Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Israel seized the West Bank and East Jerusalem by force and is currently in the process of settling the land and removing its original inhabitants -- all clear violations of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
What the heck are you talking about????
1) "Israel seized the West Bank and East Jerusalem by force"
In June, 1967, the Jordanian Arab Legion attacked Israel all along the long armistice line, especially in Jerusalem. This happened despite repeated pleas by Israel to the Jordanian king to desist. What did you expect Israel to do? Present the Arab attackers with flowers?
Shortly after the war Israel offered to return every inch of the territories in exchange for a peace treaty. The response of the Arab League was the infamous "NO NEGOTIATIONS, NO RECOGNITION, NO PEACE".
2)"(Israel) is currently in the process of settling the land and removing its original inhabitants"
First of all the "original" inhabitants to which you refer are mostly descendants of Arabs from neighboring areas who came to Palestine in search of jobs which ironically were created by the Jewish agricultural and industrial revival of the area which began in the 1800's.
Secondly, there are more Arabs living in the so-called West Bank than there were 40 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago, and one year ago. How the heck is that "removing its inhabitants"???
You're living in a world of delusions. Or is it simply a poor attempt at purposeful propaganda?
There is no such thing as 1967 Borders. There are 1948 Armistice Lines with Trans Jordan.
Jordan refused to take back the West Bank in peace negotiations. And Egypt didn't want Gaza back.
What does your international law say, Ishmael? That Jordan can capture territories and kick all the Jews out (1948), but when it attacks the Jews again 19 years later and loses, they're not allowed to move back in? THINK AGAIN!
They do-but it shouldn't be the responsibility of the US to ensure of it. Our country was intended for people of all religions so stooping down to the level of religious theocracies in the Middle East and inserting ourselves in their wars will only mean terrible things for our country in the long run. We should cease dealing with Israel, Saudi Arabia and all countries in the Middle East. Israel has proven it can take care of itself, and if those countries are "allies", who needs enemies?
They do-but it shouldn't be the responsibility of the US to ensure of it. Our country was intended for people of all religions so stooping down to the level of religious theocracies in the Middle East and inserting ourselves in their wars will only mean terrible things for our country in the long run. We should cease dealing with Israel, Saudi Arabia and all countries in the Middle East. Israel has proven it can take care of itself, and if those countries are "allies", who needs enemies?
Agree, the U.S. needs to stay out of the Israel/Palestine mess, along with a lot of other conflicts in the Middle East. U.S. interventions in the Middle East have been disastrous, and have only made the situation worse.
"What did you expect Israel to do? Present the Arab attackers with flowers?"
1. Win the war. 2. Withdraw from the territory per international law.
Quote:
"Secondly, there are more Arabs living in the so-called West Bank than there were 40 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago, and one year ago. How the heck is that "removing its inhabitants"???"
Irrelevant. Resistance fighters multiply like rats. The real question is, what is the legal status of the West Bank? Is it occupied or annexed? If it's the former, Israel's settlements are illegal; if it's the latter, Israel is an apartheid state.
No, no, of course not -- ISIS is a venerated organization and member of the international community in good standing /s. Couldn't you have grasped for a lower common denominator? Are the Khmer Rouge and the Visigoths too obscure? Are National Socialism and Stalinism too cliched?
Where the Hell did you get this nonsense? " member of the international community in good standing"
Getting to the bottom line I find it particularly abhorrent that the one movement of people, that of Zionist Jews in the early 20th Century and the post-WW II movement of Jews to the land of Israel is subject to particular Western, self-righteous attack. I don't know if it's a sudden spasm of "conscience," Western self-loathing or a reincarnation of anti-Judaism (I think the latter). But Jews, as always, lose out. Hopefully they lose out only on university campuses and on the pages of elite newspapers. I worry that developments such as the Iran treaty show that it could wind up being far worse.
Pennyone said that he/she was neutral on the subject of Israel. I think that you are not happy until all of us gentiles are jumping up and down in support of Israel. Your not losing out, but for the first time you are losing control of the argument about how many wars we Americans should fight on your behalf.
If you want to start a war we will sell you the weapons. I won't support a war that you start. I won't be fooled after being lied to about the Gulf of Tonkin, yellow cake, and weapons of mass destruction.
So go ahead and scream antisemitism. I'm for keeping out of depressions and wars that idiot Presidents start.
1. Win the war. 2. Withdraw from the territory per international law.
You are saying very interesting thing. An aggressor can start a war with the knowledge that even if he will lose the war, he will keep the territories he lost?
There no such law. If there is, please explain how USA keeps Puerto-Rico, California, and how Russia keeps Caliningrad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drishmael
Irrelevant. Resistance fighters multiply like rats.
What? What do you mean by that? What is the link between his questions to this answer?
Quote:
Originally Posted by drishmael
The real question is, what is the legal status of the West Bank? Is it occupied or annexed? If it's the former, Israel's settlements are illegal; if it's the latter, Israel is an apartheid state.
The status is disputed.
Any way it's not annexed.
From the Geneva Convention #49: "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." If it's occupied the settlements are legal, because the population came to this area voluntarily.
They do-but it shouldn't be the responsibility of the US to ensure of it. Our country was intended for people of all religions so stooping down to the level of religious theocracies in the Middle East and inserting ourselves in their wars will only mean terrible things for our country in the long run. We should cease dealing with Israel, Saudi Arabia and all countries in the Middle East. Israel has proven it can take care of itself, and if those countries are "allies", who needs enemies?
As long as the United States has energy resources vested interests in the region, Foreign policy in the region will continue. If not for Israel, many countries in the region would have sided with the Soviet's during the Cold War, and not the U.S. Thanks to Israel, the balance of power is in our favor.
1. Win the war. 2. Withdraw from the territory per international law.
There is no International Law script that orders Israel to withdraw from the West. However, there is UNSC 242 that asks for both parties to negotiate borders with a peace agreement.
Irrelevant. Resistance fighters multiply like rats. The real question is, what is the legal status of the West Bank? Is it occupied or annexed? If it's the former, Israel's settlements are illegal; if it's the latter, Israel is an apartheid state.[/quote]
The status of the West Bank is, "disputed" since the prior occupier of the land was Jordan. Jordan did not hold a legal higher power contracting title of the land, therefor, the territory must be negotiated per international law.
Anyhow, why did the original PLO Charter of 1964 article 24 state that the Palestinians have no official claims to the West Bank?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
