What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote

[JoeB131]

Why not?

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

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

I don't disagree, but then you have the issue of which Palestinians get to vote.

Right now, there are 6 Million Jews and 1 million Arabs in Israel, with another 4.75MM living in the "Occupied Territories"

Then you have 3 millon living as refugees in Jordan, half a million in Lebanon, etc.

In short, they would very quickly become the majority in Israel, which means no more Israel. Wouldn't bother me in the least, but you think the Zionists are going to go along with being a minority?

The two state solution would be better for Israel, but it has to be a fair one of returning a lot more land and Jerusalem as an international city.

 

[JoeB131]

There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
But not a peep from the Jew haters.

Every day? Really?

Even if there were, that would be an internal issue we shouldn't be involved in.

We are involved in Israel because we are the ones subsidizing it and a large part of our foreign policy is to secure Israel.

 

[Mindful]

There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
But not a peep from the Jew haters.

Every day? Really?

Even if there were, that would be an internal issue we shouldn't be involved in.

We are involved in Israel because we are the ones subsidizing it and a large part of our foreign policy is to secure Israel.

How do you feel about the USA making financial appropriations to Egypt?

 

[Indeependent]

There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
But not a peep from the Jew haters.

Every day? Really?

Even if there were, that would be an internal issue we shouldn't be involved in.

We are involved in Israel because we are the ones subsidizing it and a large part of our foreign policy is to secure Israel.

Check out some non-Jew related news once in a while.

 

[Indeependent]

There’s a revolution going on within the nations of the African continent almost every day.
But not a peep from the Jew haters.

Every day? Really?

Even if there were, that would be an internal issue we shouldn't be involved in.

We are involved in Israel because we are the ones subsidizing it and a large part of our foreign policy is to secure Israel.

Shut off anything powered by an Intel chip.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

THE OLD WILL DIE AND THE YOUNG WILL FORGET

​

Tinmore lives in 1948 because the palestinian people still lives in 1948.

Tinmore lives in 48 because Mr. Ben Gurion was only 50% correct.

The old did die but the young didn't forget.

Nevertheless, Life does go on. My parents were refugees at one time, but I never thought of them that way because they became very successful.

The young didn't forget because their elders never let them.

Why does a Spaniard like you care so much about the Israel/Palestine situation anyway? You don't even know very much about Eretz Yisrael. You once said that the Jews only have an attachment to Jerusalem, and not to the rest of the Land. Yet almost every city and town, every nook and cranny in Israel, has some Jewish history attached to it. If you want, I can give you some lessons on that.

 

[Mindful]

THE OLD WILL DIE AND THE YOUNG WILL FORGET

​

Tinmore lives in 1948 because the palestinian people still lives in 1948.

Tinmore lives in 48 because Mr. Ben Gurion was only 50% correct.

The old did die but the young didn't forget.

Nevertheless, Life does go on. My parents were refugees at one time, but I never thought of them that way because they became very successful.

The young didn't forget because their elders never let them.

Why does a Spaniard like you care so much about the Israel/Palestine situation anyway? You don't even know very much about Eretz Yisrael. You once said that the Jews only have an attachment to Jerusalem, and not to the rest of the Land. Yet almost every city and town, every nook and cranny in Israel, has some Jewish history attached to it. If you want, I can give you some lessons on that.

I once went to an archeological/excavation dig on the Golan, which proves it.

So many people think they know what they are talking about, and they don't.

The intense over fascination with Jews and Israel is mind boggling at times.

 

[flacaltenn]

Right now, there are 6 Million Jews and 1 million Arabs in Israel, with another 4.75MM living in the "Occupied Territories"

You're counting Gaza (maybe) and that's a special case of them being under Hamas occupation.. Not Israeli occupation.. Israel GAVE the PA the Gaza -- free and clear.. Hamas STOLE it.. And now NO elections are needed or anticipated...

As for those Palis living in detention or squalor in Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt and elsewhere, their CLAIMS to returning and chances are about the same as the "Reconquista" movement from militant Hispanic groups looking to RETURNING to "their homelands" in Phoenix or Los Angeles...

HOWEVER -- ANY peace plan should be a NEIGHBORHOOD affair and should involve neighboring Arab countries to put those "detainees" close to their borders with the WB and provide infrastructure and connectivity to the West Bank and the region as a whole....

 

[Spartacactcus]

Of course it makes perfect sense.

And it's no secret.

You won't know this but judge representing the USA in the 2004 ICJ regarding the wall agreed with his co judges that the Israeli settlements in the OPTs were a violation of international law.

You won't know either that he is of German Jewish-Polish Jewish origin and was one of the youngest people to be liberated from the Nazi death camps.

So when you blanket smear people who disagree with Israeli policies and/or actions with the " Jew hater " card you are actually smearing the likes of him and others that either survived themselves or were born of parents who survived the death camps.

His humanity survived the camps , yours doesn't even survive the discussion

Just so you know and can never plead ignorance in the future

 

[toomuchtime_]

Of course it makes perfect sense.

And it's no secret.

You won't know this but judge representing the USA in the 2004 ICJ regarding the wall agreed with his co judges that the Israeli settlements in the OPTs were a violation of international law.

You won't know either that he is of German Jewish-Polish Jewish origin and was one of the youngest people to be liberated from the Nazi death camps.

So when you blanket smear people who disagree with Israeli policies and/or actions with the " Jew hater " card you are actually smearing the likes of him and others that either survived themselves or were born of parents who survived the death camps.

His humanity survived the camps , yours doesn't even survive the discussion

Just so you know and can never plead ignorance in the future

Well he was clearly wrong and that doesn't make you any less of a Jew hater.

 

[Mindful]

Of course it makes perfect sense.

And it's no secret.

You won't know this but judge representing the USA in the 2004 ICJ regarding the wall agreed with his co judges that the Israeli settlements in the OPTs were a violation of international law.

You won't know either that he is of German Jewish-Polish Jewish origin and was one of the youngest people to be liberated from the Nazi death camps.

So when you blanket smear people who disagree with Israeli policies and/or actions with the " Jew hater " card you are actually smearing the likes of him and others that either survived themselves or were born of parents who survived the death camps.

His humanity survived the camps , yours doesn't even survive the discussion

Just so you know and can never plead ignorance in the future

So we're done then?

 

[Spartacactcus]

The above CLEARLY states that the Green Line exists only for military considerations. It can not be used in any way to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party.

Black. And. White. It can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel. Period. Full Stop.

And ask yourself WHY the Arab Palestinians were not involved in the Peace Treaty between Israel and Jordan. Nor why Arab Palestinians were not differentiated or mentioned at all.

And, let's talk about "Israeli annexation". You claim equivalence between Jordan crossing its own established international borders and taking land which does not belong to it AND Israeli annexation. This implies that Israel had an international boundary PRIOR to the 1949 Armistice and that it was attempting to cross that international border and take land which does not belong to it. So, where was Israel's border prior to the 1949 Armistice Agreement? And what agreement or treaty provided the legal parameters for that border?

That agreement was settled prior to Israel consenting to be constrained by the UN Charter/4th GC. So when it decided it would violate that treaty and stake a claim for sovereignty it was already contractually bound by both the conventions mentioned and thus their applicability is surely legally correct.

Thus the territory acquired via warfare in 1967 was in contravention of both as is reflected in UNSC 242 which calls for the Israeli withdrawal from those territories. Why ? On the grounds that it is illegal to acquire territory through warfare. The experts , or the majority of them at least , agree that the UN Charter and the 4th GC are applicable to that conflict.

The Palestinian were not party to the treaties because they were in complete disarray prior to even the Partition Plan vote in the UNGA. They lost the battle for self determination in the years between 1936-39

The Zionists agreed to the partition plan and even referred to resolution 181 in it's declaration of independence statement conveying a wish to see it implemented. Then they conquered more territory and refused to go back to the PP lines. Then during the amistice talks they stated a view that they had no wish to try to claim the Jordanian occupied WB. Then , crucially , it agreed to be bound by treaties that would negate any legitimacy in trying to acquire territory via warfare.

That 's how I see it and that's what I see the others making the case on

 

[Spartacactcus]

Well he was clearly wrong and that doesn't make you any less of a Jew hater.

He's the expert in international and humanitarian law and you are a troll on an anonymous board , call me a radical but I'm going to defer to his expertize over yours all day long

 

[Spartacactcus]

Of course it makes perfect sense.

And it's no secret.

You won't know this but judge representing the USA in the 2004 ICJ regarding the wall agreed with his co judges that the Israeli settlements in the OPTs were a violation of international law.

You won't know either that he is of German Jewish-Polish Jewish origin and was one of the youngest people to be liberated from the Nazi death camps.

So when you blanket smear people who disagree with Israeli policies and/or actions with the " Jew hater " card you are actually smearing the likes of him and others that either survived themselves or were born of parents who survived the death camps.

His humanity survived the camps , yours doesn't even survive the discussion

Just so you know and can never plead ignorance in the future

So we're done then?

We were never anything else imo but you can maybe reflect on calling a holocaust survivor a Jew hater akin to those who concocted the abomination of the camps . My guess is you haven't the tiniest bit of introspection required to see how gross that actually is and will remain lost

 

[Spartacactcus]

THE OLD WILL DIE AND THE YOUNG WILL FORGET

​

Tinmore lives in 1948 because the palestinian people still lives in 1948.

Tinmore lives in 48 because Mr. Ben Gurion was only 50% correct.

The old did die but the young didn't forget.

Oddly enough ben Gurion was far more understanding of the Palestinian antagonism to Zionism than many of the people in this forum living in the 21st century

Those who endure abuse tend not to forget , be they young or old imo

 

[Spartacactcus]

Q1 --- Who is the responsible and ENDURING negotiator for Team Israel in making deals with the Palestinians??

Whoever the Israeli electorate votes into office as the result of free and fair elections , their elected government .

Q2 -- Who is the responsible and ENDURING negotiator for Team Pali and speaks to Israel?

A. Your highly over-rated United Nations
B. The Arab League
C. Mammoud Abbas and team.. (YAY TEAM)
D. Donald Trump
E. None of the above
F. Hamas
G. Fatah
H. The ghost of Yassir Araffat.

The second question isn't rough at all, we just need to apply the same standards to both people , which seems to be the killer for many of the allegedly pro Israel ( read anti Arab/Muslim, as confirmed in the last part of your post I snipped )

The negotiators for the Palestinain side should be those Palestinians elected into government via free and fair elections to be held in the OPTs free from Israeli and/or anyone elses interference, so as to form the dreaded Government of National Unity for the Palestinian side.

The issue is that a divided Palestinian people offers so much more to Israel and its allies hence the constant interference and divide and conquer techniques on display for decades on end

 

[Shusha]

The above CLEARLY states that the Green Line exists only for military considerations. It can not be used in any way to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of either Party.

Black. And. White. It can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel. Period. Full Stop.

And ask yourself WHY the Arab Palestinians were not involved in the Peace Treaty between Israel and Jordan. Nor why Arab Palestinians were not differentiated or mentioned at all.

And, let's talk about "Israeli annexation". You claim equivalence between Jordan crossing its own established international borders and taking land which does not belong to it AND Israeli annexation. This implies that Israel had an international boundary PRIOR to the 1949 Armistice and that it was attempting to cross that international border and take land which does not belong to it. So, where was Israel's border prior to the 1949 Armistice Agreement? And what agreement or treaty provided the legal parameters for that border?

That agreement was settled prior to Israel consenting to be constrained by the UN Charter/4th GC. So when it decided it would violate that treaty and stake a claim for sovereignty it was already contractually bound by both the conventions mentioned and thus their applicability is surely legally correct.

Thus the territory acquired via warfare in 1967 was in contravention of both as is reflected in UNSC 242 which calls for the Israeli withdrawal from those territories. Why ? On the grounds that it is illegal to acquire territory through warfare. The experts , or the majority of them at least , agree that the UN Charter and the 4th GC are applicable to that conflict.

The Palestinian were not party to the treaties because they were in complete disarray prior to even the Partition Plan vote in the UNGA. They lost the battle for self determination in the years between 1936-39

The Zionists agreed to the partition plan and even referred to resolution 181 in it's declaration of independence statement conveying a wish to see it implemented. Then they conquered more territory and refused to go back to the PP lines. Then during the amistice talks they stated a view that they had no wish to try to claim the Jordanian occupied WB. Then , crucially , it agreed to be bound by treaties that would negate any legitimacy in trying to acquire territory via warfare.

That 's how I see it and that's what I see the others making the case on

You are wildly dodging the point here.

The Green Line can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel. Its considerations were military only. It can not in any way be used as a border for Israel. Period.

So...this (again) brings us back to exactly WHERE Israel claims sovereignty. You are trying to argue that Israel has no claim to sovereignty over the Green Line. But you can not use that line as a claim for sovereignty, nor as a denial of sovereignty. Nor can you use UN resolutions as they have no authority to create boundaries lines between States. So, WHAT line are you using instead? And make a case for that line being the international boundary of Israel beyond which she has no further claims.

 

[Shusha]

Let me help you out. The international border between Israel and Jordan is the Jordan River.

 

[Spartacactcus]

You are wildly dodging the point here.

The Green Line can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel. Its considerations were military only. It can not in any way be used as a border for Israel. Period.

So...this (again) brings us back to exactly WHERE Israel claims sovereignty. You are trying to argue that Israel has no claim to sovereignty over the Green Line. But you can not use that line as a claim for sovereignty, nor as a denial of sovereignty. Nor can you use UN resolutions as they have no authority to create boundaries lines between States. So, WHAT line are you using instead? And make a case for that line being the international boundary of Israel beyond which she has no further claims.

It's pretty obvious that when you sign a contract saying you agree not to try to acquire territory through warfare and then try to acquire territory through warfare you are in breach of that contract regardless of what you agreed to prior to that point in time. Even the armistice agreements committed both sides to desist from military actions beyond that point.

So on both counts Israel was in breach of its contractual obligations. A feature of it's existence and the reason , imo , why it is seen by many as a pariah state.

 

[Shusha]

You are wildly dodging the point here.

The Green Line can not be used to prejudice the rights, claims and positions of Israel. Its considerations were military only. It can not in any way be used as a border for Israel. Period.

So...this (again) brings us back to exactly WHERE Israel claims sovereignty. You are trying to argue that Israel has no claim to sovereignty over the Green Line. But you can not use that line as a claim for sovereignty, nor as a denial of sovereignty. Nor can you use UN resolutions as they have no authority to create boundaries lines between States. So, WHAT line are you using instead? And make a case for that line being the international boundary of Israel beyond which she has no further claims.

It's pretty obvious that when you sign a contract saying you agree not to try to acquire territory through warfare and then try to acquire territory through warfare you are in breach of that contract regardless of what you agreed to prior to that point in time. Even the armistice agreements committed both sides to desist from military actions beyond that point.

So on both counts Israel was in breach of its contractual obligations. A feature of it's existence and the reason , imo , why it is seen by many as a pariah state.

Keep dodging.

Israel is not acquiring territory through warfare. Israel makes a legal claim to the territory.

The purpose of this thread is not to discuss the military actions of Jordan and Israel in breach of their mutual 1949 Armistice Agreement.

The purpose of this thread, and its relevance to today, is establishing Israel's claims of sovereignty over territory which you label the OPTs. You can not use the Green Line to limit Israel's claim to sovereignty of that territory. You can not use the Green Line to claim that Israeli citizens have been transferred to "occupied territory".