What is your background/interest in the Middle East?

[Hossfly]

Artevelde -

Britain did not "own" Palestine - it exercised a mandate over it.

It did not colonise Palestine, it did not annex it, it did not incorporate it into Great Britain.

The mandates were never intended to be an act of colonisation - moreso of shepherding the states towards full statehood.

This is two points you are arguing where you seem to be performing the intellectual equivalent of Twister in order to hold an argument together that you are definitely smart enough to know doesn't actually hold water.

Artevelde said "exercised sovereign control", not "owned."

 

[Artevelde]

You asked for examples of states erected infrastructures outside their own territory. I gave some examples. I'm not going to do dissertation research on it. Point is, clearly states do erect infrastructure outside their own territory on many occasions. That is the only thing I claim and I proved it.

You claim that no state save Israel creates infrastructure outside its territorial boundaries is disproven. Deal with it.

You have to be kidding...are you seriously comparing the legal status of the West Bank with that of the South Pole?!

If you do come up with a serious example, I'll come back to it - but somehow the South Pole doesn't quite fit!

You are the one who compared a sovereign independent state like Mexico with an occupied and disputed territory like the West Bank.

And you should know that the South Pole is the subject of territorial disputes, as is the status of Spitsbergen and Guantanamo.

 

[Saigon]

Well I can tell the US has built numerous hospitals, schools, paved roads and other projects in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yes, of course - with the consent of the local authorities and legal government. It's ultimately their decision.

Which is also why Artevelde's eample of the South Pole is so silly - construction of buildings there is either on land designated to each of the 6 (?) states 'governing' Antarctica, and/or is constructed with international consent.

 

[Artevelde]

Really?

I can't think of a single example...

The South Pole is full of them. I could also point to US construction at Guantanamo Bay, Russian constructions on Spitzbergen, ... The list is pretty endless.

There is no dispute over the ownership of Antarctica. Guantanamo Bay is leased from Cuba by the US. The Spitsbergen Treaty designates sovereignty.

What about Israel?

Lying about the facts as usual.

 

[Saigon]

Artevelde said "exercised sovereign control", not "owned."

Hoss -

Please read the thread before commenting. Roudy said "owned" - it is that word which I think is so funny, because it is so obviously ridiculous.

 

[Artevelde]

Well I can tell the US has built numerous hospitals, schools, paved roads and other projects in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yes, of course - with the consent of the local authorities and legal government. It's ultimately their decision.

Which is also why Artevelde's eample of the South Pole is so silly - construction of buildings there is either on land designated to each of the 6 (?) states 'governing' Antarctica, and/or is constructed with international consent.

The Israeli wall is constructed with the consent of the state "governing" the West Bank.

 

[Lipush]

Really?

I can't think of a single example...

The South Pole is full of them. I could also point to US construction at Guantanamo Bay, Russian constructions on Spitzbergen, ... The list is pretty endless.

There is no dispute over the ownership of Antarctica. Guantanamo Bay is leased from Cuba by the US. The Spitsbergen Treaty designates sovereignty.

What about Israel?

There is no question that Israel belongs to the Jews. The Arabs for years have tried to twist the facts, hide evidence of Jewish history on the land. But that is destined to fail.

 

[Artevelde]

Artevelde said "exercised sovereign control", not "owned."

Hoss -

Please read the thread before commenting. Roudy said "owned" - it is that word which I think is so funny, because it is so obviously ridiculous.

Less ridiculous than your agreement with Timore's assertion that there was a Palestinian state there.

 

[Saigon]

The South Pole is full of them. I could also point to US construction at Guantanamo Bay, Russian constructions on Spitzbergen, ... The list is pretty endless.

There is no dispute over the ownership of Antarctica. Guantanamo Bay is leased from Cuba by the US. The Spitsbergen Treaty designates sovereignty.

What about Israel?

Lying about the facts as usual.

Actually, no, Tinmore is fairly much right there.

Of course there is some arguing about the Spitsbergen Treaty, but is does designtate soveriengty (to Norway, with conditions) quite clearly.

Shall we agree that no nation has ever legally constructed anything on land claimed by another state without international agreement.

Everyone agree on that?

 

[High_Gravity]

Really?

I can't think of a single example...

Well I can tell the US has built numerous hospitals, schools, paved roads and other projects in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I guess they should be torn down as "illegal" right away.

Well some of the Iraqis and Afghanis do indeed blow up these buildings.

 

[Saigon]

The Israeli wall is constructed with the consent of the state "governing" the West Bank.

Oh Good Lord.....so in other words any army which conquers any land by force is thus the legitimate government?

So Armenia is the legitimate government of Aghdam?

Indonesia was the legitimate government on East Timor?

South Sudan was the legitimate government of the Halvag oil fields?

Jesus wept....

 

[Artevelde]

There is no dispute over the ownership of Antarctica. Guantanamo Bay is leased from Cuba by the US. The Spitsbergen Treaty designates sovereignty.

What about Israel?

Lying about the facts as usual.

Actually, no, Tinmore is fairly much right there.

Of course there is some arguing about the Spitsbergen Treaty, but is does designtate soveriengty (to Norway, with conditions) quite clearly.

Shall we agree that no nation has ever legally constructed anything on land claimed by another state without international agreement.

Everyone agree on that?

Obviously not. That's a ridiculous claim which flies in the face of numerous examples.

 

[Roudy]

Jesus wept....the standard of debate here really can't go any lower, can it?

Now you're really being naive!

Jesus wept, Mohammad murdered.

 

[Artevelde]

The Israeli wall is constructed with the consent of the state "governing" the West Bank.

Oh Good Lord.....so in other words any army which conquers any land by force is thus the legitimate government?

So Armenia is the legitimate government of Aghdam?

Indonesia was the legitimate government on East Timor?

South Sudan was the legitimate government of the Halvag oil fields?

Jesus wept....

I only borrowed your term which you used for the South Pole.

Who, according to you, exercises sovereign control over the West Bank? The Martians?

 

[RoccoR]

Lipush, P F Tinmore, et al,

You know, not a week goes by that Israelis is not in the news, complaining that someone is going to wipe them off the map.

There is no such thing as Palestine.

I think someone has been pulling your leg.

I could say the same thing to you

(COMMENT)

For more than half a century, Israeli Foreign Policy has not help change the attitudes in the Middle East in its favor; with (very) minor exceptions. It should fire the entire crybaby staff in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and gag the leadership, and buy a Madison Avenue Public Relations firm to build a new image.

As far as Israeli Security goes, it has nothing to fear from any Middle East/Persian Gulf nation. Israel is, in its own right - a nuclear power operating outside the NPT and protected by a US umbrella. AIRPAC has bought and paid for Congress, and it routinely conducts espionage operations against America - so it knows the internal policies pertaining to its defense. Israel has the US Mediterranean Fleet on one side, and the Persian Gulf Fleet on the other. It has nearly an unlimited line of credit through the US, and AIRPAC as garnered it a sympathetic ear in nearly every corner in America. It is well protected, even if it has been incapable of resolving the aggravation of the Occupied Territories in more than four decades.

If Israel is not going to make a good faith effort to resolve its problems in the neighborhood, then it needs to sit back, take a breath, and keep its mouth shut.

Right or Wrong --- It is protected...

Most Respectfully,
R

Remember the USS Liberty!

 

[Lipush]

Lipush, P F Tinmore, et al,

You know, not a week goes by that Israelis is not in the news, complaining that someone is going to wipe them off the map.

I think someone has been pulling your leg.

I could say the same thing to you

(COMMENT)

For more than half a century, Israeli Foreign Policy has not help change the attitudes in the Middle East in its favor; with (very) minor exceptions. It should fire the entire crybaby staff in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and gag the leadership, and buy a Madison Avenue Public Relations firm to build a new image.

As far as Israeli Security goes, it has nothing to fear from any Middle East/Persian Gulf nation. Israel is, in its own right - a nuclear power operating outside the NPT and protected by a US umbrella. AIRPAC has bought and paid for Congress, and it routinely conducts espionage operations against America - so it knows the internal policies pertaining to its defense. Israel has the US Mediterranean Fleet on one side, and the Persian Gulf Fleet on the other. It has nearly an unlimited line of credit through the US, and AIRPAC as garnered it a sympathetic ear in nearly every corner in America. It is well protected, even if it has been incapable of resolving the aggravation of the Occupied Territories in more than four decades.

If Israel is not going to make a good faith effort to resolve its problems in the neighborhood, then it needs to sit back, take a breath, and keep its mouth shut.

Right or Wrong --- It is protected...

Most Respectfully,
R

Remember the USS Liberty!

So what do you suggest?

 

[Artevelde]

Lipush, P F Tinmore, et al,

You know, not a week goes by that Israelis is not in the news, complaining that someone is going to wipe them off the map.

I could say the same thing to you

(COMMENT)

For more than half a century, Israeli Foreign Policy has not help change the attitudes in the Middle East in its favor; with (very) minor exceptions. It should fire the entire crybaby staff in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and gag the leadership, and buy a Madison Avenue Public Relations firm to build a new image.

As far as Israeli Security goes, it has nothing to fear from any Middle East/Persian Gulf nation. Israel is, in its own right - a nuclear power operating outside the NPT and protected by a US umbrella. AIRPAC has bought and paid for Congress, and it routinely conducts espionage operations against America - so it knows the internal policies pertaining to its defense. Israel has the US Mediterranean Fleet on one side, and the Persian Gulf Fleet on the other. It has nearly an unlimited line of credit through the US, and AIRPAC as garnered it a sympathetic ear in nearly every corner in America. It is well protected, even if it has been incapable of resolving the aggravation of the Occupied Territories in more than four decades.

If Israel is not going to make a good faith effort to resolve its problems in the neighborhood, then it needs to sit back, take a breath, and keep its mouth shut.

Right or Wrong --- It is protected...

Most Respectfully,
R

Remember the USS Liberty!

So what do you suggest?

I guess he would like Israel to commit hari kiri, but quietly, without too much fuss.

 

[Roudy]

Artevelde said "exercised sovereign control", not "owned."

Hoss -

Please read the thread before commenting. Roudy said "owned" - it is that word which I think is so funny, because it is so obviously ridiculous.

It sure has hell was controlled by the Brits, and a Palestinian would be one of the Queen's Subjects, not a citizen of Palestine, the money had British markings all over it. That's just about as owned as you can get. The Arabs surely never owned it during the time of the British mandate nor did they run it. And at the time the British controlled this region, there was o such thing as an Arab Palestinian, the only people who called themselves Palestinians were the Jews. Fact of the matter is there was never a Palestinian country, ruler, culture, capital, distinct food or culture. The people calling themselves Palestinians today are ARABS from neighboring Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, just like Egyptian born and raised Arafat. It if you insist on painting stripes on a donkey and calling it a Zebra go right ahead.

 

[P F Tinmore]

The South Pole is full of them. I could also point to US construction at Guantanamo Bay, Russian constructions on Spitzbergen, ... The list is pretty endless.

There is no dispute over the ownership of Antarctica. Guantanamo Bay is leased from Cuba by the US. The Spitsbergen Treaty designates sovereignty.

What about Israel?

There is no question that Israel belongs to the Jews. The Arabs for years have tried to twist the facts, hide evidence of Jewish history on the land. But that is destined to fail.

I have no question about the Jewish history in the land.

However, the Jews were not the first people there nor were they ever the only people there. There is no historic precedent for an exclusive Jewish state.

 

[Hossfly]

Artevelde said "exercised sovereign control", not "owned."

Hoss -

Please read the thread before commenting. Roudy said "owned" - it is that word which I think is so funny, because it is so obviously ridiculous.

Where are you coming from, twit? I read everything back to where you and Artevelde began jousting and I didn't see any quotes by Roudy. Do you expect people to read your simple mind?