Who’s Right and Wrong in the Middle East?

Rune said:
Didn't think so. Common expression on your side of the pond. In the context of this thread it means "why are you changing the topuc if the thread, retard."
Click to expand...
I have asked you several times, in different threads, and you have ducked and weaved each time, proving to me that you only give a shit about the law when it is seemingly enhances your case. I will also reiterate that Israel will never make a deal with the Palestinians unless and until they can sort themselves out and act with one voice. That means fresh elections in both Gaza and the West Bank, that's realpolitik for you. Feel free to carry on on with your usual piss and wind posts though.
 
The problem with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that Israel wants all the land and the Palestinians want all the land. That's why no peace treaty can truly be amicable for both sides.
 
Milagro said:
That got you on here soon enough, you are one of the myopic zealots mentioned in the article. I note that you still refuse to tell me why you won't condemn China for the same crime you allege is happening in Israel.
Click to expand...

He had to skip rock throwing training class to respond.
 
Milagro said:
International law is supposed to apply universally, the clue is in the name. Yet our resident Hams humper will not acknowledge that the Chinese are occupying land, in the form of islands, that are in international waters. So are you going to be equally pissy about it?
Click to expand...

Those are uninhabited islands and their status is disputed. It's a much large violation to occupy inhabited territory and deny the citizens of that territory the right of self-determination than to occupy some atolls.
 
Milagro said:
I have asked you several times, in different threads, and you have ducked and weaved each time, proving to me that you only give a shit about the law when it is seemingly enhances your case. I will also reiterate that Israel will never make a deal with the Palestinians unless and until they can sort themselves out and act with one voice. That means fresh elections in both Gaza and the West Bank, that's realpolitik for you. Feel free to carry on on with your usual piss and wind posts though.
Click to expand...

I don't think elections ever should've been allowed in the first place, unity was necessary for such a fragile entity and the possibility of changes of power undermine that (especially holding elections for two important positions at the different times, creating the possibility of a divided government, was a terrible idea). Fatah should've waited until after they had control over the territory and a final settlement had been arranged, and ruled Palestine as a single party state until that time.
 
I don't really care too much about the issue, but people forget that the so called Palestinians sold much land to the Jews hundred years ago.
 
Book Purist said:
The problem with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that Israel wants all the land and the Palestinians want all the land. That's why no peace treaty can truly be amicable for both sides.
Click to expand...
I don't believe that is true, Israel will hand back the majority of the West Bank moving the Green Line to take in the settlements near the border. They need to able to talk to a unified Palestine regime not the two now that can't even stand each other enough to be in the same room together. If you don't believe that then why did Israel give back Sinai and Gaza?
 
Milagro said:
I don't believe that is true, Israel will hand back the majority of the West Bank moving the Green Line to take in the settlements near the border. They need to able to talk to a unified Palestine regime not the two now that can't even stand each other enough to be in the same room together. If you don't believe that then why did Israel give back Sinai and Gaza?
Click to expand...
I don't think Israel really had any desire to administer either Sinai or Gaza..
again though I only follow this tangentially or when the US does one of it's "peace negotiations" that become little more then Kabuki.

The whole issue is an extremely depressing affair, and a monument to the worst characteristics of humanity
 
Milagro said:
I don't believe that is true, Israel will hand back the majority of the West Bank moving the Green Line to take in the settlements near the border. They need to able to talk to a unified Palestine regime not the two now that can't even stand each other enough to be in the same room together. If you don't believe that then why did Israel give back Sinai and Gaza?
Click to expand...

Israel never wanted Sinai or Gaza. It has all the things they don't want (Arabs) with none of the things they want (arable land). The West Bank is where the entire ancient kingdom of Judea and half the ancient kingdom of Israel was. It is more linked to the ancient hebrew's than the coastal areas the Jews currently inhabit. A lot of Israeli's see it as their religious mission to make this area a permanent part of Israel. The areas of Gaza and especially Sinai, in contrast, have never been a part of the historical hebrew nation.

I also don't see Israel giving up, for instance, the huge amounts of settlements they've made in the Jordan valley. They want to *at least* annex area C. And without area C obviously there's never going to be a viable Palestinian state in the area, how the hell could you make a hundred disconnected Israeli enclaves into an independent state? The only purpose of even pretending their an independent nation at that point is the same reason South Africa pretended the blacks had independent nations during Apartheid, to deprive them of political rights.

page1-854px-West_Bank_Access_Restrictions.pdf.jpg
 
anatta said:
I don't think Israel really had any desire to administer either Sinai or Gaza..
again though I only follow this tangentially or when the US does one of it's "peace negotiations" that become little more then Kabuki.

The whole issue is an extremely depressing affair, and a monument to the worst characteristics of humanity
Click to expand...

Israel dearly wanted to hang on to the Sinai, it was an extremely lucrative piece of real estate!!

In 1979, Prime Minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian President Anwar Sadat signed the historic Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty on the lawn of the White House in Washington D.C., under the watchful gaze of President Jimmy Carter. The peace that resulted, albeit cold, has lasted till this day. In its withdrawal from Sinai, Israel gave up the homes of 7,000 Israelis, military installations, strategic defense locations – and the Alma oil field and Sadot gas field, valued at more than $100 billion.

Had the Jewish State kept the oil reserves it had discovered in 1973, it would have meant energy independence for Israel. Currently Egypt supplies approximately 40 percent of Israel's natural gas through the Sinai pipeline, which has been repeatedly attacked by terrorists since the Tahrir Square revolution that ignited at the beginning of this year. Israeli citizen's electricity bills have risen as a result.
Click to expand...

www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/149448#.V0TVz55VJ_U
 
Palestine became a United Nations recognized state in 2012.
Israel became a United Nations recognized state in 1948

There are two legitimate states. The one which is illegally occupying the other must withdraw.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top