View on the "Greater Israel" plan...

[Shusha]

The claim is flawed on two counts. First, international law simply does not function like that.

Since when did Israel take ANY notice of international law? Please!!!!

Occupation of Golan by Israel is against international law...

I'm sure you don't need a list of international law that Israel has broken and continues to break...

If you have instances of international broken by Israel, please start a thread about them and I'll be glad to discuss.

Otherwise, why don't you address the content of my post?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

The claim is flawed on two counts. First, international law simply does not function like that.

Since when did Israel take ANY notice of international law? Please!!!!

Occupation of Golan by Israel is against international law...

I'm sure you don't need a list of international law that Israel has broken and continues to break...

There is no tremendous ideological, historical or religious interest Israel has in the Golan Heights other than security. If it keeps Israelis safe, why does it bother you so much if Israel holds onto the Golan?

 

[Shusha]

If it keeps Israelis safe, why does it bother you so much if Israel holds onto the Golan?

This is an exceedingly good question. Why isn't the safety and security of innocent people a valid reason to occupy territory from which an enemy attacks you, and to hold that territory for as long as that enemy remains an enemy (rejects a peace treaty)?

 

[louie888]

If it keeps Israelis safe, why does it bother you so much if Israel holds onto the Golan?

This is an exceedingly good question. Why isn't the safety and security of innocent people a valid reason to occupy territory from which an enemy attacks you, and to hold that territory for as long as that enemy remains an enemy (rejects a peace treaty)?

Please, total straw man, if they went back Europe there would be no need for security as they would not be thieving from and murdering a people who had lived there for centuries.

 

[montelatici]

If it keeps Israelis safe, why does it bother you so much if Israel holds onto the Golan?

This is an exceedingly good question. Why isn't the safety and security of innocent people a valid reason to occupy territory from which an enemy attacks you, and to hold that territory for as long as that enemy remains an enemy (rejects a peace treaty)?

How can a people that invaded an inhabited land and colonized it, expelling a large number of the native people be absolutely "innocent"?

 

[Shusha]

How can a people that invaded an inhabited land and colonized it, expelling a large number of the native people be absolutely "innocent"?

Hey, I have an idea. Why don't we go with this. Since, as you frequently argue, the Christians and then the Muslims invaded, conquered and/or colonized Israel and killed, converted or expelled the native Jewish people, no Christian and no Muslim is "innocent" and therefore has no right to protections under international law.

What do you think?

 

[Hollie]

If it keeps Israelis safe, why does it bother you so much if Israel holds onto the Golan?

This is an exceedingly good question. Why isn't the safety and security of innocent people a valid reason to occupy territory from which an enemy attacks you, and to hold that territory for as long as that enemy remains an enemy (rejects a peace treaty)?

Please, total straw man, if they went back Europe there would be no need for security as they would not be thieving from and murdering a people who had lived there for centuries.

What is your official, Habib-approved timeline that defines the muhammedan invaders / colonizers and European Christian Crusaders / colonizers as magically becoming "The indigenous people"

 

[Indeependent]

If it keeps Israelis safe, why does it bother you so much if Israel holds onto the Golan?

This is an exceedingly good question. Why isn't the safety and security of innocent people a valid reason to occupy territory from which an enemy attacks you, and to hold that territory for as long as that enemy remains an enemy (rejects a peace treaty)?

How can a people that invaded an inhabited land and colonized it, expelling a large number of the native people be absolutely "innocent"?

Ask the Pope.

 

[montelatici]

How can a people that invaded an inhabited land and colonized it, expelling a large number of the native people be absolutely "innocent"?

Hey, I have an idea. Why don't we go with this. Since, as you frequently argue, the Christians and then the Muslims invaded, conquered and/or colonized Israel and killed, converted or expelled the native Jewish people, no Christian and no Muslim is "innocent" and therefore has no right to protections under international law.

What do you think?

The native people invaded no one. The native indigenous people were themselves invaded by various emperial powers, the Romans, the Arabians, the Ottomans etc. The people being ruled remained the same people albeit converting to the religions of the new rulers, for convenience. And, these invasions took place before there was any law against the acquisition of land through conquest.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

How can a people that invaded an inhabited land and colonized it, expelling a large number of the native people be absolutely "innocent"?

Hey, I have an idea. Why don't we go with this. Since, as you frequently argue, the Christians and then the Muslims invaded, conquered and/or colonized Israel and killed, converted or expelled the native Jewish people, no Christian and no Muslim is "innocent" and therefore has no right to protections under international law.

What do you think?

The native people invaded no one. The native indigenous people were themselves invaded by various emperial powers, the Romans, the Arabians, the Ottomans etc. The people being ruled remained the same people albeit converting to the religions of the new rulers, for convenience. And, these invasions took place before there was any law against the acquisition of land through conquest.

Just like the United States of America is only 5% Native American after only 500 years, so I would estimate that the Arab Palestinian population is about 5% Canaanite after 2000 years. They are not the same ppl.

 

[Shusha]

The native people invaded no one.

Exactly. Thank you!

 

[montelatici]

The native people invaded no one.

Exactly. Thank you!

Right, and they were, when the European Zionists invaded, the Christians and Muslims of Palestine.

 

[Humanity]

The claim is flawed on two counts. First, international law simply does not function like that.

Since when did Israel take ANY notice of international law? Please!!!!

Occupation of Golan by Israel is against international law...

I'm sure you don't need a list of international law that Israel has broken and continues to break...

If you have instances of international broken by Israel, please start a thread about them and I'll be glad to discuss.

Otherwise, why don't you address the content of my post?

I did address your content with my post...

Which, to be honest, if you feel that I need to provide a list of broken international laws then you are simply being argumentative...

The only other point to address in your post is the border 'conflicts' between the US and Canada... How many settlers are sent into US/Canada and vice versa?

There are many minor border conflicts in existence, even in Europe...

I'm sure you aren't suggesting that are similarities between Israel and other countries, who do by the way, have declared borders with their neighbours...

 

[Shusha]

There are many minor border conflicts in existence, even in Europe...

Right. And NO ONE is suggesting that because Belgium has a minor border conflict with the Netherlands that either Belgium or the Netherlands is "undefined" or "has no borders". Further NO ONE is suggesting that because Belgium has a minor border conflict with the Netherlands that Belgium is "expansionist" and has plans for a "Greater Belgium".

So why the double standard for Israel?

 

[Shusha]

Besides, given the current political situation, you can't possibly be suggesting that Israel return the territory at this time, are you?

 

[Shusha]

Which, to be honest, if you feel that I need to provide a list of broken international laws then you are simply being argumentative...

Well, it is a discussion board. I was just suggesting you discuss things on the correct threads. I can think of a TON of bullshit media soundbites about "illegal this" and "illegal that" when it comes to Israel. Very few are soundly rooted in actual law, including everything about 'settlements' which is about as bullshit as you can get. Start a thread. Resurrect an old one. I'll discuss.

 

[montelatici]

There are many minor border conflicts in existence, even in Europe...

Right. And NO ONE is suggesting that because Belgium has a minor border conflict with the Netherlands that either Belgium or the Netherlands is "undefined" or "has no borders". Further NO ONE is suggesting that because Belgium has a minor border conflict with the Netherlands that Belgium is "expansionist" and has plans for a "Greater Belgium".

So why the double standard for Israel?

Because Israel rules over a population of non-Jews (equal to the number of Jews) under occupation and without a franchise. You don't seem to understand that if Israel were not ruled by Jews, it would be a pariah state and sanctioned. You so nonchalantly overlook the fact that Israel is behaving no differently than Apartheid South Africa or Rhodesia.

 

[Shusha]

There are many minor border conflicts in existence, even in Europe...

Right. And NO ONE is suggesting that because Belgium has a minor border conflict with the Netherlands that either Belgium or the Netherlands is "undefined" or "has no borders". Further NO ONE is suggesting that because Belgium has a minor border conflict with the Netherlands that Belgium is "expansionist" and has plans for a "Greater Belgium".

So why the double standard for Israel?

Because Israel rules over a population of non-Jews (equal to the number of Jews) under occupation and without a franchise. You don't seem to understand that if Israel were not ruled by Jews, it would be a pariah state and sanctioned. You so nonchalantly overlook the fact that Israel is behaving no differently than Apartheid South Africa or Rhodesia.

Yes, but AGAIN, the premise of this thread is Israel's so-called "expansionism" OUTSIDE of Israel/"Palestine".

 

[montelatici]

There are many minor border conflicts in existence, even in Europe...

Right. And NO ONE is suggesting that because Belgium has a minor border conflict with the Netherlands that either Belgium or the Netherlands is "undefined" or "has no borders". Further NO ONE is suggesting that because Belgium has a minor border conflict with the Netherlands that Belgium is "expansionist" and has plans for a "Greater Belgium".

So why the double standard for Israel?

Because Israel rules over a population of non-Jews (equal to the number of Jews) under occupation and without a franchise. You don't seem to understand that if Israel were not ruled by Jews, it would be a pariah state and sanctioned. You so nonchalantly overlook the fact that Israel is behaving no differently than Apartheid South Africa or Rhodesia.

Yes, but AGAIN, the premise of this thread is Israel's so-called "expansionism" OUTSIDE of Israel/"Palestine".

It has already expanded outside of the Jew partition and mandatory Palestine. It had already expanded outside the Jew partition in 1947. So, "expansionism" is not in question.

 

[Humanity]

Which, to be honest, if you feel that I need to provide a list of broken international laws then you are simply being argumentative...

Well, it is a discussion board. I was just suggesting you discuss things on the correct threads. I can think of a TON of bullshit media soundbites about "illegal this" and "illegal that" when it comes to Israel. Very few are soundly rooted in actual law, including everything about 'settlements' which is about as bullshit as you can get. Start a thread. Resurrect an old one. I'll discuss.

A very 'Zionist' answer to what is clearly written either in laws, in resolutions, in morals...