The Two State Option Is Dying

[toastman]

P F Tinmore; et al,

We will never agree on this.

The problem with the two state solution and all the old partition plans is that they all start with the Palestinians ceding most of their land to Israel. This is something they have never done. They have never ceded any land to Israel, and except for a few wannabe oligarchs around Ramallah, they still refuse to do so.

To date Palestine still has the land and borders and Israel has the guns and bombs. This has been the stalemate since 1948.

(COMMENT)

I not seen a single piece of evidence (prior to November of last year) that suggests the Palestinians had land or borders.

I have seen post-War Treaties and Armistices; borders with Israel. Maybe you could show me a Treaty or Armistice with Palestine that grants borders.

Most Respectfully,
R

Maybe you could show me a Treaty or Armistice with Palestine that grants borders.

Could you clarify your request?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think he's asking how were Palestine's borders acquired ...

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

That's easy. I'll quote Tinmore " There's nothing to Negotiate". Israel is not going to go back to Borders that were never accepted in the first place, give up E. Jerusalem which has their most sacred religious sites, or allow " Right of Return". Whenever I ask a Pro Palestinian why there is always talk about " negotiations" there is no response.

No " negotiations", No " Two State Solution"

Difficult to understand all of this, I asked a poster to set forth his own view and here I find yet another Zionist who cannot do this. A poster should be capable of having a viewpoint that they can possess and clearly set forth without bringing their perceptions of the ideas of other posters into it. I cannot make sense of anything you said in your post.

The reason it's so difficult to understand is because you cannot see the truth. Your mind is clouded with Arab propaganda that stops you from seeing the truth

Still waiting for you to take a position and justify it.

 

[toastman]

Difficult to understand all of this, I asked a poster to set forth his own view and here I find yet another Zionist who cannot do this. A poster should be capable of having a viewpoint that they can possess and clearly set forth without bringing their perceptions of the ideas of other posters into it. I cannot make sense of anything you said in your post.

The reason it's so difficult to understand is because you cannot see the truth. Your mind is clouded with Arab propaganda that stops you from seeing the truth

Still waiting for you to take a position and justify it.

I don't understand what you're asking

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore; et al,

You claim is that Palestine "has the land and borders."

P F Tinmore; et al,

We will never agree on this.

The problem with the two state solution and all the old partition plans is that they all start with the Palestinians ceding most of their land to Israel. This is something they have never done. They have never ceded any land to Israel, and except for a few wannabe oligarchs around Ramallah, they still refuse to do so.

To date Palestine still has the land and borders and Israel has the guns and bombs. This has been the stalemate since 1948.

(COMMENT)

I not seen a single piece of evidence (prior to November of last year) that suggests the Palestinians had land or borders.

I have seen post-War Treaties and Armistices; borders with Israel. Maybe you could show me a Treaty or Armistice with Palestine that grants borders.

Most Respectfully,
R

Maybe you could show me a Treaty or Armistice with Palestine that grants borders.

Could you clarify your request?

(COMMENT)

A border has two sides. Your claim presumes a border with Palestine on one side. Who is on the other side? I've shown you Treaties and Armistices outlining borders with Israel on one side and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt on the other.

What countries does Palestine have recognized borders with? Can you show me the Treaties and/or Armistices with Palestine?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

That's easy. I'll quote Tinmore " There's nothing to Negotiate". Israel is not going to go back to Borders that were never accepted in the first place, give up E. Jerusalem which has their most sacred religious sites, or allow " Right of Return". Whenever I ask a Pro Palestinian why there is always talk about " negotiations" there is no response.

No " negotiations", No " Two State Solution"

Difficult to understand all of this, I asked a poster to set forth his own view and here I find yet another Zionist who cannot do this. A poster should be capable of having a viewpoint that they can possess and clearly set forth without bringing their perceptions of the ideas of other posters into it. I cannot make sense of anything you said in your post.

Read SLOWLY. If there is nothing to " negotiate", there will never be a " Two State Solution". Israel is not going back to Borders that the Arabs themselves have never recognized, leave E. Jerusalem where their most religious sites are, or allow " Right of Return". None of that would be in Israel's best interest. Get it now you fake " Christian?"

What I get from the Jewish bigot is she does not desire peace, she wants endless war. Why arent you there with your klansmen stealing land and killing more babies? That is the Zionist purpose to live, stealing from nonJews and killing nonJewish babies!

 

[toastman]

Difficult to understand all of this, I asked a poster to set forth his own view and here I find yet another Zionist who cannot do this. A poster should be capable of having a viewpoint that they can possess and clearly set forth without bringing their perceptions of the ideas of other posters into it. I cannot make sense of anything you said in your post.

Read SLOWLY. If there is nothing to " negotiate", there will never be a " Two State Solution". Israel is not going back to Borders that the Arabs themselves have never recognized, leave E. Jerusalem where their most religious sites are, or allow " Right of Return". None of that would be in Israel's best interest. Get it now you fake " Christian?"

What I get from the Jewish bigot is she does not desire peace, she wants endless war. Why arent you there with your klansmen stealing land and killing more babies? That is the Zionist purpose to live, stealing from nonJews and killing nonJewish babies!

And once again, your response to her post has NOTHING to do with what she said. Did you graduate High School ?

 

[proudveteran06]

P F Tinmore; proudveteran06; SherriMunnerlyn; et al,

I think, that in a certain sense, Paul is correct here.

The two state solution (The current euphemism for partition) has been on the table since 1937.

Why hasn't it happened yet? It has been over 75 years.

(COMMENT)

The Two-State solution, has over time, appeared in various forms. GA Resolution 181(II) was one such proposal.

The problem with the Two-State solution is that neither side will get what they want; and in not getting what they want (satisfaction), neither agree to accept. Neither side has seen a Two-State solution that they feel is in their best interest.

Having said that, both sides agree, in principle, that a continuation of the status quo (hostilities) is a better option than the acceptance of any Two-State solution presented thus far.

Again, as I said in the other thread, we need to accept that conclusion as a reality of the current situation. Both sides would rather continue the present state of hostilities than reach for any compromise suggested. In this event, we (outside observers) will have to wait until one side or the other self-destructs; with one side or the other losing the will to continue. OR, one side or the other, forces a decisive action that results in a definitive outcome.

In the past, whenever the Arab/Palestinian attempts to force a decisive outcome, the Arab/Palestinian loses more ground. The GA Resolution 181(II) borders are much different than the Treaty and Armistice borders of today. The instigated invasions (1948, 1967, 1973) have not yielded positive results for the Arab/Palestinian.

We (outside observers) need to be very patient, and wait for one side or the other to implode; until one side or the other find that a peaceful solution is more valuable then the continuation of hostilities. This is, more likely to be in the best interest of Israel. Neither Gaza or the West Bank are self-sustaining entities. They are not regimes that can, without western handouts, Iranian bribery, and gratuitous Arab League support, stand-alone as a nation. It has more characteristics of a Failed State of the Third-World, than an emerging state growing in prosperity. Thus, all Israel has to do to maintain the status quo is to hold containment; limiting the impact of hostilities.

Most Respectfully,
R

The problem with the Two-State solution is that neither side will get what they want;...

The problem with the two state solution and all the old partition plans is that they all start with the Palestinians ceding most of their land to Israel. This is something they have never done. They have never ceded any land to Israel, and except for a few wannabe oligarchs around Ramallah, they still refuse to do so.

To date Palestine still has the land and borders and Israel has the guns and bombs. This has been the stalemate since 1948.

Regarding the above statement, the Pro Palestinian is lying again. The " stalemate" has been their refusal to accept Israel and recognize it has the Right to exist, It has nothing to do with " guns and bombs" He asked why there hasn't been a " Two State Solution" and when given the answer he doesn't like it .

Israel and the 1948 War

Israel and the 1948 War

In May 1948, Israel became an independent state after Israel was recognised by the United Nations as a country in its own right within the Middle East. If relations in pre-war Palestine had been fraught with difficulties, these difficulties paled into insignificance after Israel became a state in its own right. Immediately on being granted its independence, Israel was attacked by a number of Arab nations. If Israel had faltered at this first hurdle, she would have ceased to exist as a state regardless of what the United Nations had decreed.

Before World War Two, Haganah had been, from the British viewpoint, a terrorist organisation that used violence to defend the Jewish Agency. Haganah attacked Palestinian Arabs and aspects of British rule in Palestine. By the time Israel had gained its independence, Haganah was effectively the army for Israel. Many members of Haganah had gained military experience during World War Two – ironically fighting for the same British military that they had been attacking before the war.

Israel was attacked on the same day it gained its independence – May 14th. The armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq attacked Israel. With such a combined force attacking Israel, few would have given the new country any chance of survival.

In fact, Israel had internal problems regardless of what was happening on its borders. The regular army had to be used to disband Irgun and the Stern Gang. Both of these had been classed as terrorist organisations by the British in pre-war Palestine. David Ben-Gurion, Prime Minister and Defence Minister wanted the Israeli army to remain non-political and using a combination of diplomacy and force, he removed both groups as a threat. The leaders of both groups were arrested but members of them did join the army. At the height of the 1948 War, Israel’s army numbered 100,000.

Though the attack on Israel was a surprise one, Israel was surprisingly well equipped at a military level. The country had a navy and many in her army were experienced in combat as a result of World War Two. Israel had also bought three B-17 bombers in America on the black market. In July 1948, these were used to bomb the Egyptian capital, Cairo.

The Arab nations that attacked Israel faced one major problem. There was nothing to co-ordinate their attacks. Each essentially attacked as a separate unit rather than as a combined force. However, the Israeli Army was under one single command structure and this proved to be very important. Israeli victories came on all the war fronts.

The Arab nations involved negotiated their own peace talks – a further sign that they were only united by their desire to attack Israel. Egypt signed a peace settlement in February 1949, and over the next few months Lebanon, Jordan and Syria did the same culminating in peace in July 1949. Iraq simply withdrew her forces but did not sign any peace settlement.

As a result of their military victory, Israel was able to expand the territory given to the state by the United Nations. However, this could only be at the expense of the Arab population that lived in these areas.

In the summer of 1949 there was no obvious leader in the Arab world who could head a campaign by the Arabs. Egypt seemed the most likely leader if only because of her size. However, the Egyptian Royal Family was far from popular and it was in this setting that Nasser rose to power. The scene was set for almost perpetual conflict between the Arab nations and Israel that culminated in the 1956, 1967 and 1973 wars.

The 1948 war, which the Israelis referred to as the "War of Independence", claimed 6,000 Israeli lives – but this was only 1% of the nation’s population. The boost the victory gave to the Israelis was huge and put into perspective the 6,000 lives lost. Ironically, those nations that had attacked Israel in May 1948, only lost slightly more men – 7,000. However, the damage to their morale was considerable.

 

[Hossfly]

P F Tinmore; proudveteran06; SherriMunnerlyn; et al,

I think, that in a certain sense, Paul is correct here.


(COMMENT)

The Two-State solution, has over time, appeared in various forms. GA Resolution 181(II) was one such proposal.

The problem with the Two-State solution is that neither side will get what they want; and in not getting what they want (satisfaction), neither agree to accept. Neither side has seen a Two-State solution that they feel is in their best interest.

Having said that, both sides agree, in principle, that a continuation of the status quo (hostilities) is a better option than the acceptance of any Two-State solution presented thus far.

Again, as I said in the other thread, we need to accept that conclusion as a reality of the current situation. Both sides would rather continue the present state of hostilities than reach for any compromise suggested. In this event, we (outside observers) will have to wait until one side or the other self-destructs; with one side or the other losing the will to continue. OR, one side or the other, forces a decisive action that results in a definitive outcome.

In the past, whenever the Arab/Palestinian attempts to force a decisive outcome, the Arab/Palestinian loses more ground. The GA Resolution 181(II) borders are much different than the Treaty and Armistice borders of today. The instigated invasions (1948, 1967, 1973) have not yielded positive results for the Arab/Palestinian.

We (outside observers) need to be very patient, and wait for one side or the other to implode; until one side or the other find that a peaceful solution is more valuable then the continuation of hostilities. This is, more likely to be in the best interest of Israel. Neither Gaza or the West Bank are self-sustaining entities. They are not regimes that can, without western handouts, Iranian bribery, and gratuitous Arab League support, stand-alone as a nation. It has more characteristics of a Failed State of the Third-World, than an emerging state growing in prosperity. Thus, all Israel has to do to maintain the status quo is to hold containment; limiting the impact of hostilities.

Most Respectfully,
R

The problem with the Two-State solution is that neither side will get what they want;...

The problem with the two state solution and all the old partition plans is that they all start with the Palestinians ceding most of their land to Israel. This is something they have never done. They have never ceded any land to Israel, and except for a few wannabe oligarchs around Ramallah, they still refuse to do so.

To date Palestine still has the land and borders and Israel has the guns and bombs. This has been the stalemate since 1948.

Regarding the above statement, the Pro Palestinian is lying again. The " stalemate" has been their refusal to accept Israel and recognize it has the Right to exist, It has nothing to do with " guns and bombs" He asked why there hasn't been a " Two State Solution" and when given the answer he doesn't like it .

Israel and the 1948 War

Israel and the 1948 War

In May 1948, Israel became an independent state after Israel was recognised by the United Nations as a country in its own right within the Middle East. If relations in pre-war Palestine had been fraught with difficulties, these difficulties paled into insignificance after Israel became a state in its own right. Immediately on being granted its independence, Israel was attacked by a number of Arab nations. If Israel had faltered at this first hurdle, she would have ceased to exist as a state regardless of what the United Nations had decreed.

Before World War Two, Haganah had been, from the British viewpoint, a terrorist organisation that used violence to defend the Jewish Agency. Haganah attacked Palestinian Arabs and aspects of British rule in Palestine. By the time Israel had gained its independence, Haganah was effectively the army for Israel. Many members of Haganah had gained military experience during World War Two – ironically fighting for the same British military that they had been attacking before the war.

Israel was attacked on the same day it gained its independence – May 14th. The armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq attacked Israel. With such a combined force attacking Israel, few would have given the new country any chance of survival.

In fact, Israel had internal problems regardless of what was happening on its borders. The regular army had to be used to disband Irgun and the Stern Gang. Both of these had been classed as terrorist organisations by the British in pre-war Palestine. David Ben-Gurion, Prime Minister and Defence Minister wanted the Israeli army to remain non-political and using a combination of diplomacy and force, he removed both groups as a threat. The leaders of both groups were arrested but members of them did join the army. At the height of the 1948 War, Israel’s army numbered 100,000.

Though the attack on Israel was a surprise one, Israel was surprisingly well equipped at a military level. The country had a navy and many in her army were experienced in combat as a result of World War Two. Israel had also bought three B-17 bombers in America on the black market. In July 1948, these were used to bomb the Egyptian capital, Cairo.

The Arab nations that attacked Israel faced one major problem. There was nothing to co-ordinate their attacks. Each essentially attacked as a separate unit rather than as a combined force. However, the Israeli Army was under one single command structure and this proved to be very important. Israeli victories came on all the war fronts.

The Arab nations involved negotiated their own peace talks – a further sign that they were only united by their desire to attack Israel. Egypt signed a peace settlement in February 1949, and over the next few months Lebanon, Jordan and Syria did the same culminating in peace in July 1949. Iraq simply withdrew her forces but did not sign any peace settlement.

As a result of their military victory, Israel was able to expand the territory given to the state by the United Nations. However, this could only be at the expense of the Arab population that lived in these areas.

In the summer of 1949 there was no obvious leader in the Arab world who could head a campaign by the Arabs. Egypt seemed the most likely leader if only because of her size. However, the Egyptian Royal Family was far from popular and it was in this setting that Nasser rose to power. The scene was set for almost perpetual conflict between the Arab nations and Israel that culminated in the 1956, 1967 and 1973 wars.

The 1948 war, which the Israelis referred to as the "War of Independence", claimed 6,000 Israeli lives – but this was only 1% of the nation’s population. The boost the victory gave to the Israelis was huge and put into perspective the 6,000 lives lost. Ironically, those nations that had attacked Israel in May 1948, only lost slightly more men – 7,000. However, the damage to their morale was considerable.

That should settle the matter about borders and maps. I never thought the matter would be settled. Now let's hear Tinmore's rebuttle.

 

[proudveteran06]

The problem with the two state solution and all the old partition plans is that they all start with the Palestinians ceding most of their land to Israel. This is something they have never done. They have never ceded any land to Israel, and except for a few wannabe oligarchs around Ramallah, they still refuse to do so.

To date Palestine still has the land and borders and Israel has the guns and bombs. This has been the stalemate since 1948.

Regarding the above statement, the Pro Palestinian is lying again. The " stalemate" has been their refusal to accept Israel and recognize it has the Right to exist, It has nothing to do with " guns and bombs" He asked why there hasn't been a " Two State Solution" and when given the answer he doesn't like it .

Israel and the 1948 War

Israel and the 1948 War

In May 1948, Israel became an independent state after Israel was recognised by the United Nations as a country in its own right within the Middle East. If relations in pre-war Palestine had been fraught with difficulties, these difficulties paled into insignificance after Israel became a state in its own right. Immediately on being granted its independence, Israel was attacked by a number of Arab nations. If Israel had faltered at this first hurdle, she would have ceased to exist as a state regardless of what the United Nations had decreed.

Before World War Two, Haganah had been, from the British viewpoint, a terrorist organisation that used violence to defend the Jewish Agency. Haganah attacked Palestinian Arabs and aspects of British rule in Palestine. By the time Israel had gained its independence, Haganah was effectively the army for Israel. Many members of Haganah had gained military experience during World War Two – ironically fighting for the same British military that they had been attacking before the war.

Israel was attacked on the same day it gained its independence – May 14th. The armies of Egypt, Lebanon, Syria and Iraq attacked Israel. With such a combined force attacking Israel, few would have given the new country any chance of survival.

In fact, Israel had internal problems regardless of what was happening on its borders. The regular army had to be used to disband Irgun and the Stern Gang. Both of these had been classed as terrorist organisations by the British in pre-war Palestine. David Ben-Gurion, Prime Minister and Defence Minister wanted the Israeli army to remain non-political and using a combination of diplomacy and force, he removed both groups as a threat. The leaders of both groups were arrested but members of them did join the army. At the height of the 1948 War, Israel’s army numbered 100,000.

Though the attack on Israel was a surprise one, Israel was surprisingly well equipped at a military level. The country had a navy and many in her army were experienced in combat as a result of World War Two. Israel had also bought three B-17 bombers in America on the black market. In July 1948, these were used to bomb the Egyptian capital, Cairo.

The Arab nations that attacked Israel faced one major problem. There was nothing to co-ordinate their attacks. Each essentially attacked as a separate unit rather than as a combined force. However, the Israeli Army was under one single command structure and this proved to be very important. Israeli victories came on all the war fronts.

The Arab nations involved negotiated their own peace talks – a further sign that they were only united by their desire to attack Israel. Egypt signed a peace settlement in February 1949, and over the next few months Lebanon, Jordan and Syria did the same culminating in peace in July 1949. Iraq simply withdrew her forces but did not sign any peace settlement.

As a result of their military victory, Israel was able to expand the territory given to the state by the United Nations. However, this could only be at the expense of the Arab population that lived in these areas.

In the summer of 1949 there was no obvious leader in the Arab world who could head a campaign by the Arabs. Egypt seemed the most likely leader if only because of her size. However, the Egyptian Royal Family was far from popular and it was in this setting that Nasser rose to power. The scene was set for almost perpetual conflict between the Arab nations and Israel that culminated in the 1956, 1967 and 1973 wars.

The 1948 war, which the Israelis referred to as the "War of Independence", claimed 6,000 Israeli lives – but this was only 1% of the nation’s population. The boost the victory gave to the Israelis was huge and put into perspective the 6,000 lives lost. Ironically, those nations that had attacked Israel in May 1948, only lost slightly more men – 7,000. However, the damage to their morale was considerable.

That should settle the matter about borders and maps. I never thought the matter would be settled. Now let's hear Tinmore's rebuttle.

You won't hear a thing.

 

[irosie91]

If there is anyone here ----who has never heard very decisive statements
by leaders of muslim nations ----that the given nations will not tolerate
the EXISTENCE of a ZIONIST ENTITY------please let me know-----I will try
to determine your score on the Glasgow coma scale -----not easy via
cyberspace. If there are any persons here ---who have heard or read about
REPUDIATIONS of "NON-TOLERANCE OF THE ZIONIST ENTITY" by
influenctial islamic leaders-----please let me know

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore; et al,

You claim is that Palestine "has the land and borders."

P F Tinmore; et al,

We will never agree on this.


(COMMENT)

I not seen a single piece of evidence (prior to November of last year) that suggests the Palestinians had land or borders.

I have seen post-War Treaties and Armistices; borders with Israel. Maybe you could show me a Treaty or Armistice with Palestine that grants borders.

Most Respectfully,
R

Maybe you could show me a Treaty or Armistice with Palestine that grants borders.

Could you clarify your request?

(COMMENT)

A border has two sides. Your claim presumes a border with Palestine on one side. Who is on the other side? I've shown you Treaties and Armistices outlining borders with Israel on one side and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt on the other.

What countries does Palestine have recognized borders with? Can you show me the Treaties and/or Armistices with Palestine?

Most Respectfully,
R

Link The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

The Parties to the present Agreement, responding to the Security Council resolution of 16 November 1948 calling upon them, as a further provisional measure under Article 40 of the Charter of the United Nations and in order to facilitate the transition from the present truce to permanent peace in Palestine,...

An armistice was called by UN Security Council resolution. The "Arabs" did not lose the 1948 war.

Palestine was called Palestine not the former Palestine mandate. The mandate had ended the previous year and Palestine was still there.

2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary,...

...the Armistice Demarcation Line set forth in Article VI of this Agreement except as provided in Article III of this Agreement; and elsewhere shall not violate the international frontier;...

2. The area thus demilitarized shall be as follows: From a point on the Egypt-Palestine frontier... thence returning north-west along the Egypt-Palestine frontier to the point of origin.

4. The road Taba-Qouseima-Auja shall not be employed by any military forces whatsoever for the purpose of entering Palestine.

Israel claimed that border and that territory. Not true

Link The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949

1. The Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the international boundary between the Lebanon and Palestine.

Link The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

(d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by existing military positions as surveyed in March 1949 by United Nations observers, and shall run from north to south as delineated on map 1 in annex I to this Agreement.

This armistice line did not follow the international border between Jordan and Palestine. However, they did say that the territory was Palestine not Israel.

Link The Avalon Project : Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949

Where the existing truce lines run along the international boundary between Syria and Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the boundary line

Note: Any border belonging to Palestine can only be changed by treaty or agreement with Palestine. You have never posted any such treaty or agreement.

 

[Hossfly]

P F Tinmore; et al,

You claim is that Palestine "has the land and borders."

Could you clarify your request?

(COMMENT)

A border has two sides. Your claim presumes a border with Palestine on one side. Who is on the other side? I've shown you Treaties and Armistices outlining borders with Israel on one side and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt on the other.

What countries does Palestine have recognized borders with? Can you show me the Treaties and/or Armistices with Palestine?

Most Respectfully,
R

Link The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

An armistice was called by UN Security Council resolution. The "Arabs" did not lose the 1948 war.

Palestine was called Palestine not the former Palestine mandate. The mandate had ended the previous year and Palestine was still there.


Israel claimed that border and that territory. Not true

Link The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949


Link The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

(d) In the sector from a point on the Dead Sea (MR 1925-0958) to the southernmost tip of Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall be determined by existing military positions as surveyed in March 1949 by United Nations observers, and shall run from north to south as delineated on map 1 in annex I to this Agreement.

This armistice line did not follow the international border between Jordan and Palestine. However, they did say that the territory was Palestine not Israel.

Link The Avalon Project : Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949

Where the existing truce lines run along the international boundary between Syria and Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the boundary line

Note: Any border belonging to Palestine can only be changed by treaty or agreement with Palestine. You have never posted any such treaty or agreement.

Tinmore, did you read post #107 and what's your summation of history?

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore; et al,

You claim is that Palestine "has the land and borders."


(COMMENT)

A border has two sides. Your claim presumes a border with Palestine on one side. Who is on the other side? I've shown you Treaties and Armistices outlining borders with Israel on one side and Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and Egypt on the other.

What countries does Palestine have recognized borders with? Can you show me the Treaties and/or Armistices with Palestine?

Most Respectfully,
R

Link The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

An armistice was called by UN Security Council resolution. The "Arabs" did not lose the 1948 war.

Palestine was called Palestine not the former Palestine mandate. The mandate had ended the previous year and Palestine was still there.


Israel claimed that border and that territory. Not true

Link The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949


Link The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

This armistice line did not follow the international border between Jordan and Palestine. However, they did say that the territory was Palestine not Israel.

Link The Avalon Project : Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949

Where the existing truce lines run along the international boundary between Syria and Palestine, the Armistice Demarcation Line shall follow the boundary line

Note: Any border belonging to Palestine can only be changed by treaty or agreement with Palestine. You have never posted any such treaty or agreement.

Tinmore, did you read post #107 and what's your summation of history?

I did. First sentence:

In May 1948, Israel became an independent state after Israel was recognised by the United Nations as a country in its own right within the Middle East.

No it wasn't. Shall I continue?

 

[Hossfly]

Link The Avalon Project : Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, February 24, 1949

An armistice was called by UN Security Council resolution. The "Arabs" did not lose the 1948 war.

Palestine was called Palestine not the former Palestine mandate. The mandate had ended the previous year and Palestine was still there.


Israel claimed that border and that territory. Not true

Link The Avalon Project : Lebanese-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, March 23, 1949


Link The Avalon Project : Jordanian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement, April 3, 1949

This armistice line did not follow the international border between Jordan and Palestine. However, they did say that the territory was Palestine not Israel.

Link The Avalon Project : Israeli-Syrian General Armistice Agreement, July 20, 1949


Note: Any border belonging to Palestine can only be changed by treaty or agreement with Palestine. You have never posted any such treaty or agreement.

Tinmore, did you read post #107 and what's your summation of history?

I did. First sentence:

In May 1948, Israel became an independent state after Israel was recognised by the United Nations as a country in its own right within the Middle East.

No it wasn't. Shall I continue?

I meant the complete post plus link. Read it and give us a detailed report. Thanks.

 

[P F Tinmore]

Tinmore, did you read post #107 and what's your summation of history?

I did. First sentence:

In May 1948, Israel became an independent state after Israel was recognised by the United Nations as a country in its own right within the Middle East.

No it wasn't. Shall I continue?

I meant the complete post plus link. Read it and give us a detailed report. Thanks.

OK, but you respond to my post first.

 

[Hossfly]

I did. First sentence:


No it wasn't. Shall I continue?

I meant the complete post plus link. Read it and give us a detailed report. Thanks.

OK, but you respond to my post first.

Go lay an egg, dodo.

 

[P F Tinmore]

I meant the complete post plus link. Read it and give us a detailed report. Thanks.

OK, but you respond to my post first.

Go lay an egg, dodo.

See how easy it was for me to get out of that one.

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore; Hossfly; et al,

You know that there are up-to-date agreements.

OK, but you respond to my post first.

Go lay an egg, dodo.

See how easy it was for me to get out of that one.

(COMMENT)

It is important to remember that the timeline is not frozen in 1948 or 1949. No matter how you interpret the outcome of the 1948/1949 War, it becomes irrelevant when subsequent treaties are made and recognized by the global community.

• SOUTHERN BORDER: The entire southern border is in no-contest. The treaty (effective law) establishes that segment in Article II. (LINK ---> Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt - Non-UN document (26 March 1979)) Together, with the unilaterial withdrawal from the Gaza Strip (LINK ---> S/2005/559 of 31 August 2005) the entire souther border is established.
  
  

  The permanent boundary between Egypt and Israel in the recognized international boundary between Egypt and the former mandated territory of Palestine, as shown on the map at Annex II, without prejudice to the issue of the status of the Gaza Strip. The Parties recognize this boundary as inviolable. Each will respect the territorial integrity of the other, including their territorial waters and airspace.

• NORTHERN BORDER: The UN documents and the exchange between the SecGen & President of Lebanon establishes and reaffirms "international boundary between Israel and Lebanon" in Paragraph 13 of S/2000/460. (LINKS ---> A/54/914-S/2000/564 of 12 June 2000 AND S/2000/460 of 22 May 2000).
  
  

  11. For the practical purpose of confirming the Israeli withdrawal, the United Nations needs to identify a line to be adopted conforming to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon based on the best available cartographic and other documentary material. The United Nations will then identify physically, on the ground, those portions of the line necessary or relevant to confirming the withdrawal of Israeli forces. In the southern part of the country, Lebanon shares a border with Israel and, in the eastern part, with the Syrian Arab Republic.
  
  12. The United Nations stressed in its consultations with all the parties that it was not seeking to establish an international border, as this was a matter for States to undertake in accordance with international law and practice. Rather, the United Nations was requesting the help of the parties and others in the purely technical exercise of identifying a line for the purpose of confirming compliance with resolution 425 (1978). Whatever line the United Nations uses will be without prejudice to future border agreements between the Member States concerned.
  
  13. The international boundary between Israel and Lebanon was established pursuant to the 1923 Agreement between France and Great Britain entitled “Boundary Line between Syria and Palestine from the Mediterranean to El Hamme”. This line was reaffirmed in the Israeli-Lebanese General Armistice Agreement signed on 23 March 1949. Subsequently there were several modifications mutually agreed by Israel and Lebanon. The parties have cooperated with the United Nations in the process of gathering cartographic information necessary for identifying this line. The United Nations has prepared a map based on that information and will mark portions of the line on the ground relevant to the purpose of confirming the withdrawal.

  
  

  Paragraph 11 of this report states that “for the practical purpose of confirming the Israeli withdrawal, the United Nations needs to identify a line to be adopted conforming to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon ...” and that “the United Nations will then identify physically, on the ground, those portions of the line necessary or relevant to confirming the withdrawal of Israeli forces”.
  
  Paragraph 13 of the report states that “the international boundary between Israel and Lebanon was established pursuant to the 1923 Agreement between France and Great Britain ...”, that “this line was reaffirmed in the Israeli-Lebanese General Armistice Agreement signed on 23 March 1949” and that “subsequently there were several modifications mutually agreed by Israel and Lebanon”.

• EASTERN BORDER: The Treaty of Peace Between The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan And The State of Israel October 26, 1994 (effective law) (LINKs ---> The Jordan-Israeli Peace Treaty OR A/50/73-S/1995/83 of 27 January 1995) establishes the "international boundary between Israel and Jordan" in Article 3.
  
  

  1. The international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I (a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and coordinates specified therein.
  2. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognized international boundary between Jordan and Israel, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
  3. The Parties recognize the international boundary, as well as each other's territory, territorial waters and airspace, as inviolable, and will respect and comply with them.
  4. The demarcation of the boundary will take place as set forth in Appendix (I) to Annex I and will be concluded not later than 9 months after the signing of the Treaty.
  5. It is agreed that where the boundary follows a river, in the event of natural changes in the course of the flow of the river as described in Annex I (a), the boundary shall follow the new course of the flow. In the event of any other changes the boundary shall not be affected unless otherwise agreed.
  6. Immediately upon the exchange of the instruments of ratification of this Treaty, each Party will deploy on its side of the international boundary as defined in Annex I (a).
  7. The parties shall, upon the signature of the Treaty, enter into negotiations to conclude, within 9 months, an agreement on the delimitation of their maritime boundary in the Gulf of Aqaba.
  8. Taking into account the special circumstances of the Baqura/Naharayim area, which is under Jordanian sovereignty, with Israeli private ownership rights, the Parties agree to apply the provisions set out in Annex I (b).
  9. With respect to the Al-Ghamr/Zofar area, the provisions set out in Annex I (c) will apply.​

Put away the 1948/49 Armistice Agreement. It is a great document for that time period; but you need to move 60 years forward. As you move forward in time, new arrangement are made. These are the current boundary agreements, logged and registered with the UN Treaty Collection where every and every international agreement is recorded. Most of them take into account the old arrangements, but make no mistake, the Palestinians were not involved.

• LINK ---> United Nations Treaty Collection

Article 102

• Every treaty and every international agreement entered into by any Member of the United Nations after the present Charter comes into force shall as soon as possible be registered with the Secretariat and published by it.

• No party to any such treaty or international agreement which has not been registered in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article may invoke that treaty or agreement before any organ of the United Nations.

SOURCE: Charter of the United Nations: Chapter XVI: Miscellaneous Provisions

Please note that I've included the official UN document reference numbers and link to the UN Treaty/Agreement Archive for your reference.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[P F Tinmore]

P F Tinmore; Hossfly; et al,

You know that there are up-to-date agreements.

Go lay an egg, dodo.

See how easy it was for me to get out of that one.

(COMMENT)

It is important to remember that the timeline is not frozen in 1948 or 1949. No matter how you interpret the outcome of the 1948/1949 War, it becomes irrelevant when subsequent treaties are made and recognized by the global community.

• SOUTHERN BORDER: The entire southern border is in no-contest. The treaty (effective law) establishes that segment in Article II. (LINK ---> Peace Treaty between Israel and Egypt - Non-UN document (26 March 1979)) Together, with the unilaterial withdrawal from the Gaza Strip (LINK ---> S/2005/559 of 31 August 2005) the entire souther border is established.
  
  
  

• NORTHERN BORDER: The UN documents and the exchange between the SecGen & President of Lebanon establishes and reaffirms "international boundary between Israel and Lebanon" in Paragraph 13 of S/2000/460. (LINKS ---> A/54/914-S/2000/564 of 12 June 2000 AND S/2000/460 of 22 May 2000).
  
  
  

• EASTERN BORDER: The Treaty of Peace Between The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan And The State of Israel October 26, 1994 (effective law) (LINKs ---> The Jordan-Israeli Peace Treaty OR A/50/73-S/1995/83 of 27 January 1995) establishes the "international boundary between Israel and Jordan" in Article 3.
  
  

  1. The international boundary between Jordan and Israel is delimited with reference to the boundary definition under the Mandate as is shown in Annex I (a), on the mapping materials attached thereto and coordinates specified therein.
  2. The boundary, as set out in Annex I (a), is the permanent, secure and recognized international boundary between Jordan and Israel, without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.
  3. The Parties recognize the international boundary, as well as each other's territory, territorial waters and airspace, as inviolable, and will respect and comply with them.
  4. The demarcation of the boundary will take place as set forth in Appendix (I) to Annex I and will be concluded not later than 9 months after the signing of the Treaty.
  5. It is agreed that where the boundary follows a river, in the event of natural changes in the course of the flow of the river as described in Annex I (a), the boundary shall follow the new course of the flow. In the event of any other changes the boundary shall not be affected unless otherwise agreed.
  6. Immediately upon the exchange of the instruments of ratification of this Treaty, each Party will deploy on its side of the international boundary as defined in Annex I (a).
  7. The parties shall, upon the signature of the Treaty, enter into negotiations to conclude, within 9 months, an agreement on the delimitation of their maritime boundary in the Gulf of Aqaba.
  8. Taking into account the special circumstances of the Baqura/Naharayim area, which is under Jordanian sovereignty, with Israeli private ownership rights, the Parties agree to apply the provisions set out in Annex I (b).
  9. With respect to the Al-Ghamr/Zofar area, the provisions set out in Annex I (c) will apply.​

Put away the 1948/49 Armistice Agreement. It is a great document for that time period; but you need to move 60 years forward. As you move forward in time, new arrangement are made. These are the current boundary agreements, logged and registered with the UN Treaty Collection where every and every international agreement is recorded. Most of them take into account the old arrangements, but make no mistake, the Palestinians were not involved.

• LINK ---> United Nations Treaty Collection

Article 102

• Every treaty and every international agreement entered into by any Member of the United Nations after the present Charter comes into force shall as soon as possible be registered with the Secretariat and published by it.

• No party to any such treaty or international agreement which has not been registered in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article may invoke that treaty or agreement before any organ of the United Nations.

SOURCE: Charter of the United Nations: Chapter XVI: Miscellaneous Provisions

Please note that I've included the official UN document reference numbers and link to the UN Treaty/Agreement Archive for your reference.

Most Respectfully,
R

Where is the treaty with Palestine to change Palestine's borders?

 

[RoccoR]

P F Tinmore; Hossfly; et al,

My point exactly.

Where is the treaty with Palestine to change Palestine's borders?

(REFERENCE)

• Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties Done at Vienna on 23 May 1969

(COMMENT)

Palestine (the Mandate) was not sovereign. It had no treaty because it had not borders beyond that defined by the Mandatory IAW Article 95 of the Treaty.

The Hashemite Kingdom and the State of Israel were partitioned out of the Mandate. But the Palestinians did not accept partition, and did not attempt to build a nation. Under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969)(Article 6), every State possesses capacity to conclude treaties. But Palestine was not a state. Thus it has no capacity to enter into a Treaty.

So I ask again, where is it written or recorded that Palestine has borders beyond that established artificially by the Allied Powers for the purpose of the Mandate (Article 95 of the Treaty)?

Most Respectfully,
R