by negotiations may be settled by a mechanism of conciliation to be agreed between the Parties.

3. The Parties may agree to submit to arbitration disputes relating to the interim period, which cannot be settled through conciliation. To this end, upon the agreement of both Parties, the Parties will establish an Arbitration Committee.
​

How about just doing the very practical; that which was established even before Israel was declared independent.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Shusha]

So, what would heroic and patriotic resistance to military occupation be, Rocco. Do you think that they should passively accept military occupation?

If by 'end the occupation' you mean that Israel continues to exist on some part of the territory, YES, yes, they should passively accept that. Israel is not going away and the sooner that is accepted the better for everyone.

If by 'end the occupation' you mean end the blockade of Gaza, YES, yes, they should passively accept that. The blockade is a response to violence and will continue as long as there is violence. The best (and by 'best' I mean only) way to get rid of the blockade is to stop attacking Israel.

If by 'end the occupation' you mean defining a territory and creating a border between two States and signing a peace treaty, YES, yes, they should passively accept that. That will give them the self-determination they say they want.

If by 'end the occupation' you mean the end of any two State solution and Israel takes over the entire territory; YES, yes, they should passively accept that. Israel is not going to incorporate a hostile population intent on random and not random violence into its State.

If by 'end the occupation' you mean ethnically cleansing Arab Muslim Palestine, YES, yes they should passively accept that. And be damned grateful that the world is against the Jewish people enough to actually suggest such an atrocity, let alone make UN resolutions in favor of it, let alone carry it out.

In other words, all of this senseless, random, low-level, terrorism is getting the Palestinians exactly no where. If they want a one State solution "resistance" prevents that. If they want a two State solution resistance prevents that. If they want to end the blockade resistance prevents that. If they want to destroy Israel resistance is pointless and ultimately harms Palestinians FAR more than it harms Israel. If they want a Judenrein State, resistance is unnecessary because the international community already supports that (to their abject shame).

In fact, the only benefit to this kind of low-level terrorism is to make the Muslim Palestinians feel like they are being good little Allah warriors by killing Jews.

 

[montelatici]

montelatici, et al,

Oh, you act like this has not been discussed.

So, what would heroic and patriotic resistance to military occupation be, Rocco. Do you think that they should passively accept military occupation?

(COMMENT)

• Chapter I, Article 1(1), UN Charter: To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

• A/RES/25/2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States Paragraph 1 --- Solemnly proclaims the following principles: Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip --- ARTICLE XXI Settlement of Differences and Disputes: Any difference relating to the application of this Agreement shall be referred to the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism established under this Agreement. The provisions of Article XV of the DOP shall apply to any such difference which is not settled through the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism, namely:

1. Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Agreement or any related agreements pertaining to the interim period shall be settled through the Liaison Committee.

2. Disputes which cannot be settled by negotiations may be settled by a mechanism of conciliation to be agreed between the Parties.

3. The Parties may agree to submit to arbitration disputes relating to the interim period, which cannot be settled through conciliation. To this end, upon the agreement of both Parties, the Parties will establish an Arbitration Committee.
​

How about just doing the very practical; that which was established even before Israel was declared independent.

Most Respectfully,
R

So you both believe it would have been reasonable (and practical) in 1947 for the Palestinians to have abandoned a third of their population, the Christians and Muslims left in the Jewish partition, which with the Bedouin formed a majority population, within the part of Palestine given to the Jews. You believe they should have agreed that their fellow Palestinians would never achieve self-determination and would be ruled by Jews forever.

Do you think any people would have passively accepted such a thing?

You may say, well look what resisting got them. Well, people resist injustice, that's the way people are.

I don't think you two have a clue as to the injustice done to the Muslims and Christians by the UN. The UN which states:

"To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;"

Instead the UN's action insured decades of conflict. The UN was quite cognizant that their action resulted in an injustice to the native people of Palestine. That's why Palestinian refugees have a special status. It was guilt.

As for now, Israel has never agreed to the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state and the leadership has stated that there will never be one, so resistance is the only course of action for the Palestinians. They have to make Israel occupation as costly and untenable as possible. The only hope they have is that pressure from the rest of the world will succeed in forcing Israel to accept a sovereign Palestinian state, i.e. not a fake state with Israeli forces occupying the area, as was proposed before.

 

[Hollie]

So, what would heroic and patriotic resistance to military occupation be, Rocco. Do you think that they should passively accept military occupation?

It's truly a pathology that causes you to flail your Pom Poms for Islamic terrorists. The Hamas charter is hardly a document that suggests heroism or patriotism.

But then, your heroes share a consistent theme: Ministry of Propaganda and Public Enlightenment

 

[P F Tinmore]

and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace,

The Zionist's settler colonial project was the initial act of aggression that started this whole mess.

 

[Hollie]

and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace,

The Zionist's settler colonial project was the initial act of aggression that started this whole mess.

Your use of silly slogans and clichés is a hoot.

 

[P F Tinmore]

montelatici, et al,

Oh, you act like this has not been discussed.

So, what would heroic and patriotic resistance to military occupation be, Rocco. Do you think that they should passively accept military occupation?

(COMMENT)

• Chapter I, Article 1(1), UN Charter: To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

• A/RES/25/2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States Paragraph 1 --- Solemnly proclaims the following principles: Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip --- ARTICLE XXI Settlement of Differences and Disputes: Any difference relating to the application of this Agreement shall be referred to the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism established under this Agreement. The provisions of Article XV of the DOP shall apply to any such difference which is not settled through the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism, namely:

1. Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Agreement or any related agreements pertaining to the interim period shall be settled through the Liaison Committee.

2. Disputes which cannot be settled by negotiations may be settled by a mechanism of conciliation to be agreed between the Parties.

3. The Parties may agree to submit to arbitration disputes relating to the interim period, which cannot be settled through conciliation. To this end, upon the agreement of both Parties, the Parties will establish an Arbitration Committee.
​

How about just doing the very practical; that which was established even before Israel was declared independent.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel is going to eat up all of Palestine no matter what they do. That has been the goal for a hundred years.

While you suggest a bunch of crap that won't work.

 

[MJB12741]

and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace,

The Zionist's settler colonial project was the initial act of aggression that started this whole mess.

Black November. Don't you just love the British?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is an over exaggeration in itself. I'm not sure you can predict today, what Israel will do tomorrow; because I'm not sure if the Israelis know themselves what the ultimate the current undertakings will lead them.

Don't jump to conclusions.

montelatici, et al,

Oh, you act like this has not been discussed.

So, what would heroic and patriotic resistance to military occupation be, Rocco. Do you think that they should passively accept military occupation?

(COMMENT)

• Chapter I, Article 1(1), UN Charter: To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

• A/RES/25/2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States Paragraph 1 --- Solemnly proclaims the following principles: Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip --- ARTICLE XXI Settlement of Differences and Disputes: Any difference relating to the application of this Agreement shall be referred to the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism established under this Agreement. The provisions of Article XV of the DOP shall apply to any such difference which is not settled through the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism, namely:

1. Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Agreement or any related agreements pertaining to the interim period shall be settled through the Liaison Committee.

2. Disputes which cannot be settled by negotiations may be settled by a mechanism of conciliation to be agreed between the Parties.

3. The Parties may agree to submit to arbitration disputes relating to the interim period, which cannot be settled through conciliation. To this end, upon the agreement of both Parties, the Parties will establish an Arbitration Committee.
​

How about just doing the very practical; that which was established even before Israel was declared independent.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel is going to eat up all of Palestine no matter what they do. That has been the goal for a hundred years.
While you suggest a bunch of crap that won't work.

(INTERIM ANSWERS)

Why will it not work?

∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have too many demands that if conceded would put Israeli Sovereignty at risk?
∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have a dysfunctional government that cannot compromise?
∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have a level of corruption that thrives on the conflict and profits from the continuation?
∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have produced an unskilled labor force, several generations deep, and do not know anything but how to be a Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters?
∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have glorified the campaign against Israel so much, that they see violence as a popular and respectable service to the community?
​

(COMMENT)

There are many that simply benefit more from the continuation of the struggle --- than they do by coming together in a common cause of rebuilding their nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore, et al,

Well, this is an over exaggeration in itself. I'm not sure you can predict today, what Israel will do tomorrow; because I'm not sure if the Israelis know themselves what the ultimate the current undertakings will lead them.

Don't jump to conclusions.

montelatici, et al,

Oh, you act like this has not been discussed.

So, what would heroic and patriotic resistance to military occupation be, Rocco. Do you think that they should passively accept military occupation?

(COMMENT)

• Chapter I, Article 1(1), UN Charter: To maintain international peace and security, and to that end: to take effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment or settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace;

• A/RES/25/2625 Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States Paragraph 1 --- Solemnly proclaims the following principles: Every State has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate the existing international boundaries of another State or as a means of solving international disputes, including territorial disputes and problems concerning frontiers of States.

• Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip --- ARTICLE XXI Settlement of Differences and Disputes: Any difference relating to the application of this Agreement shall be referred to the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism established under this Agreement. The provisions of Article XV of the DOP shall apply to any such difference which is not settled through the appropriate coordination and cooperation mechanism, namely:

1. Disputes arising out of the application or interpretation of this Agreement or any related agreements pertaining to the interim period shall be settled through the Liaison Committee.

2. Disputes which cannot be settled by negotiations may be settled by a mechanism of conciliation to be agreed between the Parties.

3. The Parties may agree to submit to arbitration disputes relating to the interim period, which cannot be settled through conciliation. To this end, upon the agreement of both Parties, the Parties will establish an Arbitration Committee.
​

How about just doing the very practical; that which was established even before Israel was declared independent.

Most Respectfully,
R

Israel is going to eat up all of Palestine no matter what they do. That has been the goal for a hundred years.
While you suggest a bunch of crap that won't work.

(INTERIM ANSWERS)

Why will it not work?

∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have too many demands that if conceded would put Israeli Sovereignty at risk?
∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have a dysfunctional government that cannot compromise?
∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have a level of corruption that thrives on the conflict and profits from the continuation?
∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have produced an unskilled labor force, several generations deep, and do not know anything but how to be a Jihadist, Deadly Fedayeen, Hostile Insurgent, Radicalized Islamist, and Asymmetric Fighters?
∆∆ RHETORICAL ANSWER: Is it because the Arab Palestinians have glorified the campaign against Israel so much, that they see violence as a popular and respectable service to the community?
​

(COMMENT)

There are many that simply benefit more from the continuation of the struggle --- than they do by coming together in a common cause of rebuilding their nation.

Most Respectfully,
R

Who writes your shit, Rocco?

 

[Shusha]

​

Who writes your shit, Rocco?

Translation: I have no reasonable counter-argument to your post.

 

[MJB12741]

​

Who writes your shit, Rocco?

Translation: I have no reasonable counter-argument to your post.

Documented facts just don't bode well with Tinmore & his ilk. But they sure are fun to play with.

 

[montelatici]

The documented fact is that European Zionists invaded a territory inhabited by Muslims and Christians.

 

[P F Tinmore]

​

Who writes your shit, Rocco?

Translation: I have no reasonable counter-argument to your post.

A hit piece does not warrant a detailed response.

 

[Hollie]

The documented fact is that European Zionists invaded a territory inhabited by Muslims and Christians.

Your supposed documented facts are a farce. Provide the specific data for the imagined invasion you claim has occurred.

Obviously you can't. That makes your blustering claims nothing more than so much noise.

 

[Hollie]

​

Who writes your shit, Rocco?

Translation: I have no reasonable counter-argument to your post.

A hit piece does not warrant a detailed response.

Nice dodge

 

[MJB12741]

The documented fact is that European Zionists invaded a territory inhabited by Muslims and Christians.

There were no indigenous Muslim Palestinians. There were however Jews as indigenous Palestinians.

 

[montelatici]

Of course the Muslims and Christian Palestinians were indigenous. There were no indigenous Jews, all indigenous people were required to convert to Christianity in 308 AD, and non-Christians were forbidden from entering Palestine from that date until the Muslim conquest.