P F Tinmore
Diamond Member
- Dec 6, 2009
- 78,918
- 4,379
- 1,815
Calling names is a sign of losing.So, what is ridiculous?P F Tinmore, et al,
Our friend Paul (P F Tinmore) is 100% absolutely correct.
(OBSERVATION)Sure I do.
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
3. The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Line is to delineate the line beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move except as provided in Article III of this Agreement.
The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
They were specifically not to be borders.
How do you treat an Armistice Line?
Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character. A/RES/2625
Whether you call it a "Border" an "International Boundary" --- or an "Armistice Line" --- legally they are all in the family of "demarcation lines" --- and enjoy the exact same protections. The UN understands this very well; in fact, the Secretary-General's (Ban Ki-moon) home country has had a segment of it border as an "Armistice Line" for more than half a century.
(COMMENT)
But what an "Armistice Line" is (by definition) --- or --- how an "Armistice Line" is treated and protected legally (A/RES/2625) is really of no material matter with respect to the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt); other than a historical reference point. The State of Israel and the State of Palestine do not currently share a common "active" Armistice Line." And historically, when the "Armistice Lines" were "active" --- the Palestinians (either the PLO as the sole legitimated representative of the Palestinian, or the 1988 Government for the State of Palestine) were not a Party to any Armistice Agreement. The Armistice Lines that encapsulated the Gaza Strip and the West Bank were settled by Treaty with Israel and the Governments of Egypt and Jordan (respectively).
The only active Armistice Lines in the region exist between the State of Israel and the States of Syria and Lebanon. Again, these lines have nothing to do with the Palestinians and are of no concern to the Palestinians. Currently both the Arab states are as risk, with Syria in a state of civil war --- and simultaneously --- under attack by the Jihadist Terrorist Movement (Islamic State). Lebanon, which is under the coercive influence of a Shi'a Islamist Paramilitary Movement (Jihad Council of Hezbollah), is in a precarious situation. Currently Saudi Arabia is supporting the Lebanese Army (as opposed to Hezbollah), and Hezbollah maybe at odds with Islamic State over recent events. Syria will certainly be effected by the outcome of the fighting. The Regime will certainly not be what it was. Lebanon, is at risk --- and Jordan will hold a common border with the threat. So, the "Armistice Lines" with Lebanon and Syria are of no concern to the Palestinian. In fact, no one wants to ignite another conflict that might result in the loss of containment of another Jihadist threat (Palestinians).
The Palestinians, as recognized by A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988, as the State of Palestine ( A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988) by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988; exercising their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967. Similarly, A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 on the Status of Palestine, reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967. The Armistice Lines are not used as the markers of the boundary for the basis of recognition. However, there is a territorial dispute.
Most Respectfully,
RYou keep bringing this up like it has some significance to the Palestinians.P F Tinmore, et al,
Our friend Paul (P F Tinmore) is 100% absolutely correct.
(OBSERVATION)Sure I do.
2. The Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question.
3. The basic purpose of the Armistice Demarcation Line is to delineate the line beyond which the armed forces of the respective Parties shall not move except as provided in Article III of this Agreement.
The Avalon Project Egyptian-Israeli General Armistice Agreement February 24 1949
They were specifically not to be borders.
How do you treat an Armistice Line?
Every State likewise has the duty to refrain from the threat or use of force to violate international lines of demarcation, such as armistice lines, established by or pursuant to an international agreement to which it is a party or which it is otherwise bound to respect. Nothing in the foregoing shall be construed as prejudicing the positions of the parties concerned with regard to the status and effects of such lines under their special regimes or as affecting their temporary character. A/RES/2625
Whether you call it a "Border" an "International Boundary" --- or an "Armistice Line" --- legally they are all in the family of "demarcation lines" --- and enjoy the exact same protections. The UN understands this very well; in fact, the Secretary-General's (Ban Ki-moon) home country has had a segment of it border as an "Armistice Line" for more than half a century.
For one thing, the Palestinians were not one of the respective Parties to the agreements.
For another, since the armistice lines are specifically not political or territorial borders, it is Palestine on both sides of the lines.
I don't see how it is possible for the Palestinians to violate such lines.
(COMMENT)But what an "Armistice Line" is (by definition) --- or --- how an "Armistice Line" is treated and protected legally (A/RES/2625) is really of no material matter with respect to the occupied Palestinian territories (oPt); other than a historical reference point. The State of Israel and the State of Palestine do not currently share a common "active" Armistice Line." And historically, when the "Armistice Lines" were "active" --- the Palestinians (either the PLO as the sole legitimated representative of the Palestinian, or the 1988 Government for the State of Palestine) were not a Party to any Armistice Agreement. The Armistice Lines that encapsulated the Gaza Strip and the West Bank were settled by Treaty with Israel and the Governments of Egypt and Jordan (respectively).
The only active Armistice Lines in the region exist between the State of Israel and the States of Syria and Lebanon. Again, these lines have nothing to do with the Palestinians and are of no concern to the Palestinians. Currently both the Arab states are as risk, with Syria in a state of civil war --- and simultaneously --- under attack by the Jihadist Terrorist Movement (Islamic State). Lebanon, which is under the coercive influence of a Shi'a Islamist Paramilitary Movement (Jihad Council of Hezbollah), is in a precarious situation. Currently Saudi Arabia is supporting the Lebanese Army (as opposed to Hezbollah), and Hezbollah maybe at odds with Islamic State over recent events. Syria will certainly be effected by the outcome of the fighting. The Regime will certainly not be what it was. Lebanon, is at risk --- and Jordan will hold a common border with the threat. So, the "Armistice Lines" with Lebanon and Syria are of no concern to the Palestinian. In fact, no one wants to ignite another conflict that might result in the loss of containment of another Jihadist threat (Palestinians).
The Palestinians, as recognized by A/RES/43/177 15 December 1988, as the State of Palestine ( A/43/827 S/20278 18 November 1988) by the Palestine National Council on 15 November 1988; exercising their sovereignty over their territory occupied since 1967. Similarly, A/RES/67/19 4 December 2012 on the Status of Palestine, reaffirms the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination and to independence in their State of Palestine on the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967. The Armistice Lines are not used as the markers of the boundary for the basis of recognition. However, there is a territorial dispute.
Most Respectfully,
R
"For another, since the armistice lines are specifically not political or territorial borders, it is Palestine on both sides of the lines."
How is it possible that you can come up with a statement so incredibly ridiculous??
I'll repeat it again: Just because YOU hate Israel and don't recognize it, it doesn't mean that it applies to reality.
"So, what is ridiculous?"
...you and your support of evil terrorists. that's what's ridiculous-and disgusting and...pretty much pathetic.
this is what you support. you're a sicko.
g.f.y.