Israel steals more land

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Riprorin

Banned
Apr 25, 2000
9,634
0
0
Worse, the Jordanians ravaged synagogues, turning many into stables and chicken coops, and desecrated an ancient Jewish cemetary using tombstones to build military bunhers and pave latrines, and leaving open graves with bones strewn on the ground.
 

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda
Originally posted by: smc13
You do know that East Jerusalem contains the Wailing Wall, the remains of Temple, and it is the the holiest jewish site in the world, right? You also do know that when Jordan controlled the West Bank they refused to allow Jews pray at the Wailing Wall, right? You also do know that Israel has allowed muslims to come pray at the Dome of the Rock, right? there is no way Israel will give up the Wailing Wall, which is why they are putting up the fence.

Exactly. That is why that city should be given true international status. Not the janitorial control promised to Arafat in the fineprint of the Oslo Accords.

The fence is more of a land-grabbing measure than a means of safety for the Israeli citizenry.

I don't know if you read my earlier post contained the link about the illegal wall. Here it is again:

http://www.palestinecampaign.org/pdf/settlements.pdf

I have many sources that elucidate the illegality of this Israeli escapade. I would be more than happy to share them with you if you are interested.


This "fact sheet" is just propaganda. It is funny that at the same time Palestinians teach their kids to throw rocks pay the families of teens who blow themselves up, they are turning to western style add campaigns to say what Israel is doing is illegal. It's funny. I point out that the arabs have tried to annihilate Israel, that the Palestinians could have had a state if there fellow arabs had allowed it, How the suicide bombers blow themselves up on buses and in restaurants, and all you can the Israelis do is steal land even though the land isn't Palestinian. Yet, you back the murderers and you complain about Israel fencing in part of its own territory.

Here is a question for you, by what basis is the land Palestinian? If you follow the UN rule that says you can't acquire land by conquest, shouldn't Israel be giving the land back to Jordan? I know about resolution 242 but is there any other basis for this argument?

For the record (as if a record on web forum matters), I am against the Israeli settlement of the west bank - except East Jerusalem which is rightfully part of Israel. After Israel completes its fence they should give the settlers a choice, leave the west bank or become proud citizens of the new country of Palestine.

While I am thinking about it, this discussion reminds me of a high school history class I had (in '86 I think). Every year, this teacher (Mrs. Dyer) had a mock middle east peace summit to show us how difficult the peace process was. She never had a class reach an agreement. To ensure there wouldn't be an agreement she had me as part of the Israeli delegation because I was a pro-israeli hawk. I decided that I would throw a monkey wrench into her plans so I convinced the other members of the israeli delegation that we should offer a really generous peace proposal (I don't remember what it was), and proceeded to solve the middle east crisis in 10 minutes. ;-)
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda
Originally posted by: smc13
Israel owns the land because they have the ability to hold the land. Everyone recognizes it because it has been demonstrated.

So it all comes down to "might is right" or "keep what you can take". I see now where you are coming from.
And what would be your stance had any of the Arab wars succeeded?

 

0roo0roo

No Lifer
Sep 21, 2002
64,795
84
91
Originally posted by: Riprorin
Originally posted by: lozina
Originally posted by: Riprorin
The Palestinian Authority school books use a map of the Middle East in which Israel does not exist and is replaced in its entirety by a state called "Palestine".

Link

Link

How do you negotiate with someone who doesn't acknowledge your right to exist?


How do you argue with someone who doesn't acknowledge when their point is debunked?



I don't know. I'll tell you when you've debunked it.

its sad that he can't admit what the palestinians don't even try to hide. he's in total denial:p
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Czar
ok, they are refugees, where did they originate from?

Perhaps they came from their parents?
I'm sure you know the definition

One who flees in search of refuge, as in times of war, political oppression, or religious persecution.

One who flees, as from home, confinement, captivity, or justice: escapee, fugitive, runaway. See seek/avoid.

refugee, one who leaves one's native land either because of expulsion or to escape persecution.


so from where did they run from to be classified as refugees?
well?

 

Siwy

Senior member
Sep 13, 2002
556
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Siwy
Originally posted by: smc13

I would think that everyone really believes that the west bank is owned by Israel.

Everyone?! Only arrogant Zionist zealots believe that. Why do you think Israeli court (not to mention International court) decided that the wall going through West Bank is illegal.

If even Israeli court thinks that Israel has no right to build a security barrier through the West Bank, what in the world makes you think that ?everyone really believes that the west bank is owned by Israel??

I think it is time for you to start getting news from some other sources than Zionist propaganda websites.
Again, you use zionist as if it a bad thing. :)

Israel owns the land because they have the ability to hold the land. Everyone recognizes it because it has been demonstrated. You can argue whether or not they should own the land but how can you argue that they do in fact control the territory?

There is nothing wrong with Zionism; there is a lot of wrong with fanatical Zionism.

If Israel owns the land why is it called an occupation? If Israel owns the land why does Israeli and international court call the security barrier, going through that land, illegal? If Israel owns the land why does UN, Russia and US tell Israel to remove the settlements?

Having control over something does not make one an owner. You have some twisted definition of ownership ~ definitely not shared by ?everyone? as you like to put it.
 

Siwy

Senior member
Sep 13, 2002
556
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: GreatBarracuda
Originally posted by: smc13
You do know that East Jerusalem contains the Wailing Wall, the remains of Temple, and it is the the holiest jewish site in the world, right? You also do know that when Jordan controlled the West Bank they refused to allow Jews pray at the Wailing Wall, right? You also do know that Israel has allowed muslims to come pray at the Dome of the Rock, right? there is no way Israel will give up the Wailing Wall, which is why they are putting up the fence.

Exactly. That is why that city should be given true international status. Not the janitorial control promised to Arafat in the fineprint of the Oslo Accords.

The fence is more of a land-grabbing measure than a means of safety for the Israeli citizenry.

I don't know if you read my earlier post contained the link about the illegal wall. Here it is again:

http://www.palestinecampaign.org/pdf/settlements.pdf

I have many sources that elucidate the illegality of this Israeli escapade. I would be more than happy to share them with you if you are interested.


This "fact sheet" is just propaganda. It is funny that at the same time Palestinians teach their kids to throw rocks pay the families of teens who blow themselves up, they are turning to western style add campaigns to say what Israel is doing is illegal. It's funny. I point out that the arabs have tried to annihilate Israel, that the Palestinians could have had a state if there fellow arabs had allowed it, How the suicide bombers blow themselves up on buses and in restaurants, and all you can the Israelis do is steal land even though the land isn't Palestinian. Yet, you back the murderers and you complain about Israel fencing in part of its own territory.

Here is a question for you, by what basis is the land Palestinian? If you follow the UN rule that says you can't acquire land by conquest, shouldn't Israel be giving the land back to Jordan? I know about resolution 242 but is there any other basis for this argument?

For the record (as if a record on web forum matters), I am against the Israeli settlement of the west bank - except East Jerusalem which is rightfully part of Israel. After Israel completes its fence they should give the settlers a choice, leave the west bank or become proud citizens of the new country of Palestine.

While I am thinking about it, this discussion reminds me of a high school history class I had (in '86 I think). Every year, this teacher (Mrs. Dyer) had a mock middle east peace summit to show us how difficult the peace process was. She never had a class reach an agreement. To ensure there wouldn't be an agreement she had me as part of the Israeli delegation because I was a pro-israeli hawk. I decided that I would throw a monkey wrench into her plans so I convinced the other members of the israeli delegation that we should offer a really generous peace proposal (I don't remember what it was), and proceeded to solve the middle east crisis in 10 minutes. ;-)

Wow?did you call Sharon about it? Maybe he could use your generous proposal to solve the conflict. You?re a Nobel Peace Prize winner in the making. ;)
 

cquark

Golden Member
Apr 4, 2004
1,741
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13

I read it and there wasn't any information in it that I didn't know. The arabs decided to reject the UN resolution in '47 and tried to annihilate Israel.

History's not that simple. Zionist forces entered areas allocated to Arabs by the UN partition plan before the war began.

What your fact sheet fails to mention is the fact that Ehud Barak tried his best to create a Palestinian state and Arafat refused to accept it. So the reason there is no Palestinian State today? Because Arafat refused to give up one demand - East Jerusalem.

Barak's offer was considerably worse than you claim. Palestinian territory would've been divided by major Israeli settlements and roads leading to them, occupied by Israeli military. Barak also presented his proposals verbally in an all or nothing manner, which the Palestianians were understandbly loath to trust. The negotiations would've worked better with incremental, written proposals, something the US should've pushed for more strongly.

Also, Why do you think Israel is building fences? This isn't difficult. they are building fences to prevent suicide bombers from murdering people. Why would you expect them to not fense up the area? They are building up defenses in preparation for giving the rest of the land to the Palestinians. What is wrong with that?

They're building fences to consolidate their land claims. Israel's government wants Israel to be a Jewish state, so they'll eventually give up majority Arab areas like Gaza and parts of the West Bank, but they'll give as little land as they can in the process without caring about the UN partition boundaries.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Originally posted by: cquark...without caring about the UN partition boundaries.

The UN never cared about them, why should they be concerned with the UN.
Since day 1, then UN were backing the Arabs

 

MegaWorks

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
3,819
1
0
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: cquark...without caring about the UN partition boundaries.

The Un never cared about them, why should they be concerned with the UN.
Sionce day 1, then UN werre backing the Arabs

Then Isreal should leave the UN if they don't want to follow UN resolutions.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: cquark...without caring about the UN partition boundaries.

The Un never cared about them, why should they be concerned with the UN.
Sionce day 1, then UN werre backing the Arabs

Then Isreal should leave the UN if they don't want to follow UN resolutions.

The UN resolutions have been biased against Israel and for the Arabs since hostilities started.

The UN at the time was lined up as the Soviet Block vs the Western Allies.

The Soviets saw the Arabs as malable proxies and with the African nations, were able to force enough votes through on resolutions. It was being played out as an East vs West for 30 years with Israel and the Arabs as pawns of the Cold War. The big players had nothing to lose, only the pawns.

And one side lost multiple times. Everytime the Arabs realized that they were on the losing side, they screamed for help. And the UN came riding in with a "ceasefire" to save their butts.
Then the Arab nations immediately/conviently forgot why they asked for a ceasefire and started trouble again.

The UN resolutions never required Epypt or Jordan to follow through with their committements. Why did they only go after Israel?

BIAS!!


 

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: cquark...without caring about the UN partition boundaries.

The Un never cared about them, why should they be concerned with the UN.
Sionce day 1, then UN werre backing the Arabs

Then Isreal should leave the UN if they don't want to follow UN resolutions.


UN resolutions are meaningless. The UN does not have the power or inclination to enforce their resolutions so who cares about them?
 

Siwy

Senior member
Sep 13, 2002
556
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: cquark...without caring about the UN partition boundaries.

The Un never cared about them, why should they be concerned with the UN.
Sionce day 1, then UN werre backing the Arabs

Then Isreal should leave the UN if they don't want to follow UN resolutions.


UN resolutions are meaningless. The UN does not have the power or inclination to enforce their resolutions so who cares about them?

Pretty much every modern country in the world cares about UN. With the exception of Israel, if you can call Israel modern with their government's religious bigotry and discrimination.
 

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
Originally posted by: Siwy
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: cquark...without caring about the UN partition boundaries.

The Un never cared about them, why should they be concerned with the UN.
Sionce day 1, then UN werre backing the Arabs

Then Isreal should leave the UN if they don't want to follow UN resolutions.


UN resolutions are meaningless. The UN does not have the power or inclination to enforce their resolutions so who cares about them?

Pretty much every modern country in the world cares about UN. With the exception of Israel, if you can call Israel modern with their government's religious bigotry and discrimination.

Cares about the UN? In what way? What's a modern country? The US doesn't care about the UN, except of course when we can manipulate it. China doesn't care about the UN except when they can get some concessions for their vote or their veto. In what way is the UN really useful?
 

Siwy

Senior member
Sep 13, 2002
556
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Siwy
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: cquark...without caring about the UN partition boundaries.

The Un never cared about them, why should they be concerned with the UN.
Sionce day 1, then UN werre backing the Arabs

Then Isreal should leave the UN if they don't want to follow UN resolutions.


UN resolutions are meaningless. The UN does not have the power or inclination to enforce their resolutions so who cares about them?

Pretty much every modern country in the world cares about UN. With the exception of Israel, if you can call Israel modern with their government's religious bigotry and discrimination.

Cares about the UN? In what way? What's a modern country? The US doesn't care about the UN, except of course when we can manipulate it. China doesn't care about the UN except when they can get some concessions for their vote or their veto. In what way is the UN really useful?

Modern country is a country that among other things doesn?t discriminate based on religion, doesn?t oppress people under its jurisdiction, doesn?t use internationally condemned methods like collective punishment, etc.

In what way is UN really useful? You must be kidding me? How about being responsible for 172 peaceful settlements that have ended regional conflicts? Shall I go on?

Yes, UN needs some changes and adjustments which are already being investigated and implemented but it is far from being useless.
 

Strk

Lifer
Nov 23, 2003
10,197
4
76
I really wish people could seperate the actions of the nitwits in the Israeli government and Jews. Unfortunately, the far right in Israel makes the far right here look like puppies.
 

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
Originally posted by: Siwy
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Siwy
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: MegaWorks
Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
Originally posted by: cquark...without caring about the UN partition boundaries.

The Un never cared about them, why should they be concerned with the UN.
Sionce day 1, then UN werre backing the Arabs

Then Isreal should leave the UN if they don't want to follow UN resolutions.


UN resolutions are meaningless. The UN does not have the power or inclination to enforce their resolutions so who cares about them?

Pretty much every modern country in the world cares about UN. With the exception of Israel, if you can call Israel modern with their government's religious bigotry and discrimination.

Cares about the UN? In what way? What's a modern country? The US doesn't care about the UN, except of course when we can manipulate it. China doesn't care about the UN except when they can get some concessions for their vote or their veto. In what way is the UN really useful?

Modern country is a country that among other things doesn?t discriminate based on religion, doesn?t oppress people under its jurisdiction, doesn?t use internationally condemned methods like collective punishment, etc.

In what way is UN really useful? You must be kidding me? How about being responsible for 172 peaceful settlements that have ended regional conflicts? Shall I go on?

Yes, UN needs some changes and adjustments which are already being investigated and implemented but it is far from being useless.

172 peaceful settlements? which ones? What about the fighting in the Balkans (in the 90's)? What about the fighting in Sudan? what about the fighting in ethiopia? What about North Korea's nukes? What about Iran's nukes. What about the 16 resolutions on Iraq? What conflict did the UN actually solve?

 

Siwy

Senior member
Sep 13, 2002
556
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13

172 peaceful settlements? which ones? What about the fighting in the Balkans (in the 90's)? What about the fighting in Sudan? what about the fighting in ethiopia? What about North Korea's nukes? What about Iran's nukes. What about the 16 resolutions on Iraq? What conflict did the UN actually solve?

You see, that?s the problem with people like you, you?re arguing about something you have no idea about, which is now fairly apparent judging by your doltish questions. Why don?t you stop insulting your own intelligence and do a simple search on UN? How can you possibly argue about usefulness of UN without being aware of its achievements?
 

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
Originally posted by: Siwy
Originally posted by: smc13

172 peaceful settlements? which ones? What about the fighting in the Balkans (in the 90's)? What about the fighting in Sudan? what about the fighting in ethiopia? What about North Korea's nukes? What about Iran's nukes. What about the 16 resolutions on Iraq? What conflict did the UN actually solve?

You see, that?s the problem with people like you, you?re arguing about something you have no idea about, which is now fairly apparent judging by your doltish questions. Why don?t you stop insulting your own intelligence and do a simple search on UN? How can you possibly argue about usefulness of UN without being aware of its achievements?

The translation of your post is "I have no idea what peaceful settlements the UN has resolved and I pulled the 172 number out of my butt."

I understand.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Czar
ok, they are refugees, where did they originate from?

Perhaps they came from their parents?
I'm sure you know the definition

One who flees in search of refuge, as in times of war, political oppression, or religious persecution.

One who flees, as from home, confinement, captivity, or justice: escapee, fugitive, runaway. See seek/avoid.

refugee, one who leaves one's native land either because of expulsion or to escape persecution.


so from where did they run from to be classified as refugees?
well?

 

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Czar
ok, they are refugees, where did they originate from?

Perhaps they came from their parents?
I'm sure you know the definition

One who flees in search of refuge, as in times of war, political oppression, or religious persecution.

One who flees, as from home, confinement, captivity, or justice: escapee, fugitive, runaway. See seek/avoid.

refugee, one who leaves one's native land either because of expulsion or to escape persecution.


so from where did they run from to be classified as refugees?
well?

Your question was answered yesterday. I posted a link to the UN page that deals with the palestinian refugees (the UN calls them refugees) and someone else said it depended upon which ones. Why don't you go back a few pages and look?
 

smc13

Senior member
Jan 5, 2005
606
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Czar
ok, they are refugees, where did they originate from?

Perhaps they came from their parents?
I'm sure you know the definition

One who flees in search of refuge, as in times of war, political oppression, or religious persecution.

One who flees, as from home, confinement, captivity, or justice: escapee, fugitive, runaway. See seek/avoid.

refugee, one who leaves one's native land either because of expulsion or to escape persecution.


so from where did they run from to be classified as refugees?
well?

Your question was answered yesterday. I posted a link to the UN page that deals with the palestinian refugees (the UN calls them refugees) and someone else said it depended upon which ones. Why don't you go back a few pages and look?


Here is another link for you that tells you what the UN considers a palestinian refugee:

http://www.un.org/unrwa/refugees/whois.html
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Czar
ok, they are refugees, where did they originate from?

Perhaps they came from their parents?
I'm sure you know the definition

One who flees in search of refuge, as in times of war, political oppression, or religious persecution.

One who flees, as from home, confinement, captivity, or justice: escapee, fugitive, runaway. See seek/avoid.

refugee, one who leaves one's native land either because of expulsion or to escape persecution.


so from where did they run from to be classified as refugees?
well?

Your question was answered yesterday. I posted a link to the UN page that deals with the palestinian refugees (the UN calls them refugees) and someone else said it depended upon which ones. Why don't you go back a few pages and look?


Here is another link for you that tells you what the UN considers a palestinian refugee:

http://www.un.org/unrwa/refugees/whois.html

you said " they are refugees living on Israeli land", then were did they come from?

I am asking you to see where you stand and see what your reasoning is
 

Siwy

Senior member
Sep 13, 2002
556
0
0
Originally posted by: smc13
Originally posted by: Siwy
Originally posted by: smc13

172 peaceful settlements? which ones? What about the fighting in the Balkans (in the 90's)? What about the fighting in Sudan? what about the fighting in ethiopia? What about North Korea's nukes? What about Iran's nukes. What about the 16 resolutions on Iraq? What conflict did the UN actually solve?

You see, that?s the problem with people like you, you?re arguing about something you have no idea about, which is now fairly apparent judging by your doltish questions. Why don?t you stop insulting your own intelligence and do a simple search on UN? How can you possibly argue about usefulness of UN without being aware of its achievements?

The translation of your post is "I have no idea what peaceful settlements the UN has resolved and I pulled the 172 number out of my butt."

I understand.

Here you go, straight from the source: un.org

Here is just the tip of an ice-berg.

1963 Yemen
1992 Mozqambique
1995 Eastern Slavonia
1996 Guatemala

How about some current operations:

Burundi
East Timor

Do you feel enlightened now?